HS/TL/22/00526
|
Proposed 5G telecommunications installation: 17m street pole and 3 additional ancillary equipment cabinets and associated ancillary works
|
Pavement Little Ridge Avenue, Hastings (Opposite 71-78 Oasthouse Close)
- Total Consulted: 0
- Comments Received: 85
- Objections: 81
- Supporting: 4
-
Collapse All|Expand All|Showing 1-10 of 85|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|Next
Mr Tim Crook
Comment submitted date: Thu 04 Aug 2022
I strongly object to the installation of a 5G monopole on Little Ridge Avenue, opposite the flats on Oasthouse Close. My reasons for objecting are as follows:
1. The proposed monopole is 17 metres tall and would tower above the nearby streetlights, which look to be around 7 metres tall, as well as over adjacent trees, which are a maximum of 10-12 metres tall. It would also tower over the two storey residential properties across the road, and be very visible from their windows which are only a few metres away.
2. The land to the south of the proposed installation drops away, which would increase the sense of this monopole looming over the houses to the south. In the winter the trees, which would only provide partial screening to the south in the summer, would be bare, which would increase the visibility of this mast.
3. Three cabinets will be installed alongside this mast - this is a narrow pavement/verge area and the mast plus cabinets will make this section very cluttered, especially as the proposed site is very near a nursery and not far from Ark Little Ridge School - this section of pavement can be busy with children and parents going to and from school.
4. In general this monopole would be an inappropriate, obtrusive and overly dominant eyesore, out of keeping with the character and appearance of this quiet leafy residential neighbourhood.
5. There continues to be a worldwide dispute about the official guidelines on radio frequency radiation (RFR) emitted by 5G masts. Many expert scientists have long questioned the safety of these guidelines and the majority of independent scientific studies on RFR show adverse biological effects on both humans and wildlife;
6. An independent review of ten epidemiological studies (Khurana et al, 2010) found that eight of the studies showed increased levels of cancer and neurological symptoms amongst those living within 500m of a mast.
There are many more health and environmental issues that could be listed.
Please do not allow the installation of this 5G monopole, the siting and appearance of which would seriously detract and negatively impact on the beauty and surroundings of Little Ridge Avenue.
Comment submitted date: Thu 04 Aug 2022
I strongly object to the installation of a 5G monopole on Little Ridge Avenue, opposite the flats on Oasthouse Close. My reasons for objecting are as follows:
1. The proposed monopole is 17 metres tall and would tower above the nearby streetlights, which look to be around 7 metres tall, as well as over adjacent trees, which are a maximum of 10-12 metres tall. It would also tower over the two storey residential properties across the road, and be very visible from their windows which are only a few metres away.
2. The land to the south of the proposed installation drops away, which would increase the sense of this monopole looming over the houses to the south. In the winter the trees, which would only provide partial screening to the south in the summer, would be bare, which would increase the visibility of this mast.
3. Three cabinets will be installed alongside this mast - this is a narrow pavement/verge area and the mast plus cabinets will make this section very cluttered, especially as the proposed site is very near a nursery and not far from Ark Little Ridge School - this section of pavement can be busy with children and parents going to and from school.
4. In general this monopole would be an inappropriate, obtrusive and overly dominant eyesore, out of keeping with the character and appearance of this quiet leafy residential neighbourhood.
5. There continues to be a worldwide dispute about the official guidelines on radio frequency radiation (RFR) emitted by 5G masts. Many expert scientists have long questioned the safety of these guidelines and the majority of independent scientific studies on RFR show adverse biological effects on both humans and wildlife;
6. An independent review of ten epidemiological studies (Khurana et al, 2010) found that eight of the studies showed increased levels of cancer and neurological symptoms amongst those living within 500m of a mast.
There are many more health and environmental issues that could be listed.
Please do not allow the installation of this 5G monopole, the siting and appearance of which would seriously detract and negatively impact on the beauty and surroundings of Little Ridge Avenue.
Neil Del Strother
Comment submitted date: Thu 04 Aug 2022
I strongly object to the installation of a 5G monopole on Little Ridge Avenue, opposite the flats on Oasthouse Close. My reasons for objecting are as follows:
1. The proposed monopole is 17 metres tall and would tower above the nearby streetlights, which look to be around 7 metres tall, as well as over adjacent trees, which are a maximum of 10-12 metres tall. It would also tower over the two storey residential properties across the road, and be very visible from their windows which are only a few metres away.
2. The land to the south of the proposed installation drops away, which would increase the sense of this monopole looming over the houses to the south. In the winter the trees, which would only provide partial screening to the south in the summer, would be bare, which would increase the visibility of this mast.
3. Three cabinets will be installed alongside this mast - this is a narrow pavement/verge area and the mast plus cabinets will make this section very cluttered, especially as the proposed site is very near a nursery and not far from Ark Little Ridge School - this section of pavement can be busy with children and parents going to and from school.
4. In general this monopole would be an inappropriate, obtrusive and overly dominant eyesore, out of keeping with the character and appearance of this quiet leafy residential neighbourhood.
5. There continues to be a worldwide dispute about the official guidelines on radio frequency radiation (RFR) emitted by 5G masts. Many expert scientists have long questioned the safety of these guidelines and the majority of independent scientific studies on RFR show adverse biological effects on both humans and wildlife;
6. An independent review of ten epidemiological studies (Khurana et al, 2010) found that eight of the studies showed increased levels of cancer and neurological symptoms amongst those living within 500m of a mast.
There are many more health and environmental issues that could be listed.
Please do not allow the installation of this 5G monopole, the siting and appearance of which would seriously detract and negatively impact on the beauty and surroundings of Little Ridge Avenue.
Mrs J Torrance
Comment submitted date: Fri 29 Jul 2022
I strongly object to an unsightly mast and it's ancillary cabinets being sited in our leafy avenue. The mast is 5 metres (15 feet) above the tree line & would an eye-sore in this area. The cabinets would take up too much room on a narrow pavement frequented by people getting to the shop s & the school.
The crucial findings of the New Hampshire Commission: The New Hampshire Commission To Study The Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology was formed through legislation by the state of New Hampshire to include 13 experts in physics, toxicology, electro-magnetics, epidemiology, biostatistics, occupational health medicine, public health policy, business and law. In their 2021 Final Report they state that wireless telecommunication antennas should be placed at least 500m from residents, parks, playgrounds, hospitals, nursing homes, day care centres, and schools. The report can be found here: https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/statstudcomm/committees/1474/reports/5G%20final%20report.pdf (Page 13 and Pages 100-109 reference the 500m setback recommendation and the studies used to arrive at this recommendation.) The findings of the report are evidence-based and therefore globally applicable.
The evidence in this report shows that this mast should NOT be sited directly across the road from nurses homes, definitely NOT iso close to the hospital nursery.
Please keep our town a pleasant place to live & safe.
Thank you
Ms Susie Metcalf
Comment submitted date: Wed 27 Jul 2022
Bloody eyesore and nor sure how safe they are. Why do we need 5g anyway %comment redacted%
Ms Lisa Peters
Comment submitted date: Tue 26 Jul 2022
It's way to close to housing and the hospital, need way more checks before putting this in a residential place. It will look out of character could be dangerious. Please think again
Marybeth Haas
Comment submitted date: Tue 26 Jul 2022
I object to this 5G mast proposal and any other sited anywhere near populated areas because there are many scientists researching and providing evidence of potential harms caused by the high frequencies used in '5G'. Little Ridge is too densely populated to not cause risk of serious harm to residents and the community working and using services in the area. Children in particular are more vulnerable to the high frequency microwave radiation in 5G tech because thier brains and bodies are still developing.
All living beings, bees, other pollinating insects, humans, birds, trees, etc... are at risk of harm from these microwaves but some will be more vulnerable than others.
The primary risks of concern are not addressed by existing regulation that have looked only the potential dangers of heat; most of the risks are to do with radiation.
5G masts require approx 3 x more power than 4G and more masts will be needed. How does this fit in with HBC's carbon neutral commitment?
Are you aware that tests have shown that 5G is actually slower than 4G in some circumstances; how can this be worth the multitude known health risks. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/09/08/5g-speed/
Are you aware that 5G is also technology used for killing people by stealth by US and other military? One discussion expounding the virtues for military use of 5G tech
https://dev007.militaryembedded.com/comms/communications/5g-and-the-military-a-new-era-of-connectivity
Find key issues here: https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell-phoneswireless/5g-internet-everything/20-quick-facts-what-you-need-to-know-about-5g-wireless-and-small-cells/
Please find links to further info below about health concerns and other risk factors. Lots more info is available if you choose to do the research. All of our health is at risk not just to our own and our children's bodies but local and global ecosystems. Once you see all the discussions and research findings, you will see it is insane to go ahead with this '5G rollout'. I'm appealing to YOUR humanity. Please make INFORMED decisions meaning you must look at the real data and not onky what 'government' offers. Once you've seen the volume of real evidence showing the dangers, you will definitely not want this tech interfering with your, your children's, and nature's health.
https://actionagainst5g.org/about-us/
https://www.sageobserver.com/5g-will-unleash-a-colossal-public-health-nightmare/
Eileen O'Connor interview https://profdolorescahill.com/
https://www.5gexposed.com/united-kingdom/
https://ukstop5g.freeforums.net/board/10/why-stop-5g-masts
Mr Robert Wakeford
Comment submitted date: Tue 26 Jul 2022
I believe that the proposal will deliver a much needed community resource providing the tower is sited in accordance with agreed planning guidelines.
Mr Roger Dando
Comment submitted date: Tue 26 Jul 2022
too high an eye sore badly sited too near the road
unpleasant appearance 5g radiation cabinets will clutter pavement bad for environemnt and built area not needed 4g works fine ! pls register my formal objection
Ms Cindy Chin sang
Comment submitted date: Tue 26 Jul 2022
I object to this proposed telecoms mast. It would not be in keeping with the area, being obtrusive and unsightly. The area is densely populated and has a nursery and school close by so we should be using the precautionary principle with this technology due to the growing body of peer reviewed evidence which shows the adverse health effects of 5G.
Mrs Alison Blything
Comment submitted date: Tue 26 Jul 2022
I wish to strongly object to the installation of this 5G Mast in a residential area.
I am highly concerned about the health and environmental effects on the residents if the mast is built. There are many residents, including elderly and vulnerable people as well as children living in this area. Published research shows that living near masts can cause negative health effects such as cancer, diabetes, anxiety, headaches, sleep problems, memory problems and blurred vision.
It would also be contrary to Policies DM1 and DM2(a) of Hastings Council's own Development Management Plan.
The proposed site is very near a nursery, the Conquest Hospital, nurses' residential accommodation, and not far from Ark Little Ridge School. This section of pavement can be busy with children and parents using the schools and the installation of the necessary cabinets will considerably restrict and obstruct pavement access and be detrimental in particular to users of pushchairs, wheelchairs and the sight impaired.
An independent review of ten epidemiological studies (Khurana et al, 2010) found that eight of the studies showed increased levels of cancer and neurological symptoms amongst those living within 500m of a mast.
Many independent scientific studies on RFR show adverse biological effects on both human and wildlife.
The European Parliament's STOA Committee recently issued a report calling for a halt to 5G rollout, based on sufficient evidence of adverse health effects of RFR microwave radiation. They describe 5G as an experiment on the population and state that the official safety guidelines (as provided by ICNIRP) do not protect the population.
There is a recommendation the 5G telecommunication antennas should by placed at least 500m from residential areas to be safe. As stated above this one is looking to be placed right in the middle of a residential area. Is the Council willing to risk the health of its residents.
Hastings has a carbon neutral goal. How will this fit in with that as it is stated the electricity usage from 5G networks will create up to 23% of the global greenhouse gas emissions by 2030?
It would also be contrary to Policies DM1 and DM2(a) of Hastings Council's own Development Management Plan.
Showing 1-10 of 85|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|Next