3.1 Telecommunications Infrastructure Lot 32 … · 3.1 Telecommunications Infrastructure Lot 32 ... part of the Hutchison mobile telephone network in the Perth ... living near a

Ordinary Meeting of Council 13 April 2005

Page 1

Cr Jones disclosed an interest affecting impartiality in Item 3.1 by virtue of being a Member of the Whiteman Park Management Board. Cr Jones left the Chamber at 5.51pm and was absent during the whole of the debate on Item 3.1 and did not speak or otherwise participate in the decision making process.

3.1 Telecommunications Infrastructure - Lot 32 BEECHBORO ROAD NORTH, Cullacabardee (DA0008-05) (ALTONE WARD) (SPS)

KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATION

• It is proposed to erect a 32 metre high slimline monopole, three panel antennas, three parabolic antennas and a 7.5m2 equipment shelter on the subject property.

• The proposed monopole is planned to service two carriers.

• The proposal was advertised in accordance with the City’s Telecommunication (Mobile Telephone) Facility Policy. A total of 32 submissions were received during the advertising period including 28 objections and 4 non-objections.

• The main points of objection were the proposed tower’s potential to adversely affect the health of nearby residents, the adverse effect on the amenity of the area and the potential for the proposed development to decrease property values in the locality.

• Electromagnetic emissions resulting from telecommunication facilities are regulated by the Australian Communications Authority in accordance with the Telecommunications Act 1997.

It is recommended to support the proposed telecommunications infrastructure.

AUTHORITY/DISCRETION

In accordance with clause 2.3.1 of Town Planning Scheme No. 9 (TPS 9) an approval of the Council is required prior to the commencement of the development.

Clause 2.3.9.1 of TPS 9 advises: In determining the application the Council may resolve to approve (with or without conditions) or refuse to approve the application.

BACKGROUND

APPLICANT: Planning Solutions OWNER: Western Australian Planning Commission ZONING: TPS - General Rural MRS - Rural STRATEGY/POLICY: Telecommunications (Mobile Telephone) Facilities Policy DEVELOPMENT SCHEME: Nil EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant LOT SIZE: 160ha AREA: 40m2 USE CLASS: Telecommunications Infrastructure ‘AA’


Page 2

DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

It is proposed to erect a 32 metre high slimline monopole, three panel antennas, two parabolic antennas and a 7.5m2 equipment shelter on the subject property. The site is accessed by a track, which is accessed from Woollcott Avenue.

The proposed tower is approximately 644 metres from the northern boundary, 1 kilometre from the eastern boundary, 284 metres from the southern boundary and 212 metres from the western boundary of the subject property.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE

The subject property is vacant, generally flat and is sparsely vegetated. The land to the north and east is utilised for various recreational activities associated with Whiteman Park, the land to the south is utilised for residential purposes and the land to the west is utilised for rural residential purposes.

SITE HISTORY/PREVIOUS APPROVALS

Nil

OTHER RELEVANT PREVIOUS DECISIONS OF COUNCIL

Nil

APPLICANT’S SUBMISSION

Planning Solutions (Aust) Pty Ltd (Planning Solutions) acts on behalf of Hutchison 3G Australia Pty Limited (Hutchison). Planning Solutions has prepared the following report in support of an Application for Approval to Commence Development for a telecommunications facility to form part of the Hutchison mobile telephone network in the Perth Metropolitan Region.

An assessment by Planning Solutions under the provisions of the Telecommunications (Low-Impact Facilities) Determination 1997 (the Determination) determined the proposed facility not to be “Low-Impact” for the purposes of “the Determination”. The assessment by Planning Solutions has been supported by Hutchison.

The fact that the proposed facility has been determined not to be “Low-Impact” requires the proponent to apply for, and receive Approval to Commence Development under State planning laws under Part 2 of the Determination.

The site selection process, undertaken by Hutchison and the facility proposed to achieve the network solution required to achieve the required coverage has incorporated the following considerations:

• Radio coverage objectives; • Low Impact and Co-location opportunities;


Page 3

• Surrounding land uses; • Planning, Environmental and Heritage considerations; and, • Facility construction and treatments.

The proposed facility is the most appropriate solution to facilitate Hutchison’s mobile telephone network, with the minimum impact upon the amenity of the locality. Accordingly, the local authority is formally requested to grant its Approval to Commence Development under delegated authority.

The proposal presented is permissible under the provisions of the Metropolitan Region Scheme and the City of Swan Town Planning Scheme No. 9.

The proposal presented is consistent with orderly and proper planning of the locality on the basis of the points presented in this application.

The proposed facility utilises a design and location which:

• Is in a ‘General Rural’ zone;

• Is removed from land zoned for residential purposes;

• Utilises a location which is setback as far as physically possible form all residences in the locality, incorporates a steel slimline monopole structure, antennas mounted so as to minimise visual impact;

• Provides for the future co-location of Telecommunications Carriers, ultimately up to three Carriers depending upon design;

• All facilities shall comply with all relevant Australian Standards relating to exposure to electromagnetic fields. An independent source “Radhaz Consulting Pty Ltd” has provided a detailed diagram depicting the Hutchison electromagnetic zones applicable (refer Appendix 3);

• Does not adversely affect any place of Heritage significance as identified by the City of Swan;

• Complies with Council’s Policy and SPP No. 5.2 in terms of siting and design; and,

• Is consistent with relevant telecommunications legislation and determinations.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The original proposal was advertised for a period of 28 days from 1 to 29 March 2005. The advertising period included letters to the surrounding owners within a 200 metre radius, a sign on site and 2 newspaper advertisements (The Echo).

A total of 32 submissions were received during the advertising period including 28 objections and 4 non-objections. The main points contended by the submissions are as follows:

• The potential health effects on the nearby residents;

• The proposed base station is likely to have an adverse effect on property values within the locality;


Page 4

• The subject property is environmentally sensitive;

• The proposed structure will interfere with electrical equipment; and

• Concern at the effect on the visual amenity of the area.

Copies of the submissions received are available to Councillors through the City’s Planning Service.

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR CONSULTANTS

Department of Indigenous Affairs

The Aboriginal Lands Trust (ALT) does not have any objection to the proposal. However it is recommended that:

• The proponents consult with the residents of the Cullacabardee Aboriginal community (Reserve 37145) at Baal Street, Cullacabardee, due to the height of the tower and its proximity to the community.

• The proponents contact the Heritage Branch at the Department of Indigenous Affairs and consult with the appropriate Aboriginal elders. The tower appears to be near the headwaters of Bennett Brook, which is a registered Aboriginal Heritage Site and is protected under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.

• The proponents advise the South West Land and Sea Council of the proposal.

The above dot points are recommended to be included as footnotes if the subjectr development is approved.

REPORT

Health Effects

The City acknowledges the community’s concerns in respect to the perceived negative health effects of electromagnetic radiation and radio frequency energy being emitted from mobile telephone towers but it must also be acknowledged that the control of emissions from these facilities is the responsibility of the Australian Communications Authority (ACA), not the City of Swan.

The following is an extract from the City’s Telecommunication (Mobile Phone) Facilities Policy regarding the perceived health effects of such facilities:

“In respect to public health, the Australian Communications Authority (ACA) has advised that the weight of national and international opinion conclude that there is no substantiated evidence that living near a mobile phone tower causes adverse health effects. The ACA is the Commonwealth Government body responsible for regulating telecommunications and radio communications.

Council recognises the sensitivity associated with the perceived health effects of electromagnetic radiation from telecommunication facilities. However, Council does not have the capability to


Page 5

make a determination on the impacts of telecommunication facilities on public health, or to monitor these impacts in the long term.

The study of electromagnetic radiation is highly complicated and technical and Council has to rely on the findings and advice of the ACA and the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) when considering the perceived health effects of proposed telecommunication facilities.

Therefore, on the basis of the current findings of the ACA and ARPANSA, Council is presently unable to regard the perceived health impacts of telecommunication facilities as a matter to be considered when determining planning applications. This approach is consistent with the WA Planning Commission’s Planning Bulletin No. 46 and Final Draft Statement of Planning Policy regarding Telecommunications Infrastructure.”

The applicant has also submitted a report on the electromagnetic emissions (EME) levels surrounding the proposed base station. This report is appended.

Effect on Property Values

Concerns over the proposal causing a decrease in property values are an issue that generally relates to amenity.

Amenity related issues, amongst other things, are one factor that is taken into consideration when determining property values in the area. It is considered that due to the siting of the development approximately 350 metres from the nearest dwelling, the closest dwellings being oriented away from the proposed development that the proposal is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the amenity and property values of the area.

Effect on the Environment

There are no identified environmental constraints, such as vegetation, watercourse etc, on the subject property.

Interference with Electrical Equipment

There is no evidence that the proposed development will cause interference to electrical equipment.

Australian Communications Authority

The Australian Communications Authority (ACA) is a government regulator of radio communications and telecommunications. Established in July 1997, the ACA falls within the portfolio of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. It exercises powers under the Telecommunications Act 1997, the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 and the Radio Communications Act 1992 and other related legislation. The ACA works closely with the communications industry to achieve active self-regulation, while ensuring industry compliance with licence conditions, codes and standards and monitoring the effect of regulations to ensure they are responsive to the community’s needs.

The Australian Communications Authority has introduced a regulatory scheme to limit human exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from radio communications and telecommunications


Page 6

transmitters. The scheme centres on a mandatory standard that came into effect on 1 February 1999. The ACA-mandated standard is the Electromagnetic Radiation (Human Exposure) Standard. This legislative instrument is based on the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) limits and derived power flux density levels in the lapsed Australian standard AS/NZS 2772.1(Int):1998. All licensees of radio communications transmitters (e.g. Telstra, Optus) are required to comply with the standard.

There is a range of penalties including fines, seizure and forfeiture of stock, ceasing to supply products until non-compliance is corrected or prosecution.

Offences include:

• breaching licence conditions (conditions specify that licensees must comply with applicable standards); and

• making a false declaration.

Telecommunication (Mobile Telephone) Facilities Policy

Council Policy C-059 Telecommunication (Mobile Phone) Facilities prescribes development standards and management tools for telecommunication facilities that encourage co-location. The following is an extract from the Policy stating the prescribed development standards and the application’s compliance in respect to these standards:

(a) Capable of accommodating the equipment of at least 3 carriers in total, having regard to the size of the property; existing development on the land; access to the site; and the land area available for the equipment of additional carriers.

It is proposed to place two carriers (Hutchison and Telstra) on the monopole. The applicant has advised that the proposed tower is capable of accommodating at least 3 carriers, depending on design. A condition of development approval will be imposed requiring the applicant to provide an Engineer’s Certificate to demonstrate that the pole is able to accommodate a maximum of three carriers, and this pole shall be designed and constructed in accordance with these requirements.

(b) If located on land that is reserved under Council’s Town Planning Scheme or the Metropolitan Region Scheme, setback a minimum distance of 30 metres from any boundary.

This development standard is not applicable as the subject property is zoned “General Rural”.

(c) If located within the Midland Sub-Regional Centre zones, setback from the lot boundaries in accordance with the requirements of Table 4B of the Scheme.

This development standard is not applicable as the subject property is not located within the Midland Sub-Regional Centre.

(d) Setback a minimum of 200 metres from any dwelling or residential zoned land.

The closest dwelling is located approximately 350 metres to the south. The closest residential zoned land is approximately 340 metres to the south.


Page 7

(e) If located within the Commercial or Industrial zones, located in the rear setback and behind any building on the property.

This development standard is not applicable as the subject property is zoned “General Rural”

Town Planning Scheme No. 9 (TPS 9)

The following is an excerpt from the TPS regarding telecommunications infrastructure and officers comments:

3.1.14 Telecommunications Infrastructure

When considering an application for Telecommunications Infrastructure, the Council shall have regard to any relevant planning policy adopted by the Council pursuant to clause 2.4A, WAPC Statement of Planning Policy 5.2 (Telecommunications Infrastructure), any other relevant Statement of Planning Policy and to the following objectives:

(a) To encourage co-location as a means of preventing unnecessary proliferation and

duplication of such infrastructure;

The proposed monopole will be accommodating two carriers (Hutchison and Telstra).

(b) To minimise the visual impact of such infrastructure on the surrounding locality;

The closest dwelling is located approximately 350 metres to the south. There closest residential zoned land in approximately 340 metres to the south. As a result of this siting it is considered that the visual impact will be minimal.

(c) To prevent ad-hoc development of such infrastructure by requiring applicants to provide a report in accordance with the requirements of WAPC Statement of Planning Policy 5.2 and any other relevant Statement of Planning Policy and demonstrating an industry-wide strategic approach to the location of such infrastructure throughout the City.

The following is an excerpt from the applicant’s documentation addressing the WAPC’s Statement of Planning Policy 5.2:

1. There should be a coordinated approach to the planning and development of telecommunications infrastructure, although changes in the location and demand for services require a flexible approach.

Hutchison and its consultants have investigated a number of location options within the area, and have determined the subject site facilitates the greatest benefits to the community whilst remaining inconspicuous and having minimal impact upon amenity in the area.

2. Telecommunications infrastructure should be strategically planned and co-ordinated, similar to planning for other essential infrastructure such as transport networks and energy supply.


Page 8

Hutchison are at present engaged in significant infrastructure rollout operations in order to coordinate the strategic location and provision of infrastructure as well as keeping up with technological development within the industry. As monopoles and related infrastructure are established, the potential for future co-location reflects the strategic approach adopted by Hutchison in the deployment of its 3G network.

3. Telecommunications facilities should be located and designed to meet the communication needs of the community.

The location of the proposed facility was determined in order to provide optimal mobile coverage for the community in the locality. The proposed development is necessary to ensure that the surrounding community is provided with access to the most efficient mobile network available.

4. Telecommunications facilities should be designed and sited to minimise any potential adverse visual impact on the character and amenity of the local environment, in particular, impacts on prominent landscape features, general views in the locality and individual significant views.

Presently, the land within and surrounding the subject site is flat sparse bushland, consisting of mostly grass and other common trees, with knee-high groundcover. The nearest road is Lakefarm Retreat, 210 metres to the east of the subject site. The visual amenity of the area will not be compromised by the proposed development. The facility is located in an isolated location that affords no views. The proposed construction shall not interrupt view corridors for surrounding land uses. The mature vegetation that does exist will allow the camouflaging of the construction at ground level, whilst the slimline monopole will blend in with already established light and power poles that run adjacent to Hepburn Avenue and surrounding streets.

5. ‘Telecommunications facilities should be designed and sited to minimise adverse impacts on areas of natural conservation value and places of heritage significance or where declared rare flora are located.’

The subject site is of no environmental or historical significance. The site has not been identified as significant by the Heritage Council of Western Australia or under Bush Forever.

6. ‘Telecommunications facilities should be designed and sited with specific consideration of water catchment protection requirements and the need to minimise land degradation.’

No water protection issues are apparent on the subject site.

7. ‘Telecommunications facilities should be designed and sited to minimise adverse impacts of the visual character and amenity of residential areas.’

As previously addressed, the proposed site provides adequate buffers and screening from residential areas. The proposed development is beyond the 200m buffer zone stipulated in Council’s policy. Design initiatives such as colour choice, non-glare materials and landscaping, combined with the existing vegetation, will ensure the site has no adverse impact upon the amenity of nearby residential areas.

8. ‘Telecommunications cables should be placed underground, unless it is impractical to do so and there would be no significant effect on visual amenity or, in the case of regional areas,


Page 9

it can be demonstrated that there are long-term benefits to the community that outweigh the visual impact.’

The proposed development incorporates underground cabling – no aboveground cabling will be necessary, thus having no impact upon visual amenity.

9. ‘Telecommunications cables that are installed overhead with other infrastructure such as electricity cables should be removed and placed underground when it can be demonstrated and agreed by the carrier that it is technically feasible and practical to do so.’

As all cabling is to be underground from the outset, there is no foreseeable reason why the development would in the future, need to consider relocating cables underground.

10. ‘Unless it is impractical to do so telecommunication towers should be located within commercial, business, industrial and rural areas outside identified conservation areas.’

The subject site falls within a ‘General Rural’ zone, which is not an identified conservation area. Thus the location meets the above guideline.

11. ‘The design and siting of telecommunications towers and ancillary facilities should be integrated with existing buildings and structures, unless it is impractical to do so, in which case they should be sited and designed so as to minimise any adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding area.’

No existing buildings or structures are located within the locality identified as requiring future network coverage, therefore no opportunity exists to utilise existing structures. However, the amenity will not be threatened, as the surrounding land (within a 200 metre radius) is not utilised by any identifiable body or group.

12. ‘Co-location of telecommunications facilities should generally be sought, unless such an arrangement would detract from the local amenities or where operation of the facilities would be significantly compromised as a result.’

All opportunities to co-locate have been exhausted. The proposed slimline monopole is required to meet network coverage requirements, and ensure the people of the City of Swan are provided with a reliable and extensive mobile network service.

13. ‘Measures such as surface mounting, concealment, colour co-ordination, camouflage and landscaping to screen at least the base of towers and ancillary structures, and to draw attention away from the tower, should be used, where appropriate, to minimise the visual impact of telecommunications facilities.’

Appropriate screening is provided on site by way of the existing mature vegetation. The proposed monopole shall be of a standard colour. Hutchison has determined, in working with other local authorities the least intrusive colour in terms of visual impact is of a dull grey tone. This allows the tower to blend in with the skyline, whilst acting to reduce the visual impact of the slimline monopole from distant viewpoints. Other design features to be incorporated include planting where necessary, and the use of non-glare and other low impact construction materials.

14. ‘Design and operation of a telecommunications facility should accord with the licensing requirements of the Australian Communications Authority, with physical isolation and


Page 10

control of public access to emission hazard zones and use of minimum power levels consistent with quality services.’

The proposed development complies with requirements of the Australian Communications Authority. It is physically isolated from all surrounding land uses due to the surrounding bushland. Public access will be prevented and security ensured by the 1.8 metre high security fence that is to be erected, which will surround the slimline monopole and all related infrastructure. EME emission levels will remain well within all specified levels (refer Appendix 3).

15. ‘Construction of a telecommunications facility (including access to a facility) should be undertaken so as to minimise adverse effects on the natural environment and the amenity of users or occupiers of adjacent property, and ensure compliance with relevant health and safety standards.’

Hutchison intends to construct a 3 metre-wide limestone access track that shall provide a sustainable route for future infrastructure maintenance and upgrades. Whilst construction will necessitate the clearing of a small amount of existing bushland, it will not have any long-term negative impacts upon the surrounding natural environment. The site is in all respects, isolated from surrounding residential land uses to the extent that this development will have minimal impact upon the amenity of users or occupiers of any adjacent property. Thus, the proposal is deemed to comply with the above guideline.

The above information is considered adequate to address the TPS provisions.

OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Option 1: Council may approve the proposed base station with or without conditions.

Implications: The monopole and associated infrastructure will be constructed in accordance with the approval and any prescribed conditions. Any additional works will be classified as “low impact” and will not require the approval of the City.

Option 2: Council may resolve that the location of the proposed tower is unsuitable and refuse the application.

Implications: The applicant has the right of appeal in accordance with the Town Planning and Development Act 1928.

CONCLUSION

Whilst the community’s concerns are acknowledged in respect to the perceived negative health effects of electromagnetic radiation and radio frequency energy being emitted from mobile telephone towers, it must be noted that there is no substantiated evidence that living near a mobile phone tower can cause adverse health effects. It must also be acknowledged that the Australian Communications Authority is the Government agency responsible for regulating communications licences and facility emissions.

The location of the subject tower is considered suitable taking into account the zoning of the subject property and the surrounding land uses. As the subject application complies with the


Page 11

development standards of Council’s Telecommunication (Mobile Phone) Facilities Policy and the proposal is unlikely to have a detrimental affect on the area, approval is recommended subject to conditions.

ATTACHMENTS

• Site Plan

• Elevation

APPENDICES

EME Report

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

Nil

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

• Telecommunications Act 1997

• Town Planning Scheme No. 9

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil

RECOMMENDATION

That the Council resolve to:

(1) Approve the application for a Telecommunication Facility on Lot 37 Beechboro Road North, Cullacabardee subject to the following conditions:

1. The operator or landowner removing the equipment involved in the mobile telephone facility at such time it is no longer operational.

2. Advise the applicant that a further development application will have to be considered by Council prior to any additions or modifications to the mobile telephone facility.

3. The pole shall be of slimline design and also designed to allow co-location by up to three carriers.


Page 12

4. No part of the antennae panels, including those proposed as part of this application and any further antennae, which may be added later by other carriers, shall project more than 500mm from the pole.

5. Prior to the issue of a building licence the applicant providing an Engineer’s Certificate to demonstrate that the pole is able to accommodate up to three carriers, and this pole shall be designed and constructed in accordance with these requirements.

6. The pole and equipment shelter shall be finished in a neutral colour to the satisfaction of the Principal Planner.

FOOTNOTES:

1. It has been advised by the Department of Indigenous Affairs that the proponents consult with the residents of the Cullacabardee Aboriginal community (Reserve 37145) at Baal Street, Cullacabardee, due to the height of the tower and its proximity to the community. The Department of Indigenous Affairs Midland Office on ph: 9274 4288 can assist with contact details.

2. It has been advised by the Department of Indigenous that the proponents contact the Heritage Branch at the Department of Indigenous Affairs (Peter Randolph ph: 9235 8100) and consult with the appropriate Aboriginal elders. The tower appears to be near the headwaters of Bennett Brook, which is a registered Aboriginal Heritage Site and is protected under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.

3. It has been advised by the Department of Indigenous that the proponents advise the South West Land and Sea Council of the proposal.

(2) Advise those who made submissions of Council’s resolution.

MOTION that the Council resolve to:

(1) Adopt the staff recommendation subject to the addition of the following condition 1. and the following conditions being renumbered accordingly:

1. The proposed facility being located a minimum of 600 metres from the southern boundary of the subject property (Lot 32 Beechboro Road North, Cullacabardee).

(2) Record that the reason for changing the staff recommendation is that the proposed facility is considered to have the potential to affect the amenity of the area. The relocation of the proposed facility to the north and away from the residential areas of Ballajura is considered to protect the amenity of the residents of the locality.

(Cr McNamara - Cr Congerton)

Cr Dennis arrived at 5.52pm.


Page 13

RESOLVED (12/1) TO:

(1) Adopt the staff recommendation subject to the addition of the following condition 1. and the following conditions being renumbered accordingly:

1. The proposed facility being located a minimum of 600 metres from the southern boundary of the subject property (Lot 32 Beechboro Road North, Cullacabardee).

(2) Record that the reason for changing the staff recommendation is that the proposed facility is considered to have the potential to affect the amenity of the area. The relocation of the proposed facility to the north and away from the residential areas of Ballajura is considered to protect the amenity of the residents of the locality.

Cr Fardig requested that it be recorded he opposed the motion.

OCM 13 April 2005 Attachment 3.1 Page 1 of 3



Documents

3.1 Telecommunications Infrastructure Lot 32 … · 3.1 Telecommunications Infrastructure Lot 32 ... part of the Hutchison mobile telephone network in the Perth ... living near a