Whiskey Posted February 19, 2022 Share Posted February 19, 2022 8 hours ago, Kopek said: Legal arguments. It could be seen from Selbourne Drive!!! Well if the Selborne residents can see it, it must be felled. Move it so it can only be seen by Demesne Road people. 1 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Thomas Posted February 19, 2022 Share Posted February 19, 2022 16 hours ago, Happier diner said: Why then, in terms that actually mean something, was it rejected? Please don't say legal arguements. That is meaningless to me. Where is a mast that gives your constituents a phone signal going to be placed that does not fall foul of legal arguments? Thanks for comment. Significant harm to residential amenity (General Policy 2 of Strategic Plan) and harm to conservation area character, appearance and views (Environmental Policies 35 and 36, Strategic Policies 4 and 5, and General Policy 2B) were reasons for refusal but another important one was failure to demonstrate strategic national need for the mast which cannot be secured by mast sharing or alternative locations (Infrastructure Policy 3). This was an important element of my Tynwald telecommunications motions in the last 18 months or so. Telecommunications policy, implementation and public funding are flawed. I would hope fibre, mast sharing and existing infrastructure are part of the way ahead. Sure has had a 5G pilot and wrote things like "no prospect of 5G in this area without a development of some kind" but concluded that "there is an urgent need for improved mobile phone coverage in the conservation area". Many residents did petition and object, and two appealed, but I was the only observer at the appeal hearing and the case made by one appellant's lawyers was persuasive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Thomas Posted February 19, 2022 Share Posted February 19, 2022 17 hours ago, finlo said: It says 5g in the news reports are they wrong then? Not wrong, just over-emphasizing the 5G element I feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 19, 2022 Share Posted February 19, 2022 18 hours ago, Chris Thomas said: 5G mast? The mast was not 5G. Planners did not reject. Appeal was successful based on legal arguments. 1 hour ago, Chris Thomas said: Not wrong, just over-emphasizing the 5G element I feel. Oh. The mast was not 5G, but maybe.......a little bit 5G or maybe it was 5G. Surely a mast is a mast so now I am confused whether the issue was its mastness or its G ness. So was the petition because it was (although only a bit) 5G (or not) or because of it being a mast (of questionable 5G ability)? Did they say what the significant harm to the amenity it was considering the fact that there is a derelict old school about 75metres away full of old vans. What is the way forward then with 4G (or a bit of 5G) and mobile phone signal being terrible in such a populated area. A mast free mast? Invisible masts, invisible sewage works. I am grateful for your explanation, and thank you for putting your head in this lions mouth, but what is your view? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted February 19, 2022 Share Posted February 19, 2022 The telecoms companies will get their way eventually they'll just get more creative and start hiding them inside petrol price sign's etc like they do elsewhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 19, 2022 Share Posted February 19, 2022 7 minutes ago, finlo said: The telecoms companies will get their way eventually they'll just get more creative and start hiding them inside petrol price sign's etc like they do elsewhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Thomas Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 (edited) 22 hours ago, Happier diner said: So was the petition because it was (although only a bit) 5G (or not) or because of it being a mast (of questionable 5G ability)? What is the way forward then with 4G (or a bit of 5G) and mobile phone signal being terrible in such a populated area. A mast free mast? The petition, and the objections to the original planning application, were on many grounds. My comment was about the legally argued case which was made successfully at the appeal. Alternatives include: Fibre to provide the home service which Sure has piloted in north and central Douglas since 2019 using another approach Use of the mast in Masonic Hall grounds with full planning permission Mast sharing between Sure and Manx Telecom, for instance at Dalton Street Licensed used of Douglas Borough Council street lights Masts on top of existing infrastructure and buildings Planning and telecoms policy around this is not right. There are two Government reports which relate. Edited February 20, 2022 by Chris Thomas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 What's really bonkers is that that part of Douglas is a 'conservation' zone. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twitch Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 5 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: What's really bonkers is that that part of Douglas is a 'conservation' zone. Opposite, South Quay is in a 'shithole' zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizo Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 10 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: What's really bonkers is that that part of Douglas is a 'conservation' zone. or in Douglas as a whole 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 6 minutes ago, Twitch said: Opposite, South Quay is in a 'shithole' zone. It was. It's all been demolished now. Not sure what is going to replace it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 2 minutes ago, Gizo said: or in Douglas as a whole Well yeah. Conservation zones are often really stupid. So what if someone in a townhouse at Woodbourne Square wants to get PVC windows, just let them. It's bonkers. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 2 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Well yeah. Conservation zones are often really stupid. So what if someone in a townhouse at Woodbourne Square wants to get PVC windows, just let them. It's bonkers. I had the same issue, all my neighbours had PVC opening vent windows, I had to get sash windows. The next door neighbour applied a couple of years later, PVC vent windows, replacing wooden sash windows! No consistency at all, I was tempted to claim for the difference! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizo Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 4 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Well yeah. Conservation zones are often really stupid. So what if someone in a townhouse at Woodbourne Square wants to get PVC windows, just let them. It's bonkers. and yet you get places for instance in Castletown where they knock half of the street down in order to build (really badly) a load of half way houses with all rent paid for by IOMG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twitch Posted February 20, 2022 Share Posted February 20, 2022 8 minutes ago, Happier diner said: It was. It's all been demolished now. Not sure what is going to replace it all. Was? Sorry, I missed out the architecturally significant Quay House and Plumb Centre.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.