Cheadle and Gatley Lib Dems are moving
Your Lib Dem team for Cheadle West & Gatley Learn more
by Lib Dem team on 5 May, 2016
We’ve received the following email:
Proposed upgrade of existing telecommunications equipment for H3G and EE at Gatley Telephone Exchange, High Street, Cheadle, Cheshire, SK8 1BN
Mono Consultants Limited act as agents for Arqiva who build, own and operate shared radio telecommunications and public broadcast infrastructure in the UK. The company owns and operates the UK’s public broadcast transmitter network, as well as large numbers of mobile phone and other radio transmission sites. Arqiva manages equipment at the Gatley Telephone Exchange telecommunications site on behalf of H3G Limited and EE Limited.
In order to provide 4G coverage to the surrounding area, H3G and EE have approached Arqiva to upgrade their existing mobile telecommunications equipment at the Gatley Telephone Exchange.
H3G and EE already operate telecommunications apparatus from the telephone exchange and the upgrade would therefore involve the installation of 3No additional antennas on stand-off brackets attached to 3No existing antenna support poles and 1No additional equipment cabinet on the roof of the Gatley Telephone Exchange, High Street, Cheadle, SK8 1BN, as shown in the attached drawings. The proposed development would provide high quality 4G coverage to 3 and EE customers in the surrounding area.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with information on the proposal and offer the opportunity for you to seek further information should you wish to do so. We would welcome your views by 19 May 2016 before we finalise the proposal and submit a full planning application.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any further information about the proposal.
Regards
Ginny Hall MRTPI
Mono Consultants Limited
48 St Vincent Street
Glasgow
G2 5TS
Now that is a building I would love to see inside.
What a shame we can’t encourage them to do something about the eyesore that is its exterior, even a larg banner with the picture of some local building would be more acceptable.
It is good news, though, if our signal is to be improved.
I agree with Alf, the building is an eyesore. I do not understand why as part of the approval (if that is the exult) that they are made to improve the front of the building?
Hi Peter – the reason would simply be that the council has no legal power to do that, and can’t act outside the law. We’d love to get the frontage improved, and we’ll approach BT about it (again!).
On a tenuous connection (no pun intended) why doesn’t Gatley have superfast fibre optic broadband from BT?
Seems strange that we don’t have it.
Most of Gatley does have it, but you’re right that it’s strange a small section doesn’t. I don’t know why BT has been unwilling or unable to provide it everywhere.
The scheme drawings seem quite detailed in terms of the electrical scheme quoting manufacturers parts etc. Its interesting that the original issue of the drawing was 19/6/13 and the latest update around April 16. I wonder why there has been such a delay when my understanding is that the 4G technology has been in place for a few years now.
I have seen similar schemes before to put Vodafone equipment on top of existing Gymnasium buildings. In this instance it concerns an existing exchange building which seems sensible, in the centre of a busy shopping village.
It seems that some telecomms equipment is being re-used and therefore there is existing 2G/3G in place. Going forward if 5G is added and there is an approach to support all legacy equipment, I would be a bit concerned about the potential combined effect of all the transmission equipment on people working in/around this area. (ie would the transmission equipment be being used at maximum duty cycle on say a saturday afternoon when most people are around the village?). I have no knowledge / expertise concerning this, but presumably there should be a ‘safety case’ or similar, and the consultants will be working on the health and safety aspects – my experience (not concerning telecomms. projects) is that sometimes this involves external health and safety organisations who ‘standardise’ their approach.
I am sure there are technical answers / justifications to my points, but i am just putting forward a few of my concerns.
Best regards
Has anyone actually bothered to have dialogue with the owners re: improving frontage – clearly not given the state of this eyesore. Council pull your fingers out and stop making excuses!