Portsmouth City Council continues to refuse plans for 5G masts across the city

Proposals to build masts in Southsea, Paulsgrove and Anchorage Park were all rejected just before Christmas over concerns the equipment would be ‘detrimental to the visual amenity’ of each area.

More than 40 people wrote to Portsmouth City Council objecting to the Sywell Crescent plans submitted by telecoms firm 3’s parent company CK Hutchison Networks (UK) Ltd saying residential areas were not suitable locations.

SEE ALSO: University of Portsmouth library severely damaged by blaze caused by heater as firefighters evacuate occupants

Among them was Everdon Lane resident Margaret Johnson who said: ‘Anchorage Park is a pleasant residential estate with plenty of green space which is not really the place to put an ugly mast and cabinets. It would be more suited to the perimeter of the estate or the industrial area.

‘If this goes ahead it will be another blot on the Portsmouth landscape.’

But CK Hutchison Networks, in a statement submitted with its application, said it was ‘the best available compromise’ for filling a ‘coverage hole’ in its network.

‘In this location, existing mast sites are not capable of supporting additional equipment compliment to extend coverage reach across the target area and prospective in-fill mast sites are extremely limited,’ it said. ‘There is an acute need for a new base station to provide effective service coverage and, in this case, the height of the proposed street pole is the minimum required to bring the benefits of 5G to this area.’

The council’s assessment of the scheme, used to refuse planning permission, said the mast would have been ‘incongruous within its residential context’.

In the same week it refused the Sywell Crescent application, the council also issued decision notices reaching the same decision for similar proposals in Elkstone Road in Paulsgrove and on the pavement outside the Pyramids Centre in Southsea.

For the latter, planners said the choice of location in the seafront conservation area near Southsea Common made it unsuitable.

‘It is considered that the monopole (mast), would not be screened by any trees or greenery from the south or east and would have an oppressive impact,’ the report said. ‘While weight is given to the need to support the provision of 5G, it is not considered in is this instance to outweigh the harm of the mast and ancillary equipment.’