Residents who watched in disbelief as a 30 metre communications mast was erected next to their homes are still living under it seven weeks later.

Those living in Ivy Crescent have had their quiet road upturned by a towering structure placed in Dunelm's loading bay without any word.

Simon Cooksey, 56, lives in Ivy Crescent and alongside other neighbours has been demanding answers.

On Thursday, April 18, the mast was erected in a single afternoon, by contractors who used a crane to lift the structure into place.

The "eyesore" has left residents "furious" - with all available households meeting with the Observer to voice their concerns in April.

In the following week issues arose with a noisy diesel generator and concerns over the health risks of living so close to the mast.

There is conflicting information about the dangers of TETRA masts, with some residents believing them to be "dangerous" and "frightening".

By mid-May, Motorola had installed a solar panel to mitigate the issues surrounding the diesel generator.

Prior to this, it had been reprogrammed to only run for four hours out of every 36 to "charge the batteries that power the site".

However, Simon says the generators are still coming on at "weird times" at night.

In an email exchange with Motorola shared with The Observer, Simon wrote: "There has been no consultation, no planning permission and no excuse for this to be where it is, there are thousands of more suitable locations yet you put it in a residential area.

"The locality is fuming and we will do everything in our power to get this removed."

Simon claims residents have fallen ill from the pollution the generator is emitting and has used a Milesight air quality reader - which reportedly gave readings in a 'hazardous' range.

He added: "These Generators are pouring epidemically high poisonous compounds into the gardens and houses of Ivy Crescent."

Simon also slammed Motorola for its "blatant disregard for residents health and welfare" during the initial operations of the mast.

In a response seen by Motorola, they responded saying: "This mast is a temporary coverage solution for our emergency services users in the local area. It is not nor was it ever intended to be permanent."

When approached for comment, Motorola said: “Reliable radio communications are a matter of public safety.

"The temporary Airwave mast was erected to support vital radio communications for the emergency services personnel operating in the area, whilst looking for a permanent solution.

"In the meantime, we are in touch with the local community and have taken steps to address their concerns, including installing a solar power system.”

Slough Borough Council were unaware of the mast until residents raised alarm on the day of its installation.

Addressing concerns over pollution and air quality, a Slough Borough Council spokesperson said: "Short-term increases in environmental particulates can be linked to a slight decrease in lung function in healthy people and can increase the frequency and severity of asthma attacks and other symptoms of respiratory illness in people with existing health conditions.

"However, the Milesight monitor used in the photo provided is an indoor air quality sensor of ‘comfort’ levels and not intended to be used in this type of circumstance."

Due to this, the Council have said readings may have been "inadvertently skewed".

Regarding the mast, the Council have thrown the need for a generator into question.

The spokesperson said: "The mast and the diesel fumes from the ‘old generator shed’ may not be linked – indeed a mast would not ordinarily run from a generator, with such equipment usually only being used as a backup to plant or buildings in event of a power failure and would only run for very limited periods of time.

“The planning investigation is still ongoing. A further update is expected within the next four to six weeks. A request for information was made and only limited information has been received from the interested parties.

"For this reason, on May 16, 2024, a Planning Contravention Notice was served on all the parties with an interest in the land to ascertain further information; this is required to be responded to within 21 days.

"Once the relative information has been received and reviewed, consideration will then be given with regard to the next steps with this matter.

"To date – no application has been received by the Local Planning Authority regarding the development.”