PROTESTERS against plans for a second mobile phone transmitter mast hundreds of yards from their homes will voice their concerns tonight at the Barrowford and Western Parishes Committee.

Members of SPAM (Strong Protest Against Mast) are against proposals by NTL to extend the existing Pendle Forest Transmitter Mast in Spenbrook Road, Newchurch-in-Pendle.

Plans include putting up a 41-metre high lattice tower to the side of the existing tower with a number of different antennaes, two ground-based antennae, two three-metre high equipment cabins and a new access across the field to the extension.

Council officers have recommended that the application should be deferred until full details of the effect the new access road would have on highway safety have been received.

The residents have collected more than 250 signatures on a petition against the development, which was placed in one of the village shops.

Mother-of-two Claire Milligan, of Higher Spen, helped set up SPAM earlier his year and said she will fight all the way to stop the mobile phone mast being put approximately130 metres from her home.

She said: "This is an area of outstanding natural beauty and a conservation area and the law states that things should be in harmony with the area. How can you say concrete towers, barbed wire and raw metals harmonise with the area? It's just a huge, ugly eyesore.

"People say you can't prove it's a health risk, but neither can the council say it isn't. It's the worry of not knowing whether it is or not. You have a choice whether you smoke, or drink, or get into a car and drive it, or eat microwaved food, but we have no choice here.

"SPAM is not against masts, as we know things have to move forward but lets have them 1,000 metres away from residents. There's plenty of hills and fields in this area where they could be sensibly sited until they know the health risks. Everyone is disgusted at what is happening.

"We have got one mast in our back yard already and I think one is enough."

A report to the committee stated that NTL had demonstrated a need for the tower because of weaknesses in mobile phone coverage in the area, for new services such as digital radio broadcasts and because the existing tower has reached its capacity.

The case officer said: "I think it would be better to concentrate such development in one place rather than spread it out, thereby possibly affecting a wider area."

Bruce Randall, public relations officer for NTL Broadcast, said: "We try to be as sensitive as possible and we do think site sharing is a good idea rather than having masts all over the place. On the health and safety side of things we are very emphatic that there are no dangers in our activities.

"The signals that are coming out are very minor and many times below the safety recommendations. We always ensure they are no stronger than they need to be."