Discover Hertford Online Forum

Archived Topic

Topic ID 1974

13/09/2006 by Sargasso

New mast on Bircherley Green car park

I haven't many details but have heard that are planning to erect a 5.8 metre mast on the roof of the Bircherley Green car park. Anyone got any more details? I for one can't stand seeing phone masts everywhere, they are the next generation of eyesore.


0 replies

Archived Replies

Reply ID 25665

13/09/2006 by sloopjohnb

I'm perplexed by this as well - have to ring a few people today and will ask around. Possibly something to do with the Parking Attendants office being on the first floor and the necessity of their communications network. It is obviously a big aerial with a wide radius because Town Watch uses the fibre optic network. If we couldn't have gone down this route we would have needed a similar large aerial to reach Stevenage and the cost and licensing would have put it out of our range (excusing the pun).


Reply ID 25666

13/09/2006 by OldCross

It is a 5.8M imitation flagpole which doubles as a electronic communications base station, and there will also be a small dish Comments have to be in by September 27th so get writing or e-mail planning(at)eastherts.gov.uk. The reference number is 3/06/1725/FP/JS



Reply ID 25680

13/09/2006 by Mr P

quote:
Originally posted by sloopjohnb
Possibly something to do with the Parking Attendants office being on the first floor and the necessity of their communications network.
Parking Attendants + Commnuication = Pentagram. No mast required, only chalk.


Reply ID 25723

13/09/2006 by Berbatov

It's for Three mobile to run 3rd and 4th generation mobile phone signals.


Reply ID 25725

13/09/2006 by Pez

There's a rather large, very dark grey, (and very thick, sturdy-looking) mast gone up on the Bluecoats corner of Railway Street and Mead Lane. Only noticed it the other day, so I don't know how long it's been there but it doesn't look 'finished' - there's nothing actually mounted on top of it.


Reply ID 25726

13/09/2006 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Pez
There's a rather large, very dark grey, (and very thick, sturdy-looking) mast gone up on the Bluecoats corner of Railway Street and Mead Lane. Only noticed it the other day, so I don't know how long it's been there but it doesn't look 'finished' - there's nothing actually mounted on top of it.
It's for a CCTV camera to link into the existing network of cameras in the town. A significant amount of the crime that is imported into the town comes via Hertford East Station. [url="http://e-services.eastherts.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=3/05/1655/FP&backURL=%3Ca%20href=wphappcriteria.display?paSearchKey=17562%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C/a%3E%20%3E%20%3Ca%20href='wphappsearchres.displayResultsURL?ResultID=33533%26StartIndex=1%26SortOrder=APNID:asc%26DispResultsAs=WPHAPPSEARCHRES%26BackURL=%3Ca%20href=wphappcriteria.display?paSearchKey=17562%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C/a%3E'%3ESearch%20Results%3C/a%3E"]Planning Application[/url]


Reply ID 25728

13/09/2006 by Pez

Ah, thought so! Ta!


Reply ID 25738

13/09/2006 by Landy

All this talk of next generation phones means we're going to have 1 extra mast for every 4 at present. These will add to the existing eyesores we have to tolerate. I don't believe they are not dangerous either I think they do cause lots of headaches and who knows what else to a person's brain. Years ago there was the Rabbit and before that the One Point phone system. This worked on the basis of a mobile phone receiving a call from a small aerial hardly visible, located on the corner of a building. It was preferable to using a smelly phone box. It's been successful in Paris I believe. You could only use them within a short range of the aerial, which meant they couldn't be used in moving cars, unlike mobile phones which are responsible for bad driving habits, being constantly held to drivers ears. I don't need to make or receive video calls and only switch on my old phone when I need to make a call, I don't use the text facility, I believe it promotes a deterioration in the ability to spell correctly. Why don't we all go back to the Rabbit or One Point systems and be in less danger.


Reply ID 25765

14/09/2006 by Deveraux

quote:
Originally posted by Landy
Why don't we all go back to the Rabbit or One Point systems and be in less danger.
I may be wrong, but didn't those systems only allow you to make calls? I seem to remember that you needed a pager as well so that people could page you to ask that you called them!


Reply ID 25796

14/09/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by Deveraux
quote:
Originally posted by Landy
Why don't we all go back to the Rabbit or One Point systems and be in less danger.
I may be wrong, but didn't those systems only allow you to make calls? I seem to remember that you needed a pager as well so that people could page you to ask that you called them!
Correct Deveraux. I worked for Rabbit at the time and was made redundant when the system was closed down. The only good thing was that it worked on the underground in London. I used to have to respond from receiving a bleep on my pager, find a nearby Rabbit station (such as a newsagent) and then make a call from the phone. This hardly made it a mobile device which is why it failed. Not to mention the astronomical fee that was paid to Mickey Pearce of Only Fools and Horses fame to promote it. That's another story though....


Reply ID 25802

14/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Landy ...... Why don't we all go back to the Rabbit or One Point systems and be in less danger.
Rabbits are still very popular, especially with women, and today's version doesn't require an aerial. They are available in pink, mauve, silver and green. [;)]


Reply ID 27142

02/10/2006 by Landy

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
quote:
Originally posted by Landy ...... Why don't we all go back to the Rabbit or One Point systems and be in less danger.
Rabbits are still very popular, especially with women, and today's version doesn't require an aerial. They are available in pink, mauve, silver and green. [;)]
If I'm not mistaken I don't think you are referring to rabbits as in a gnawing mammal of the family Leporidae, but instead some instrument of female pleasure. Really!! I must complain at a perfectly acceptable posting on my behalf being used to as a means of leading this discussion into the realms of unpalatable sordidness. I would ask you to refrain from such innuendo as I'm sure it doesn't appeal to everyone involved in this forum.


Reply ID 27143

02/10/2006 by Victor Meldrew

Better still, lets all go back and live in a cave


Reply ID 27209

02/10/2006 by Stan

This weekend you can get rabbit stew at the OXT beer fest it seems. Not sure about all those colours, i thought rabbits only came in one colour? Brown Fir colour!


Reply ID 27215

02/10/2006 by CSP

quote:
some instrument of female pleasure
Blimey Landy: I didn't know about this. How do you know? What do they look like? Are they one of the nibbles at the SA Lingerie gig? Phew.


Reply ID 27217

02/10/2006 by Herbert Lemons

To be fair, I have Landy to thank for my awareness of Fish Wife's invidious ribald reference.


Reply ID 27223

02/10/2006 by 60sDJ

If I'm not mistaken I don't think you are referring to rabbits as in a gnawing mammal of the family Leporidae, but instead some instrument of female pleasure. Really!! I must complain at a perfectly acceptable posting on my behalf being used to as a means of leading this discussion into the realms of unpalatable sordidness. I would ask you to refrain from such innuendo as I'm sure it doesn't appeal to everyone involved in this forum. [/quote] "gnawing mammal of the family Leporidae" I think you know more about these Rabbits than you're letting on. Aren't those the ones with mains adaptors?? [:D] For goodness sake Landy. Just ignore it if you find it unpalatable, it's a fact of life, like the expulsion of methane gas from a human being (acceptable enough for you??) There's a vast number of your postings on this site that may have left others speechless, hence their lack of response (aha I prove my point....) but we don't criticise your entries. You are entitled to your views, granted and I for one would defend your right to place such postings etc etc but moralising over others is another thing. Herbert, If you erm Fish about on this Forum you may find other postings from Fish Wife suggesting ribaldness. Monitoring her offerings more closely in future will become de rigour.


Reply ID 27224

02/10/2006 by nora batty

I know, I know. Off topic, but if you are into rabbits you just gotta read this... http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/grub/rabbit.htm


Reply ID 27228

02/10/2006 by Herbert Lemons

" Herbert, If you erm Fish about on this Forum you may find other postings from Fish Wife suggesting ribaldness. Monitoring her offerings more closely in future will become de rigour". Don't mean to be poncey about the distinction, but "de rigour" is an unquestionably funnier comment than the spelling which I assume you were alluding to. Honestly - not being funny. It just made me laugh more. Serendipitous typographical comedy if you like.


Reply ID 27230

02/10/2006 by 60sDJ

Oops Sorry! Carelessness again.


Reply ID 27232

02/10/2006 by Herbert Lemons

To keep topic momentum (which I ain't good at) I've just looked at the planning application originally posted by Steve on Page 1, it fabulously refines the planning proposal in terms of "Erection of 10m black joint CCTV and lighting column in a heritage style." Heritage CCTV eh? Bircherley is in danger of getting it's own security camera obscura. .


Reply ID 27233

03/10/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by nora batty
I know, I know. Off topic, but if you are into rabbits you just gotta read this... http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/grub/rabbit.htm
It hath provoked in me a fear of the Creature or fearful implement known as The Rabbit.....


23 replies