5G phone mast to be put up beside Cambridge zebra crossing after planning inspector dismisses safety concerns

A 15-metre high 5G mast will be constructed next to a zebra crossing in Cambridge, despite councillors’ concerns that it could be dangerous for vulnerable people trying to cross the road.

CK Hutchinson Networks UK has successfully appealed to the Planning Inspectorate to overrule a decision by Cambridge City Council’s planning committee to refuse permission for the monopole in Wulfstan Way last September.

The council had said its “excessive height and bulk” would result in a “dominant and incongruous” built form, harming the character and appearance of the area.

And it said the mast would be “extremely close” to a zebra crossing, warning not enough information had been supplied to prove it would not cause “harm to the vulnerable users” of the crossing.

Cllr Jennifer Page-Croft (Lib Dem, Queen Edith’s), who lives in Wulfstan Way, objected at the time, explaining that she was not opposed to having a pole in the area, but did not think this was the right location.

She highlighted that the crossing was “regularly used” by elderly people and children who, she said, “struggle to see traffic”.

She said: “This is a very busy road. Buses pass both ways every 20 minutes, plus traffic to the schools, deliveries, and is used as a bit of a rat run to Queen Edith’s Way and vice versa.

“This is a risky place to put the pole and the cabinet, between a bus shelter and a zebra crossing.”

Cllr Sam Davies (Ind, Queen Edith’s) also opposed the plans, warning of “strong local opposition” due to the “overbearing height” of the proposed mast and the “safety hazard” of the cabinets on the roadside.

But the planning inspector noted the monopole would be “set back” from the edge of the road and concluded it would not “impede” views of the crossing, or have an “adverse effect” on highway safety.

The inspector said: “Motorists approaching the appeal site would have an appropriate forewarning of the presence of the pedestrian crossing.

“Furthermore, pedestrians waiting to cross the road would also be viewable to approaching motorists.

“In reaching this view I have had regard to the fact that the majority of approaching drivers would be near to the centre of the road. This means that they would have a substantial field of view. This would not be compromised by the proposed development.

“In result, motorists would be able to view pedestrians using or approaching the crossing.

“The relatively low speeds that approaching vehicles are likely to be travelling at means that motorists would have sufficient time to respond to the presence of pedestrians.

“In addition, there would be sufficient visibility for motorists to undertake avoiding action if required.

“This means that the development would not create conflict between pedestrians and moving vehicles.

“In addition, owing to the positioning of the development, pedestrians would also be able to view on-coming traffic.

“They would therefore be able to observe approaching vehicles slowing down and stopping.

“In addition, pedestrians would also be able to judge the speed of approaching vehicles. This means that they would be able to establish whether it is safe to cross the highway.”

The inspector concluded that the mast would not lead to the “erosion of character and appearance” of the area, and that the associated cabinets were “relatively small” and would not have a “notable effect” on the open area.