Protest petition over radio ham's mast
NEIGHBOURS are getting ready for a public hearing about radio ham Robert Dodson's mast.
Residents say that when the King's Stanley householder is chatting on the airwaves his 20ft aerial interferes with their TVs as well as their lives.
-
Robert Dodson
But Mr Dodson, 59, blames his neighbours' outdated TVs and videos for their problems and said his hobby was fully licensed and regulated by radio authorities.
Stroud District Council has, however, refused planning permission for the mast and will be defending its stance at a public inquiry on July 29.
Linda Blackwell lives next door to Mr Dodson in Daffodil Leaze, Middleyard.
She said a 40-name petition against the mast had been sent to the planning inspectorate, which will conduct the hearing at Ebley Mill.
"I object to the overbearing sight of the mast and the sound it makes when the wind whistles through the antenna," she said.
"This is annoying when trying to have a peaceful afternoon in the garden and is particularly annoying on a windy night."
Mrs Blackwell said residents had experienced TV interference.
She said: "One elderly couple had to go to the expense of having satellite TV installed and another disabled lady has interference when she calls a family member in Australia on the phone."
Mr Dodson said the mast, which can extent to 60ft, was mounted on a trailer which did not make it a permanent development which could be controlled by the council.
"The real issue is that they can't watch their TVs if I leave my transmitter on but I can watch my, more modern, TV," he said. "I've had Ofcom out here to test all my equipment. It is my neighbours' equipment that doesn't meet the standard."
Mr Dodson , a lifelong radio ham, enjoys chatting to fellow enthusiasts across the globe.
A Stroud District Council spokeswoman said: "Officers have visited the site and assessed that the mast is detrimental to the local area and an inappropriate development for such a residential setting."
7 Comments
View all
by John, Tamworth, Australia
Wednesday, July 22 2009, 11:43PM
“Unfortunately, this is becoming the attitude, worldwide, to people enjoying hobbies and interests, that may differ from what is perceived by some as the norm. You cannot keep birds because of noise and the like. Keeping chickens is frowned upon and woe betide anyone that has a rooster! Everyone complains about young people not having interests or hobbies, yet the same ones try and prevent those that want to do something a bit different. It is highly more likely that the interference is caused by domestic appliances, plasma TV's, not the radio. As another writer said, tape or record the interference and show it to the radio operator. He is probably not even transmitting when the problems are there. What about all the sat dishes? Or are they exempt, because of the soaps?”
by Stewart, Cheltenham
Monday, June 22 2009, 12:00PM
“I agree with Bob and Ken, the type and age of TV, Radio and Telephone equipment (including the TV Receiver, Radio Receiver, Antenna and the connecting cables) can lead to problems when any nearby licensed transmitter is used.
As Bob has apparently already had confirmation from Ofcom that his equipment is not at fault I am afraid that it is up to the neighbours to resolve any interference problems (perhaps with the help of Ofcom), such issues may be easily resolved by fitting of a small filter costing very little.
I believe that under planning rules any interference that is or might be caused to TV or Radio reception is NOT valid reason for any council to refuse permission for such an installation (even if any such permission is necessary).
Also as stated in the original article a non-permanent structure, such as trailer mounted mast DOES NOT require planning consent (you may consider this to be 'flouting' the planning rules, but those are the rules).
I am lead to believe that there are a number of other masts belonging to other Amateur Radio users (and no doubt Mobile phone operators) located not far away, so for the council to say 'the mast is detrimental to the local area and an inappropriate development for such a residential setting' in just this case is just plain rubbish.”
by TERRY GLOUCESTER, GLOUCESTER
Monday, June 22 2009, 11:14AM
“I live on a estate where the house,s are close together,i also have a 40 foot mast ,but apart from one person who could me on her phone,SO I GOT HER A NEW PHONE now all is well, and we get on fine..SO I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ALL PARTY,s TALK TO EACH OTHER NEIGHBOURS ARE THE NEXT THING TO FAMILY.....Terry”
by Ken, Nailsworth
Monday, June 22 2009, 11:13AM
“Truly I think bob is right, local outdated TV equipment can be a problem to anybody with a licence to transmit. The local council have been told time and time again from OFcom and the radio society that they have no hold over issues with Radio interference and therefore using the same old story that the mast is detrimental to the local area.
All the complaints are interference related, they need to log calls with OFcom to get there problems resolved and not with the local council. What they do not understand is that Bob has the right to transmit even if he is not transmitting through his tower and beam; wire aerials can cause just as much interference.
It should be noted that over 30% of employees in Nokia Sweden are Radio amateurs, most of the TV's/Radio were designed in the uk over decades by Radio amateurs.
By poisoning the root it kills the plant.
What world are we left with if these people get away with this?”
by Dixie, Cotswolds
Sunday, June 21 2009, 9:20AM
“Planning laws are for a reason otherwise there would be all sorts of erections stuck all over the place, surely the point is Mr Dodgson is flouting planning laws by erecting the aeriel on a non permanent structure, I am sure nobody would want that stuck by their garden, never mind the electrical emmitences, complete eyesore and should be somewhere completely away from other properties”