New proposal to build 17.5 mt 5G tower in Chadwick Road

[TheCropolite]

uki1988 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The technology used by 5G Masts is different to

> those used in the past and there is not enough

> science to prove either side and for this reason

> it has been banned on most countries. I don't feel

> like being the test rat for this technology until

> they have substantial long term proof that it does

> not have adverse effects in our health. Below is

> an excerpt from one of the studies that have been

> done in the US regarding the effects of these

> masts.

>

The general consensus of EXPERTS (you know those people that have spent their entire lives studying something) is that 5G technology poses no more risk to your health than a lightbulb does. This isn?t something that was just conjured up out of nowhere overnight it?s been around for decades but now it is being harnessed in a useful way.

Seeing as you feel strongly about this I recommend you watch this video to get an accurate perspective on what 5G is:

[redpost]

Well, the mast has to go somewhere and the options are limited by:

* height - may need to be on high point to get good coverage, or may need to be on a fairly low point to counter a not spot (dip in topography)

* adjacent buildings that block signal

* space for ancilliary building(s) at bottom to house network equipment, aircon, uniterruptable power supply etc

* availability/cost of land

* availability of fibre backhaul or microwave line of sight to another base station with backhaul

so, you can see there aren't many candidate sites with all the constraints above

[Blah Blah]

It's a difficult one isn't it. Everyone wants the extra speeds and bandwidth of mobile technology, but no-one wants the rather ugly masts in their immediate line of sight. No right or wrong here, just the practical difficulty of finding places to put the masts.

[rupert james]

Or as this has been rejected 4 times lets sneak another application in undercover of the pandemic.

Chances are Southwark will just nod these through as not many people know this about to happen and cannot comment.

I asked the local Cllr about why no information has been put out in the neighbourhood and have not even received an acknowledgement.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

"The (completely mad) suggestion that it is in any way related to Covid-19 is promulgated by the same people who believe we are ruled by lizards"

If 5G spread lizards, I would be strongly in favour.

[Penguin68]

"The (completely mad) suggestion that it is in any way related to Covid-19 is promulgated by the same people who believe we are ruled by lizards"

If 5G spread lizards, I would be strongly in favour.

But secret lizards, ruling over you...?

And it's the Lizards using 5G to spread Covid (for that group) I believe.

[peckhamese]

Anyone who wants a template letter to ask our local Councillors for support please send me a private message or email [email protected] and I'll be happy to provide.

If you haven't objected on the planning application online yet, do so quickly! The application closes to comments on December 30th.

Link to application: https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=QKGRSTKB03Q00

Reasons to object:

> It would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area as it does against the aesthetics of the neighbourhood. It would be an obtrusive feature in the streetscape and wholly out of keeping in a residential area.

> Causes significant loss of amenity to adjacent

residents and occupiers or the surrounding area with at least 35 dwellings within a 50 meter radius. Some as close as 20 meters!

> The mast can be seen by surrounding Holly Grove and Camberwell Grove conservations areas and would be harmful to their appearance. The development obviously does not respect historical building lines.

[KidKruger]

The people who mock the fact that we are being taken-over by an alien lizard race which controls Covid19, 5G, and other things (like the tides and fossils) need to take a serious reality check.

[peckhamese]

Thank you for your valuable input on this matter KidKruger!

Anyone who wants a template letter to ask our local Councillors for support please send me a private message or email [email protected] and I'll be happy to provide.

If you haven't objected on the planning application online yet, do so quickly! The application closes to comments on December 30th.

Link to application: [planning.southwark.gov.uk]

Reasons to object:

> It would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area as it does against the aesthetics of the neighbourhood. It would be an obtrusive feature in the streetscape and wholly out of keeping in a residential area.

> Causes significant loss of amenity to adjacent

residents and occupiers or the surrounding area with at least 35 dwellings within a 50 meter radius. Some as close as 20 meters!

> The mast can be seen by surrounding Holly Grove and Camberwell Grove conservations areas and would be harmful to their appearance. The development obviously does not respect historical building lines.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The people who mock the fact that we are being

> taken-over by an alien lizard race which controls

> Covid19, 5G, and other things (like the tides and

> fossils) need to take a serious reality check.

I would like to clarify my earlier statement. Although I am in favour of being ruled by lizards, I am also highly xenophobic and therefore HATE alien lizards coming down here, taking our British lizards' overlord jobs.

[sally buying]

peckhamese Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyone who wants a template letter to ask our

> local Councillors for support please send me a

> private message or email [email protected]

> and I'll be happy to provide.

>

> If you haven't objected on the planning

> application online yet, do so quickly! The

> application closes to comments on December 30th.

>

> Link to application:

> https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applicati

> ons/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal

> =QKGRSTKB03Q00

>

>

> Reasons to object:

> > It would be harmful to the character and

> appearance of the area as it does against the

> aesthetics of the neighbourhood. It would be an

> obtrusive feature in the streetscape and wholly

> out of keeping in a residential area.

>

> > Causes significant loss of amenity to adjacent

> residents and occupiers or the surrounding area

> with at least 35 dwellings within a 50 meter

> radius. Some as close as 20 meters!

>

> > The mast can be seen by surrounding Holly Grove

> and Camberwell Grove conservations areas and would

> be harmful to their appearance. The development

> obviously does not respect historical building

> lines.

Used your template to send letters to Cllrs. Found it very useful. Thanks for doing this and hope others use it to object.

[peckhamese]

Thank you for your support Sally!

[JohnL]

I don't think health risks is allowed to be taken into account - only normal planning issues

"National planning policy states councils must determine applications on planning grounds and, in judging the health risks, should only ensure the proposal meets ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure."

I think siting and design are the grounds for refusal like this one in Lewisham. You do get the impression they will just come back with a different design though.

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/18877517.perry-vale-locals-relieved-three-5g-mast-refused-nbsp-nbsp/

[peckhamese]

Hi everyone, a heads up that there is another planning application to build another 5G tower on the corner of Bellenden Road and Holly Grove. 20 meter monopole: 20/AP/3790.

This was raised on 18 December and does not have any comments on it because no one has been made aware.

https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=QLP5HXKB03Q00

[James Barber]

Health is covered by ICNIRP guidance/rules. Worth asking the planning officer to request the ICNIRP report and plans from the applicant and that these are published on the councils planning documentation e.g. 4G antennae roughly shouldn't face anywhere humans will be for 10-15m. Combinations of mobile operators signals no the same mast can make the exclusion zone even larger.

If you oppose such a mast that meets ICNIRP rules, then planning objections around aesthetics, etc is more likely to be successful.

[Clix]

I appreciate other peoples legitimate concerns in relation to antennae masts near their properties but before everyone starts to object to all new masts in our area I'd like put forward an opposing legitimate concern.

Since Nov 2019 I have had no mobile coverage in my house because one of the old local masts was taken down (see attachments). I have been complaining and trying to get coverage again ever since then, I feel that in Inner London in 2020/21 I should be able to receive and make calls from my house.

The attached map (although inaccurate because the signal is certainly not even remotely good indoors) shows a distinct lack of masts in this particular area.

[Clix]

For some reason these two didn't attach

[Jules-and-Boo]

Where would we like it put instead?

[ed26]

Stick it in my garden if it means that I can get a mobile signal

[Chick]

I get a bit fed up with scare stories based on ignorance. For example there was a move to locate a cell base station on St Johns Church. Parents at the school objected on the basis that it is too near the school. Modern phones and base stations are "clever". If you are close to the base station the phone ramps down the power, so having a base near the school makes it safer since the strongest source of RF is the phone.

So now there is poor reception in that area.

[Huggers]

Actually Chick the main objection was on the basis that it was commercialising church premises for loads of dosh by using the spire as a transmitter-

[Chick]

Huggers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually Chick the main objection was on the basis

> that it was commercialising church premises for

> loads of dosh by using the spire as a transmitter-

That may well be but there was certainly opposition from parents with children at the school.