A WORCESTER councillor says he fears for people's safety after learning communication masts could be placed around the city - by hiding them in petrol station signs.

Independent councillor Mike Layland says masts owned by telecommunication companies could be placed throughout the Faithful City as planning permission would not be needed if they did not visually affect an area.

But he added he was particularly concerned about the possibility after members of the planning committee were told at a meeting last week that masts could be a health risk.

During the meeting planning officers told the committee it's suggestion to group three telecommunications masts to the centre of the roof of Security House, Barbourne Road, instead of having them spread out over the roof as initially suggested by the applicant GPN Hutchinson 3G, had been rejected.

The communications company claimed grouping them together would cause a potential health risk for anyone working on the roof.

"We've been told these masts were safe time and time again, but when it was suggested three could be bunched together we're told there could be a health risk," said Coun Layland.

"So exactly how safe are these masts? Is this going to be another BSE situation where we find out what we're told is safe actually isn't?"

However, the councillor said he feared the masts would now find their way into the city after learning there was currently a One2One communications mast inside the sign at Bath Road's Shell Garage.

"This is very worrying because communication companies won't need planning permission to do this," he added.

A spokesperson for One2One confirmed the company had "dozens" of similar masts in operation. He added the masts emitted less radiation than many household appliances such as televisions and radios and did not present a health problem.

"In the same way emergency services have guidelines for communication masts, so do we, and all our masts fall well within the guidelines," he said.

"There are international guidelines to protect everyone in the population and the masts emit well below the levels of those guidelines."

Peter Yates, head of planning at the city council, confirmed masts only required planning permission when they had an impact on, or changed the look of an area or building. He said placing the masts in the signs was an imaginative way of overcoming their visual impact.

"When I hear scientists say they're safe I tend to believe them," he said.

"If these signs got to a point no-one knew they were there, people wouldn't worry about them."