5G in Merton

5G in Merton

Comments 0 Comment

 

Hi All,
I hope everyone is well :-).  Some updates which I hope are useful:
What this email contains:
  1. Towards Legal action ActionAgainst5G.org, 1 week to go before the opportunity to crowd fund it is closed
  2. Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s ‘Broadband and the Road to 5G consultation’ inquiry to close on 19th June https://committees.parliament.uk/work/89/broadband-and-the-road-to-5g/
  3. 5G towers being erected in Merton, Croydon and Epsom
  4. State of play with local MP
  5. An NHS consultant is being put under pressure by Senior MPs for his concerns about 5G
  6. 5G and environmental impact -another angle
  7. 3 videos which pretty much cover everything about the 5G issue.
  8. 5GinMerton articles you are welcome to distribute/re-publish
1.There is a week before the opportunity to help group fund the legal action below is closed.
ActionAgainst5g-fb-website-announcement-h (2).jpg
Brief background on why this action is taking place.
  • Lack confidence in Public Health England. PHE has dismissed multiple warnings from both government and independent scientists including many Scientific Committees for Health and the evidence of thousands of peer reviewed scientific papers. Instead it accepts outdated opinions from unreliable and unaccountable agencies.
  • Since 2000, when The Stewart Report recommended the government apply the precautionary principle to radio frequency radiation, the government has failed in its duty to protect health.
  • Concerns also include the imposition of radiation on the population without consent and the serious matter of privacy, surveillance and social control.
The Stewart Report mentioned in the second bullet point is named after Sir William Stewart who is featured in the 2007 Panorama documentary ‘WiFi Warning Signal’.  When he was the chairman of the Health Protection Agency he expressed safety concerns and was critical of WHO’s pronouncements which he says does not accurately reflect the science.  The documentary also features Mike Repocholi, a founding member of ICNIRP, you can read about him here.
2. Committee’s ‘Broadband and the Road to 5G consultation’ inquiry to close on 19th June https://committees.parliament.uk/work/89/broadband-and-the-road-to-5g/
As with all the previous consultations here and abroad, the terms of reference they use is so narrow they are reduced to a glorified leading question, I am sure I am not the only one who always mention this point when I respond.  I would really encourage people to write their own submissions because we are more likely to be heard if we are not submitting templates, also I am sure you can do better than me anyway!  As an aid to get started, I attach what I sent to this inquiry and an OFCOM consultation which I was unaware of but just managed to respond to before the deadline for submission.  Bristol Group did some thorough work on points which can be used in to respond to consultations, also attached. Thanks to Brian and team of Hammersmith and Fulham Group for the heads up.
3. 5G towers in Merton, Croydon and Epsom
I’ve seen a few more of the 4G LTE small cell transmitters in Wimbledon Broadway/High Street.  This time, Telefonica/O2 are using Infinitel equipment rather than Nokia.  Infinitel is a Russian privately owned concern.  I guess they beat Nokia on price/performance.  I spoke to workers maintaining/replacing lamp posts with these transmitters.  They weren’t actually working on fitting transmitters to poles but all knew about 5G concerns and asked me questions about them  Some even knew I was going to ask them about 5G even before any mentioned of it.  I took it as encouragement that the issue was becoming so widely known, such a contrast from a year ago.
In Merton there are two 20m 5G towers planned that I am aware of, 1 approved and 1 refused.
  1. Application number 20/P1392, Prior approval has been granted 11/06/20, it’s OPP 41 ST HELIER AVENUE, MORDEN, LONDON, SM4 6HQ.  It’s close to homes and shops and is 20m high!  No objections had been received by the council, probably because no one knew about it. (Thanks to Leigh of Wimbledon E Hillside Residents’ Assn-WEHRA.)
    1. It seemed to go through very smoothly
    2. It was disturbing to read how Government Departments have neutered local democracy: “The National Planning Policy Framework clearly states that authorities should NOT question the need for the service, nor seek to prevent competition between operators. Notwithstanding this fact, the Applicant considers it to be important to explain the technical justification for the site and how the facility fits into the overall network.”  Local residents and their reps “should not question“.  It can’t be much more overt, it’s written policy for institutions to stamp out thoughts expressed at a local level.
  2. 20/P1391, Prior approval refused, near 188 Merton High Street, close to South Wimbledon Station.  Some reasons why it’s been refused, which may be useful to refer to when making objections:
    1. Significant detrimental impact on the historical setting of the listed building (South Wimbledon Station- Grade 2)  to the detriment of the wider street scene.
    2. Concern at the gradual proliferation of large masts in this location and their associated street cabinets
    3. Visually intrusive to the new park planned for the estate along Pincott Road
    4. Perhaps most damningly: Drawings did not adequately reveal the existing 4G mast that is currently located on the corner of Pincott Road and Merton High Street, which would be situated within close proximity (approx. 5m) to the proposed 5G Mast.  “As such this information is highly inaccurate and misleading. Officers consider that the proposed mast would result in a cumulative impact of telecom masts (with associated cabinets) within this area and cause detrimental harm on the visual and physical amenities of the wider area.” (Regs do not allow for objection based on health effects unless it breaks ICNIRP guidelines, may be this does?)
    5. Overbearing and over-massing impact highly detrimental on the amenities of residents properties at High Path Estate as this would result in a very minimal separation distance of 14m from the proposed buildings and windows.  (The same could be said of the application above which was granted)
    6. Would have severe impact on character and appearance on proposed regeneration plan.
In Croydon, two 20m high masts again (thanks to Graham and Jovita), 1 granted and 1 refused. 
  1. The granted application 19/03850/FUL includes 9 cabinets as well as the mast and will be directly situated in front of homes.  The 20m mast multi-operator will replace an 11m mono-operator one,  The street was already cluttered so the council said it wont make things worse!
    1. It’s near Hamsey Green Primary School which was consulted but did not respond (this is in late 2019, prior to the lockdown)
    2. Given that neighbouring buildings are generally 2/3 storeys, the increase in height was not considered to affect outlook or light of neighbouring residential dwellings.
    3. The monopole would be located in close to a street tree. However, the siting of the mast was considered unlikely to affect its health or stability. (health effects on trees considered but not humans but I’m sure it’s just looking at the physical structure of the roots being affected by the installation of the mast rather than the EMRs emitted.)
    4. The conclusion of the planning department: “whilst the development would not positively enhance the character of local area, its impact would be considerably outweighed by the communications benefits.  Therefore, it is considered acceptable.”
  2. The refused application 20/00431/FUL includes 9 cabinets too and is further away from homes. The 20m mast will replace a 10m one.
    1. The proposed telecommunications mast, by reason of its proposed scale, height and bulk and the associated street furniture, would result in excessive visual clutter, harming the visual amenity of the street scene and the surrounding area.
    2. Unlike the granted application there were objections received by the council.  The breakdown: 22 objections with 1 supporting the proposal.
    3. The objections were on these grounds:
      1. Not in keeping with the area
      2. Obtrusive by design
      3. Overlooking
      4. Overdevelopment
      5. Impact on highways
    4. Objections were supported by a councillor and the local residents’ association.  The councillor based his opposition on impact on the existing street scene and excessive street furniture and clutter.  The residents’ association objected due to scale and size of the proposed monopole, impact on the metropolitan green belt, security risk to neighbouring properties (interesting consideration) and impact to the existing fences.
    5. Surprisingly, health was touched upon and Sir William Stewart (See section 1 of this newsletter) was quoted: “However it is not possible at present to say that exposure to Radio Frequency (RF) radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health effects, and the gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach.”  Note, this was the strongest it was on the issue as much of what was written was hedged and unclear.  It even makes out Stewart went with ICNIRP because it was considered to be taking a precautionary approach, the Panorama documentary tells a different story in which Stewart was side-lined and the Government decided to go with the ICNIRP.  The refusal doc is attached so you can see what you make of it.
    6. In conclusion, the council rejected size of the pole, mentioned it does not fit in with surrounding area’s character and said this outweighed the benefit of the improvement in mobile telephony.  Of course they were unable to factor health issues in their explanation.
In Epsom a large mast of 15m is having additional equipment added, increasing the power output using coherent radiators to make it 5G. (thanks Ludovica).  
4. State of Play with local MP
Stephen Hammond MP has yet to respond to all our face to face and written communications on the issue, it would be a valuable support if others to write in too so the concerns aren’t considered fringe and we aren’t seen as the usual nutty suspects!!  In my last email I provided him more updates on the issue locally and more broadly.  The objective was to ascertain where he stands on the issue and whether he needs more info to clarify his position.   I haven’t been successful in this case but on the whole I’ve found what works is to be polite and respectful, brief, specific (less wriggle room) and only ask 1 or 2 questions. Keep it to one page, if that.
5. An NHS consultant is being put under pressure by Senior MPs for his concerns about 5G
6. 5G and environmental impact -another angle
Many of us know about the negative impacts on the health of animal and plant life due to the ever-increasing man-made EMR.  The Ecologist has another take which may increase the possibility of people focused on climate change to hear us.  If carbon is the enemy, then 5G and associated tech e.g. IoT will make things worse.  In addition, there is the mining as well as depletion of the ozone layer due to the launching of tens of thousands of small satellites to beam 5G.
7. 3 videos which pretty much cover everything about the 5G issue.
I know I mentioned the first two previously, but they’re so good!!
8. 5GinMerton articles you are welcome to distribute/re-publish/adapt for your needs
All attached.
With best wishes,
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

 

Leave a Reply