I just had a converstion with a gentleman seeking signatures on a petition to stop the proposed mast outside Sydenham Tennis Club in Lawrie Park Road. He assured me he was not against 5G - just the location. The two arguments put forward were:
It was too near residential housing. It would obstruct his view. He declined to say which street has this issue
5G masts would invite vandalism and this could affect his small children
... and a solution ...
Put it on top of the telephone exchange in Crystal Palace Road
I have a number of unanwered questions about this:
The mast is less of visual obstruction than most trees around here
The telephone exchange is, I believe, nearer to residential accommodation
The telephone exchange is a less optimal place to maximise the high speed 5G broadband network which, as a community, would be beneficial and an alternative to the wretched Openreach/Virgin duopoly
'5G vandalism' was a short period problem that was taken out on 4G masts, I, nor he, could remember any recent incidents
OK, I and many others, would benefit from this mast. However, I do feel for the guy who feels under threat. But this is London full of sirens, night time helicopters and other intrusions that are all a cost of living in a densely populated area - and not a countryside idyll. So how do we balance out what I would suggest is the benefit of many against the fears of the few?
Probably not to answer your question but there are a few things going on here I believe.
It's not just the mast - the amount and size of associated street furniture with the 5G installation is quite a lot and perhaos more of an eyesore / imposition. Also there is the factor of the design of the mast - it seems that the telcos initially propose what can only be described as basic utilitarian one size fits all masts rather than tailoring them to the local environment. Perhaps cost has something to do with this and they go with the cheapest???
Would it help their case if in the planning application or before they showed a range of possible masts and did a survey / competition to identify whether there was one design more or less preferred than others? It would also help transparency if rent associated with these installations was declared - we would then know who had an interest in getting them deployed.
Experience has shown me that if one disputes initial planning proposals one gets a more holistic beneficial result for all in the end as the plans are then mitigated down to a more reasonable acceptable outcome - that more people can agree with. The system encourages developers to go for extremes at the outset and they run an assumption that the initial proposals will be watered down - but great for them if they are not.
There is a lot of nonsense spouted about 5G masts - the fact that they will emit killer radiation for a start. And I agree that the design of them is pretty awful and further thought needs to be given to how they look. They should also not obstruct pavements.
However, if we want 5G (and people will soon moan if they're denied access to its benefits) we have to have masts. It may be of no use at all having them stuck up on the Crystal Palace TV mast because they are needed in greater concentration and more locally to users to work effectively. Personally I think they should consider rooftops, eg blocks of flats/offices, where possible but I guess that's double the aggro for the operators as they would have to negotiate with a council for planning and the property owners for permission.
Arguments that such things generate crime is utterly ludicrous and seriously clutching at straws. If a yobbo wants to vandalise something they will find something to vandalise - a car, a lamp post, a post box.
Basically it comes down to not wanting to look at something grim. But London is full of hideousness and you don't live in London for its romantic unspoilt countryside.
If someone wanted to put something like a mast in my sight line at home I would grumble but I would get used to it and I want 5G. I would rather that than put up with the god awful giant conifer that neighbours have been letting run riot for years and that's sucking all life out of my garden!
For me, it's all about the street clutter. You get at least 3, and often 4 tatty metal boxes installed next to the mast. The companies could make a small investment in developing a better designed, more space efficient cabinet, which could be shared between networks. I presume the number of cabinets taking up pavement space are because each network wants its own. Not on. Cooperate and consolidate, and you'll get fewer objections.