Cornerstone, a mobile infrastructure services company, has submitted a planning application to Chesterfield Borough Council seeking permission to replace an existing 15-metre-high 4G mast with a 20-metre-high 5G mast on the south side of Canal Wharf.
The new mast, which promises to ‘upgrade the telecommunication system’, would include six antennas.
As part of the public consultation phase, a resident wrote an objection letter to the borough council.
The resident said: “The mast will change the appeal of Canal Wharf, which is a leafy suburban street, as well as potentially reducing house prices.
“The mast is the kind that you would find in an out-of-town business park or an industrial area or town centre, not 20 metres from housing in a quiet area.”
They added: “My other opposition to the mast is that it’ll be using new 5G technology.
“5G uses much higher frequency (up to 300GHz) radio waves than the 21-27 GHz in the past.
“This new technology provides little benefit to the residents of Canal Wharf and Hazelhurst Road, as we already have very good mobile signal on all providers.
“This proposal is next to the children’s play park and is not the ideal place to be testing out this new technology which could have detrimental impacts on the health of local residents.
“There are also fears from studies in South Korea that it can impact on wildlife and biodiversity in the area surrounding a transmitter.”
Officers are recommending members of the borough council’s planning committee to grant the application condition permission at a meeting next week.
According to a report to be considered by councillors: “It is considered for the context of the area, the proposed installation is acceptable in appearance and design.
“It is acknowledged there is an increase in height of five-metres and this will have an increased visual impact.
“It is not considered this impact is such that a refusal is required.
“The mast will be finished in dark green which will lessen the visual impact and enable the proposal to reflect the existing arrangement.”
The borough council’s environmental health officer ‘raised no specific concerns in respect of the development’, the report added.