Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"I find it very offensive....etc., etc."


Widely held concerns are not necessarily valid. In fact they are often stupid and ill-informed, and widely held simply because they chime with widely held prejudices, superstitions and the like. That offends me (intellectually) but I am evidently made of sterner stuff, because I manage to shrug it off. I'm afraid you will need to develop a rather thicker skin if you are going to invite people to join a campaign based on such a shaky premise - you can expect some challenge.

Looking at the map above it seems that there are no masts within the Dulwich estate boundary? Dave R I suggest you lobby the Dulwich estate for a 25 meter mast and 6 large cabinets in a central village location? This would seem to be in a better location for all concerned? But perhaps this does not in the view of Dulwich estate supports the 'preservation of the character of the area - the appearance of individual properties is in harmony with that of neighbouring buildings, maintaining the integrity of streetscapes and there is an almost rural feel due to an abundance of trees and open spaces.'

Elephant Wrote:

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

> Looking at the map above it seems that there are

> no masts within the Dulwich estate boundary?


That's right.


The Dulwich Estates management are Luddites. They don't understand that efficient communications are vital in today's world. They have objected to other masts and so the phone reception in the Village is dismal.


Similarly, they want to use bicycles for every journey - hence their support for potty modifications to the Townley Road junction.


I live in the village and to think that we pay them a levy every year for the privilege, really goes against the grain.


Villager

I've made it clear that I don't have a view on this other than that bad science should not feature, so I'm not going to be lobbying anybody. A mast near Barry Road would come in handy though.

Isn't there a mobile mast on the Pelo ground, within the Estate? Doesn't seem to be on the diagram, but just googled it and it seems there is a separate planning application to upgrade it?


planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_STHWR_DCAPR_9558973

If this mast gets built, will it benefit users of all of the mobile networks (O2, EE etc) or only a limited number of them?


Also, does anyone know what the likely range will be that it benefits? The map that Villager posted shows a black hole and it would be helpful to know whether this new mast (if built) will fill that hole or only part of it? It may be that it will, but the further away the user is the less the potential benefit in improved signal?


It will clearly be an eyesore, but in weighing that up against the potential benefit, it would be helpful to understand what the potential benefit actually is.

MiniViking Wrote:

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

> If this mast gets built, will it benefit users of

> all of the mobile networks (O2, EE etc) or only a

> limited number of them?

>

The supporting docos say that it is for Vodafone and O2 for 3G and 4G services.


It's part o Vodafone's "Project Spring" ?13Bn investment programme and they will sub-let to O2.

sanity girl Wrote:

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

> It will only benefit people who have mobile phones

> that use 4G. I have an iPhone 4s that uses 3G not

> 4G. So no, I don't think it will benefit all

> mobile users.


Should you read the supporting documents you may find that it covers 2G,3G and 4G specifically..

4G 800 MHz

Cellular Band

2G/3G 900 MHz

Cellular Band

2G 1800 MHz

Cellular Band

3G 2100 MHz

Cellular Band

4G 2600 MHz

Cellular Band

  • 3 weeks later...

According to the Dulwich Society Newsletter.

________

Proposed Mobile Phone mast on the corner of Village Way & Half Moon Lane: Along with more than 270 other local residents, the Society objected to the planning application to install a radio base station at this junction. The Council has now refused the application.

___________


I wonder on what mandate the Dulwich Society objected? Did it raise the opinion of its members - I don't recall responding.


Good news it is rejected though.

Apart from any concerns about being sited next to a school.


Siting a 25m tall 60cm diameter pole with numoerous street cabinets on a prominent street corner aesthetically would be unacceptable. Their are smarter places to house these masts.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...