Planning application for BT Street Hub on LL - unnecessary at best.

[concorde]

Whilst reading about what was Poundland, I saw that BT has applied to install (block the pavement with) one of its large screen advertising 'street hubs' outside the building. This seems like a terrible idea in my opinion - others may disagree - but you might want to look at the planning application and comment. There is still a day or two to do so. 

Here's the relevant application 25/AP/2825 https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=T3G4H5KBH1500 and how it will look https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/BDF327FA0103A31946387A251B9C9D45/pdf/25_AP_2825-ELEVATION_PLAN-4143504.pdf

[ianr]

I see from the Site Notice https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/B867B0B45973C03BE4D45CE4513BDE35/pdf/25_AP_2825-SITE_NOTICE-4151698.pdf that the "Comment by" date is 5 November.

My understanding is that comments submitted after that date can and ?will still be considered if the decision-making hasn't yet been done; so I wouldn't let the date in itself deter you if you  want to comment now.   Was the site notice actually posted near the location, btw?

Does the hub have any claimed functions other than advertising?

Edited November 10 by ianr

[Penguin68]

Yes, there's no way anyone would want a Wi-Fi hub in Lordship Lane. Absolutely pointless. Anyone who actually wants or needs to communicate or access data will already have their 5G phone or satellite phone on them to get fast data. And of course we are lucky that we have such a strong and unbroken mobile signal from all suppliers locally. With no dead spots. 

[Azalea]

Pointless unless Southwark will make money from this being erected.  If that’s the case, it will be allowed.

[ianr]

 Do mobile phone users have any reception problems in that part of LL?

PS There's a BT brochure about them at https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/9C2ACB97B33D4EE9E2D88FF630639C14/pdf/25_AP_2825-STREET_HUBS_BEYOND_CONNECTION_V2.1-4143500.pdf

From which: "Street Hubs are free-standing structures featuring digital HD display screens on two sides. The screens display content at 10-second intervals, both the commercial content that funds the service as well as a wide range of local community and council content."

and

"Advertising for businesses of all sizes Street Hubs represent the latest in advertising platforms – an affordable, accessible digital advertising solution that specifically targets Street Hubs close to small businesses."

I think if I saw one of the local businesses flashing their ads at me while out peaceably walking in my neighbourhood I'd almost certainly be put off using them.

Edited November 10 by ianr

[Sue]

27 minutes ago, ianr said:

I see from the Site Notice https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/B867B0B45973C03BE4D45CE4513BDE35/pdf/25_AP_2825-SITE_NOTICE-4151698.pdf that the "Comment by" date is 5 November.

My understanding is that comments submitted after that date can and ?will still be considered if the decision-making hasn't yet been done; so I wouldn't let the date in itself deter you if you  want to comment now.   Was the site notice actually posted near the location, btw?

Does the hub have any claimed functions other than advertising?

I'm getting "document unavailable" when I click on that link?

[Alec1]

It's not exactly blocking the pavement.  No more so than the bicycle chained up in the foreground.  Whilst the majority may not need it, the minority might.  It's definitely not very aesthetically pleasing, but less intrusive than piles of lime bikes lying around. 

[ianr]

Files attached here. 🙂  The files do seem still available at the link concorde provided above.

site_notice.pdf BT_brochure.pdf

[Angelina]

Benefits include free phone calls, wifi, charging points, information etc.

What's the problem?

 

[Penguin68]

NIMBY - apparently 

[Angelina]

does seem to take up a width of the pavement that could be better used (i.e. we have to walk around it)  and I'm not sure we need advertising on the pavements. Perhaps there are benefit's I don't know of.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

49 minutes ago, Angelina said:

Benefits include free phone calls, wifi, charging points, information etc.

What's the problem?

 

They're big and ugly electronic advertising boards. There's a shagged out phone box across the road that could do the same thing!

[Penguin68]

47 minutes ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

There's a shagged out phone box across the road that could do the same thing!

If this is approved BT will probably apply to remove the phone box. These cost far more than they earn and are very vulnerable to vandelism. The old phone boxes are not ideal to become WiFi hubs, and will need the same level of engineering work to convert (they will be connected over copper). And they don't offer the advertising opportunity which pays for the free WiFi. 

Edited November 10 by Penguin68

[CPR Dave]

Didn't there used to be a phone box here too? 

[Kipper_1972]

5 hours ago, concorde said:

Whilst reading about what was Poundland, I saw that BT has applied to install (block the pavement with) one of its large screen advertising 'street hubs' outside the building. This seems like a terrible idea in my opinion

why do you think it's a "terrible idea"

[concorde]

5 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

NIMBY - apparently 

Not in anybody’s back yard, to be fair. 

50 minutes ago, Kipper_1972 said:

why do you think it's a "terrible idea"

I think I made it clear it was just my opinion. As far as I understand it, there is no wider need for any of the proposed functionality (and I’d be happy to be shown actual evidence otherwise); it’s just an big digital advertising screen taking up quite a lot of pavement. None of it is a public service, as one can see on the existing - well, I’ll call it a digital bollard.

So yes, I think it’s terrible idea. And if you don’t, that’s also absolutely fine  

 

[Penguin68]

I think free calls and WiFi might be considered a public service. Many, of course, are on contracts which offer much of that, but not everybody, and particularly not those who can't afford such contracts. Or maybe those are the sort of people you don't want to be mixing with on Lordship Lane. 

[Friernlocal]

3 hours ago, CPR Dave said:

Didn't there used to be a phone box here too? 

Yes. Google street view shows one on this spot from 2012 to2020.

1 hour ago, Penguin68 said:

I think free calls and WiFi might be considered a public service. Many, of course, are on contracts which offer much of that, but not everybody, and particularly not those who can't afford such contracts. Or maybe those are the sort of people you don't want to be mixing with on Lordship Lane. 

I agree that they provide a useful service. I recently passed one and it was being used by someone who looked like they could be 'of no fixed abode' making a free call.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

17 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

I think free calls and WiFi might be considered a public service. 

Doesn't the phone box across the street already do that? On some of them they've already ripped out the coin/card collection and just gve free calls.

Let's not kid ourselves - this is about BT getting an electronic billboards on the street, and they havent been too diligent in taking care of manky phone box opposite.

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

Doesn't the phone box across the street already do that?

I don't believe it offers free WiFi, and if it does from a pretty grotty and expensive to maintain platform. 

[Moovart]

Perfectly placed for a phone thief on a bike 😱

[gregSE15]

https://adfreecities.org.uk/2022/11/the-hubs-are-coming-how-bt-invaded-public-space/
 

Seems like they're pretty bad.

[James Barber]

The proposed BT freestanding advertising/street hub unit is proposed to be placed immediately adjacent a Bus Stop area. It will impede people entering and leaving buses that stop at this bus stop. It would block buses deploying their disabled ramps. 

Frankly, I am amazed this wasn’t caught at the application initial assessment and rejected.  

This proposal will cause problems, it is clearly discriminatory towards disabled people and people requiring wheelchairs. Equally it would block people with prams from accessing buses that stop at this bus stop.

I would encourage people to email the case officer pointing out the blindingly obvious - [email protected]