Comment by Matthew Kitching on July 2, 2020 at 18:41

Looking at the plans it doesn't seem to take up much pavement space. Would be good if this was a sign of 5G investment in the area.

Comment by Caroline Simpson on July 4, 2020 at 12:58

I live just a few doors down from this corner, do not have a car, and walk round this corner and use the crossing hundreds of times a week.  I have submitted my objection on the Council website.  Here it is:

I am writing to object in principle to the application, and also to point out major flaws in the Proposed Site Layout and Proposed Site Elevation drawings.  The two drawings do not show what is there on the ground, and thus the application should be withdrawn and start again if they wish.

*  Proposed site layout.  I presume that the spotted area around the building of No 1 Whittington Rd is meant to show its exterior land, and thus the double line to the left of the area should show the boundary fence of No 1.  Something is deeply wrong with this all.  The drawing shows the boundary fence as only c 2.25 m from the end of the billboard.  In fact there is c 5.63 between the end of the billboard and the end of the fence by No 1.  The drawing thus shows the fence as 8.75 in total, whereas it is 12.08.  This mistake means that the bollards are all in the wrong places in relation to No 1.  The 3 right hand bollards on the plan are shown as outside No 1 land....but they are not... the nearest/right hand one is near the boundary corner and c 1.64 from the fence.   The whole relationship between No 1 and the road and corner is wrong. 

 *   Proposed Site Elevation drawing.  This drawing shows the billboard as 6.45 m wide, which it is. But then the drawing shows the fence between the billboard and the boundary of No 1 as c.10.25m which it is not... it is 5.63m. 

Thus one drawing shows the fence along the corner bend as too long and one shows it as far too short.

On the Proposed Site Elevation the gaps between the bollards are also far too big.

 *  There is a major omission from the plan, and that is the Pedestrian Crossing which exists between the two middle bollards to cross over Whittington Rd towards the Supermarket.  This crossing is marked on the pavement by two rows of four yellow bumpy paving stones, to alert people to the crossing.  None of these features are shown on the Proposed Layout Plan. I believe that the crossing was omitted on purpose so that it would not appear dangerous.

 * I also object to this application in principle.  It is on a very busy corner, which has heavy vehicular traffic, and very heavy pedestrian traffic.  Many hundreds - probably thousands - of people use this corner and crossing every day, many with buggies and prams, kids on their bikes and scooters, people in electric wheelchairs etc.  It is already a narrow pavement, and the bend is a blind bend from the Bounds Green Rd.  The installation of the various Cabinets would make it almost impossible for any adult to cross the road or turn the corner safely, but would make it very dangerous indeed to most pedestrians and the general public..

 * The proposed 15m mast and 5 cabinets on the pavement are at the entrance to our Conservation Area.  No 1 is a fine building at the start of our terrace of lovely 19th century houses.  The mast and cabinets would greatly detract from the appearance of the area and thus the application should be refused for this, if for no other reason.

 I ask the Council to suggest that the applicant withdraws this application, and if not that it be refused.

 Additional comment July 4^th:

There is yet another mistake on the two Plans.  The Street Sign at the entrance to Whittington Road is also incorrectly described on the Plans as “(30mph)”. In fact it says 30mph on one side, but says “(20mph ZONE)” on the other side to show traffic entering Whittington Road that it is entering a ‘Safer Streets’ area .  I see this as yet another attempt by the applicant to make the proposed Mast and Cabinets appear safe to erect on this corner.

Comment by louiza charalambous on July 4, 2020 at 13:24

This is the first I am hearing of this proposal and heavily object echoing many of the significant reasons stated above. I'm concerned that a telecoms operator says letters to school,nurseries,councillors and MPs have been sent but no reply. Can I please urge anyone who knows any member of the schools, nurseries and councils to get in contact ASAP and make them aware of this proposal and the claim no responses have been received. Thank you.

Comment by Renaissance on July 4, 2020 at 14:01

It seems no one knows about this planning application, this is the link to make comments and objections to the application https://www.haringey.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning/...

The planning application number is:

reference HGY/2020/1446

Comment by Lucy Whitehead on July 6, 2020 at 11:16

And to think the council wouldn't even let us have new signage directing people to Myddleton Road because of the "clutter"!!

Add a Comment