A mobile phone giant has launched a bid to overturn a decision to refuse plans to make a towering mast a lasting fixture.

A 5G structure, erected for providers EE and Three, was placed in the Central car park in Faversham early last year with a temporary 18-month licence.

Plans were then unveiled to install a permanent mast next to a nearby toilet block.

But Swale Borough Council turned down the proposals, arguing the mast “would cause demonstrable harm” to the area.

And now the installer, MBNL, has lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate to force the scheme through.

The firm argues: “There is a demonstrable need for this to prevent the degradation of critical services on two mobile networks within Faversham.

“Any harm to a heritage asset that might occur as a result of the proposal would be less than substantial and would be outweighed by the public benefits brought.”

The local authority’s planning committee concluded last year the “harm” the project would inflict locally would not be outweighed by the improvements it would offer the area.

“The mast and equipment, by virtue of its height, design, materials and location, would cause demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area,” it explained.

“It would be harmful to the setting of nearby listed buildings - harm which is not outweighed by the public benefits, in a manner contrary to planning policies.”

Prior to the local authority’s decision last September, several objections to the scheme were lodged by residents.

One branded it a “complete eyesore”, while another argued: “Faversham is a historic town where stringent planning criteria are applied to the position of satellite dishes on private property due to conservation laws.

“I do not understand how this 18m telecommunications pole fits any of these criteria.

“It will be visible on all walking routes into the town centre.

“There must be less obvious sites that are more suitable.”

Town and Swale borough councillor Hannah Perkin says residents remain “very upset” at the prospect of a mobile mast in the car park becoming permanent.

“Everyone I speak to is against it and believes there must be a better location in the town rather than smack bang in the middle of a conservation area,” she said.

“Obviously we appreciate that a good mobile signal is vital for businesses in the town centre, but it doesn’t look like EE have made much effort to find anywhere else.

“We can only hope that the inspector will agree with us because it will be incredibly disappointing if EE’s application is approved.”

Supporters of the proposal have accused the objectors of “nimbyism”, believing the mast is needed to maintain a reliable phone signal in the town.

MBNL also insists there is no alternative spot in the town for the structure.

It has reduced the height of the proposed mast to the minimum 18 metres and made it slimmer and less intrusive.

The inspector will consider the existing written representations, plus any new or revised observations which have to be submitted by September 14.

The appeal details can be seen on the Planning Inspectorate’s website, quoting reference APP/V2255/W/22/3295885.