Telecom - recommendation report: Notice of requirement

Notices of Requirement – Telecom NZ and Chorus North Shore 1

A U C K L A N D C O U N C I L

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991

RECOMMENDATION ON NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT BY CHORUS NEW ZEALAND AND TELECOM NEW ZEALAND LIMITED PURSUANT TO SECTION

171 OF THE ACT

SUBJECT: 12 NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT TO THE AUCKLAND COUNCIL DISTRICT PLAN (NORTH SHORE SECTION) TO DESIGNATE 9 EXISTING TELEPHONE EXCHANGE SITES “TELECOMMUNICATION AND RADIO COMMUNICATION AND ANCILLARY PURPOSES”

HEARING HELD ON WEDNESDAY, 10 JULY 2013 IN TAKAPUNA COUNCIL CHAMBER, LEVEL 3, TAKAPUNA SERVICE CENTRE, 1 THE STRAND, TAKAPUNA

AT 9.30am

COMMISSIONERS: Ms Jenny Hudson Chairperson Mr Bill Smith COUNCIL OFFICERS: Ms Jo Hart Planner Mr Joe Jeffries Reporting Planner Mr Nick Grala Consultant Planner Mr Jon Styles Acoustic Expert Ms Wendy Stephenson Democracy Advisor

APPEARANCES: For the Requiring Authority:

Luke Hinchey - Counsel

Chris Horne - Planning Consultant Curt Robinson - Acoustic Expert (Marshall Day) Graeme McCarrison – Engagement and Planning Manager

for Chorus

TABLED EVIDENCE: Submitters: New Zealand Historic Places Trust

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report contains the recommendations of Independent Hearing Commissioners on Notices of Requirement (“NoR”) issued by Chorus New Zealand Limited (‘Chorus’) and Telecom New Zealand Limited (‘Telecom’) to the Auckland Council. The Hearing Commissioners have been delegated full responsibility to consider submissions and determine the Council’s recommendations to the Requiring Authorities pursuant to Section 34 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). Accordingly, the recommendations in this report are made directly to Chorus and Telecom.

The Notices of Requirement relate to the designation of 9 existing telephone exchanges and/or radio/telecommunication sites on the North Shore. Each site is subject to its own


unique Notice of Requirement. The sites are fully operational and contain buildings, equipment and facilities varying in age, style and size.

The Notices of Requirement were lodged concurrently by Chorus and Telecom. Where 2 Notices apply to the same site, Chorus has responsibility for the ‘primary’ designation and Telecom for the ‘secondary’ designation. The sites and their identification numbers, as applied by the Council, are set out in the table below.

The individual Notices contain a considerable amount of material that is relevant to all of the sites and is replicated in each application. The reports prepared by three consultant planners engaged by the Council also treat each Notice individually. To avoid unnecessary duplication in this decision, we have considered the matters that are common to all sites under generic headings and then referred, as appropriate, to issues that are specific to individual sites.

The Notices of Requirement apply to 9 sites which were designated under district plans that preceded the current Auckland Council (North Shore Section) District Plan (‘District Plan’), which became operative in 2002. For unknown reasons, the previous designations did not ‘roll over’ into the District Plan. Telecom and Chorus have relied on existing use rights and in some cases, resource consents, for the current activities, buildings and structures.

We have not given any consideration or weight to the question of whether any existing adverse effects are protected by existing use rights. Our findings are more concerned with the effective authorisation of existing and potential effects of the activities if the NoRs are confirmed. However, in reaching our conclusions in respect to all of the Notices of Requirement and recommending that they be confirmed, we have noted the difficulty in establishing accurately the full extent of development that currently exists on each site, or for which outline plans of works/resource consents have been granted but not yet implemented. This situation has arisen in part because no accurate plans are available for each site. The plans submitted with the Notices of Requirement were acknowledged by the Requiring Authorities as being ‘indicative’ of the existing site layouts. The consultant planners’ reports note a number of inconsistencies or inaccuracies between the plans and the ‘as-built’ situation and we found the same during our visit to each site. Given the recommended provision for conditions which will not require outline plans for upgrades for replacement of existing equipment/ antennas/structures, we are strongly of the view that before the designations are incorporated into the District Plan, the Requiring Authorities must submit accurate site plans and elevations or schedules that will provide a benchmark against which any future upgrades or new works can be assessed. If the Requiring Authorities are unwilling to do this, then we would not support the conditions providing for exemptions from outline plans in their current form.


TABLE 1: IDENTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT

SITE ADDRESS UNDERLYING ZONING

REQUIRING AUTHORITY

PLAN MODIFICATION (DESIGNATION) NUMBER

356 Glenvar Road, Torbay

Chorus (primary designation)

195


Residential 4B

Telecom (secondary designation)

196

634 Beach Road, Browns Bay

Chorus (primary designation)

197


Residential 4A


198

69 Stredwick Drive, Torbay

Residential 4B Telecom 199

363 Albany Highway Chorus (primary designation)

200

363 Albany Highway

Business 9


201

9 Mayfield Rd, Glenfield Residential 4A Telecom 202

1 Akoranga Drive, Northcote

Business 9 Telecom 203

161 Forrest Hill Rd, Forrest Hill

Residential 4A Chorus 204

43 Greenhithe Rd, Greenhithe

Residential 1 Chorus 205

187 Hurstmere Rd, Takapuna

Residential 6A Chorus 206

In relation to the Requirements, we are required to consider whether Chorus and Telecom have satisfied the statutory tests under section 171 of the RMA. Having had regard to these matters, under section 171(2) we may recommend to the Requiring Authorities that they confirm or modify the requirement, impose conditions, or withdraw the requirement.

For the reasons given later in this report, we have recommended that the Requirements be confirmed, subject to modified conditions as set out at the end of this report.

2.0 THE NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT

The Notices of Requirement are to formally designate the nine sites identified in Table 1 above for the purposes of “Telecommunication and radiocommunication and Ancillary Purposes.” The designations are to acknowledge existing works and to enable the Requiring Authorities to carry out future work in a nationally consistent manner. Copies of the Certificates of Title for all of the sites form part of the Notices of Requirement. The sites have also been identified in the aerial photographs sourced from the Auckland Council GIS, and attached to the individual Notices.

The Notices all address the following matters:

The nature of the proposed works


Proposed designation conditions

Matters to be considered under section 171 of the RMA, namely:

Relevant policy statements and plans

Environmental effects

Alternative sites, routes or methods

Necessity for the designation

Part 2 considerations

Each Notice was accompanied by a description of the site, existing buildings, structures, installations and equipment on the site, a description of the locality, and comments on the past and present usage of the site.

The ‘legacy’ plans submitted with the Notices of Requirement are acknowledged by the Requiring Authorities as being indicative of the existing site layouts. However, they do not purport to represent an up-to-date snapshot of existing facilities and/or proposed facilities that have yet to go through an outline plan of works process under section 176A of the RMA. As outlined above, we consider it essential that the Requiring Authorities provide accurate plans and information to ensure that future changes to each site can be assessed under the appropriate provisions of the Act and the designation conditions.

2.1 Project Objective

The Requiring Authorities state that the objective of the Notices is

“To provide a World Class telecommunication and radio-communication network, to enable the most up to date products and services available to be delivered via its local access network to the community.”

The Notices all describe the demerger of Chorus from Telecom in November 2011, which resulted in Chorus becoming the network services operator and Telecom a retail service provider. Some of the assets previously owned by Telecom have been transferred into Chorus’ ownership. Telecom retains ownership of a number of network assets that are located within the North Shore area, including the XT 3G mobile network, some of the major telephone exchanges, the international cables and associated infrastructure, and Telecom payphones.

The Chorus network comprises local telephone exchanges (the hub of telecommunication services), radio-communications infrastructure, cabinets, and copper and fibre cables. The Notices of Requirement state that telecommunications and radio-communications facilities are essential services, because of the critical role they play in terms of allowing people and communities to provide for their wellbeing and their health and safety. Chorus works with retail service providers to give access to its network and develop new products and services, and the company has rolled out the ultrafast broadband network in conjunction with Crown Fibre Holdings.

One of Telecom’s key objectives is to ensure that a reliable, efficient and resilient mobile network is provided to its customers at all times, which means that the technology on its sites must be kept up to date. The Notices of Requirement also state that there is a critical need for the provision of resilient telecommunication networks during emergencies, as highlighted in the Canterbury earthquakes.


2.2 Proposed Construction Works

The Requiring Authorities state that no specific works are proposed as part of the Notices of Requirement, and that future work “may include maintenance, upgrades and replacement of equipment/new equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunication and radiocommunication services to meet evolving technology and customer demand”. However, there are 5 sites on which masts associated with the mobile network may be erected in the future that do not currently have a mast. These are:

Stredwick Drive, Torbay

Forrest Hill Road, Forrest Hill

Greenhithe Road, Greenhithe

Hurstmere Road, Takapuna

Mayfield Road, Glenfield

3.0 NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS

The Notices of Requirement were publicly notified on 12 April 2013. Submissions closed on 17 May 2013. During the hearing, we sought clarification from the reporting planners and the Requiring Authorities as to the description of the Requirements that was given in the public notices and in the consultation undertaken by Telecom/Chorus. We are satisfied that sufficient information was provided for potentially affected persons to understand that the designations would enable a mast to be erected on the sites referred to above, at some future date.

At the close of the submission period, four submissions were received. These were from:

The New Zealand Historic Places Trust

The Trust has submitted on all 9 sites to be designated and it is seeking that an advice note be added to the designation conditions of each of the NoRs. The advice note is to ensure that the Requiring Authorities are aware of the archaeological protection provisions of the Historic Places Act.

Auckland Transport

Auckland Transport made submissions on the Notices of Requirement relating to 7 sites, and sought that a new condition(s) be added to the designations to ensure that vehicle access is limited to the current location unless otherwise approved by Auckland Transport.

Kyung Yeol Shin – residential address not supplied. Mr Kyung’s submission relates specifically to designations 195 and 196 at Glenvar Road, Torbay. His concern is the risk of terrorist attack on the facilities. At this point we make the observation that security of telecommunication facilities is the responsibility of the Requiring Authorities and that we have not given further consideration to this matter in this decision.

Michael Jones, owner of 628, 630, 632 Beach Road, Browns Bay made a submission on designations at Beach Road, Browns Bay (subsequently withdrawn).


4.0 SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE

4.1 For the Applicants

Luke Hinchey, legal counsel for both Requiring Authorities, made brief opening submissions in which he said that the designations sought reflected similar designations in other parts of Auckland. Discussions had been held with the Historic Places Trust and Auckland Transport, and proposed conditions for the designations had mostly been agreed between Auckland Council and the Requiring Authorities.

Chris Horne, planning consultant for the Requiring Authorities, outlined the designation strategy for Chorus and Telecom, stating that the intention is to designate all of their strategic sites such as international cable terminals, exchanges and radio/microwave sites where the requiring authority is the owner of the site. Strategic sites “are critical for the overall operation of the telecommunication system”1. The companies also aim for national consistency in respect of the conditions that apply to their designations, so as to provide more certainty around future network planning which in turn provides more certainty for communities near Chorus and Telecom sites.

Mr Horne explained that Chorus and Telecom are not seeking the designations to facilitate any specific projects but it is more a case of providing for business as usual. He considered it an anomaly that the 9 subject sites are not currently designated, particularly as they had been in earlier versions of the current District Plan, and there are 3 other sites on the North Shore that are designated.

Mr Horne outlined the reasons why designations are preferred over other methods, particularly the costly and lengthy consenting process where District Plan provisions are relied upon. The dynamic nature of telecommunication and radio-communication services is such that designation allows adjustments and changes that may be required from time to time to accommodate changes in technology and customer demands. He gave examples of resource consents being required by local authorities for various proposed works that reduced adverse environmental effects – the inference being that this process was inefficient and unnecessary.

He discussed the conditions proposed by the Requiring Authorities in the Notices of Requirement, which were largely based on the conditions recently agreed through the designation process for 14 existing sites in the Auckland Isthmus. However, some additional conditions/amendments were now sought in response to the Council officers’ recommendations.

Mr Horne then addressed the environmental effects associated with Chorus’ and Telecom’s activities and explained how the proposed conditions would manage these effects, recognising that sites in business zones have less sensitivity than sites in residential zones. Mr Horne acknowledged that all of the sites to be designated have existing or potential issues with noise and that it is not practicable to comply with the District Plan noise performance standards. However, he was relying upon the expert advice of Mr Robinson in relation to these matters.

Mr Horne produced an example of GPS equipment currently in use on Telecom sites. This is a small cone-shaped object about half the size of a rugby ball. He said that the Requiring Authorities were seeking an exemption for these from any restriction on their location, in the proposed conditions, owing to their small size.

1 Horne evidence paragraph 12.


Following questions from the commissioners and responses from the Council’s advisers, further revisions to the conditions were submitted following the hearing.

We refer to Mr Horne’s evidence and further revisions to proposed conditions in more detail in our consideration of environmental effects below.

Curt Robinson, an acoustic consultant with Marshall Day Acoustics, gave evidence relating specifically to a proposed ‘Benchmark Noise Condition’ recommended by the Council’s reporting planners on advice from Mr Styles, the Council’s acoustic consultant. Mr Robinson explained that his company had undertaken an acoustic environmental survey of the 9 sites in June 2012. The survey results were not truly representative of noise emissions from the sites, because many of the condenser units were not operating, whereas in the summer months they must work harder at cooling the equipment. The purpose of the assessment was to provide an understanding of the existing noise emissions to ensure that any noise conditions to be imposed would be “fit for purpose in terms of the existing equipment and its use at the site, and that the expected noise emissions from the sites were not unreasonable in terms of their impact on neighbouring sites”2.

He did not agree with the proposed Benchmark Noise Condition, but understood the reasoning for undertaking further measurements during the summer months, which would establish the worst case scenario when mechanical services are “working overtime”. He considered that the intention to ensure that new equipment is designed to ensure that the overall ambient acoustic emission from each site does not increase any further, would be adequately addressed in the survey requirements of the existing conditions as proposed in the original Notices of Requirement.

4.2 Officers’ Reports and Advice

Three consultant planners – Lee Marr, Nick Grala and Kelly Seekup - prepared reports on behalf of the Council. These assessed the individual Notices of Requirement and the submissions in terms of the relevant statutory provisions of the RMA. A comprehensive peer review of the Requiring Authorities’ noise assessment undertaken by Marshall Day Acoustics was provided from Jon Styles, the Council’s acoustic consultant. The reporting planners recommended that all the Notices of Requirement be confirmed subject to modifications to the conditions offered by the Requiring Authorities.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS APPLICABLE TO ALL SITES

The Assessment of Environmental Effects provided by the Requiring Authority within each Notice, and Council reports identified and addressed a number of potential effects that the works permitted by the designations may have on the environment. These include the positive effects of allowing future work associated with provision and maintenance of essential telecommunications services on Chorus’ and Telecom’s sites to be carried out in a nationally consistent manner, which would have social and economic benefits for the community and the nation as a whole. We find that there are positive effects as described in the Notices and in the planners’ reports.

Before referring to the existing and potential environmental effects likely to arise on individual sites, and to avoid unnecessary repetition, we have considered the broader effects of telecommunication and radio-communication activities below.

2 Robinson evidence, para 3.6


5.1 Radiofrequency Effects

We were advised that the Ministry of Health considers that there are no established adverse effects from exposures to radiofrequency (RF) fields that comply with the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines and the New Zealand Standard. The Environment Court has similarly concluded that there are no adverse health effects arising from exposures to RF fields that comply with the New Zealand Standard. The New Zealand Standard is NZS 2772: Part 1: 1999 Radiofrequency Fields Part 1 – Maximum Exposure Levels – 3 kHz to 300 GHz.

Clause 4 of the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities, which came into force in 2008, requires compliance with the New Zealand Standard, and is relevant to all telecommunications facilities that generate RF fields.

The Requiring Authorities have provided assessments confirming that all existing and any future equipment transmitting RF fields on all sites, whether or not they currently have masts or antennas, will comply with the New Zealand Standard or any successor standard.

Telecom has proposed a condition in the Notices of Requirement that any equipment transmitting RF energy is to be operated in accordance with the New Zealand Standard for exposure to RF energy (NZS2772:1999 Part 1) as required by the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications Facilities 2008 (NES).

We find that this is an appropriate method of mitigating any potential adverse effects of radiofrequency fields.

5.2 Access and Parking Effects

All sites provide access and car parking, although these arrangements vary from site to site. The Council has not identified any issues with access or parking and no submissions were received that raised concerns suggesting that there are existing adverse effects. Having visited all of the sites and taking into account the officers’ advice, we are satisfied that there is sufficient on-site parking to cater for normal usage by staff and contractors.

Auckland Transport’s submission has sought a new condition be added to seven of the designations to ensure vehicle access is limited to the current location, or limited to a certain identified length of road frontage, unless otherwise approved by Auckland Transport. These sites are:

Albany Highway

Glenvar Road

Beach Road, Browns Bay

Forrest Hill

Mayfield Rd, Glenfield

Akoranga Drive, Takapuna

Hurstmere Rd, Takapuna

Chorus and Telecom have reached agreement with Auckland Transport in regard to the wording of a suitable condition which in its generic form reads:


‘Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from [road], existing as of [date of Council recommendation on requirement], unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.’

Slightly different wording has been agreed for the Browns Bay Exchange (Beach Road), Takapuna Cable Station (Akoranga Drive) and the Takapuna Exchange (Hurstmere Road), which we refer to later. The amended conditions are incorporated into our recommendations on each of the relevant designations.

5.3 Hazardous Substances/Contamination

The Requiring Authorities have advised that diesel storage associated with the running of engine alternators is located on their sites. The only exception is at Greenhithe, which has a small building and no engine alternator.

Any upgrade of existing facilities will need to meet current Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996 Regulations. Further, any sites with existing underground diesel storage are subject to Regulation 8 of the Resource Management (National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 2011 should removal of redundant fuel systems or site excavation be required.

The Requiring Authorities consider that as these regulations override any designation confirmed in a District Plan, no specific designation conditions in relation to hazardous substances are required. The Notices of Requirement also state that confirmation of compliance with relevant regulations would be provided in any outline plan.

In his evidence, Mr Horne explained that the introduction of the above NES has made redundant the conditions on the 14 designations of sites within the Auckland Isthmus, which is why the North Shore designation conditions are not consistent in that respect with those on the Isthmus sites. He also told us that above-ground storage tanks are generally either screened or located in secure compounds to reduce fuel thefts and we therefore find that it is unnecessary to recommend a condition requiring that the tanks be screened or enclosed.

Having considered the Requiring Authorities’ assessment we accept that the storage of diesel at each site is being appropriately managed under relevant legislation outside the designation process, and that no conditions are necessary.

5.4 Heritage Effects

There are no sites with identified heritage features except for protected trees at 9 Mayfield Rd, Glenfield which are addressed separately; however it is possible that future excavation of any site may uncover unknown heritage items.

The New Zealand Historic Places Trust submitted on all 9 sites to be designated and sought that an advice note be added to the designation conditions of each of the NoRs. The advice note is to ensure that the Requiring Authorities are aware of the archaeological provisions of the Historic Places Act.

We find that the advice note proposed by the NZHPT is appropriate to ensure the Requiring Authorities are aware of their obligations under the Historic Places Act should archaeological items be uncovered during future excavations.


5.5 Noise Effects

We understand that the sites currently contain a variety of noise-generating equipment, including condenser units, which are used for the cooling of equipment, as well as backup electricity generators required to operate during electricity outages. These have been variously referred to as engine alternators, emergency generators or electricity alternators – ‘EA’s’. We were informed that the correct term is engine alternator, and have applied it accordingly.

The potential noise effects from the mechanical equipment vary according to the number, age and size of the units, their location within the site and whether they are located within a building or outside. The effects also vary with climatic and seasonal conditions - the condensers being in use for greater periods of time during the summer months than in winter.

The assessment of the acoustic effects prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics (‘MDA’) on behalf of the Requiring Authorities contained a survey of each site undertaken on a Sunday night in June 2012 and refers to the current District Plan’s noise standards. The report identifies potential noise sources as:

Air conditioning plant

Emergency generators (engine alternators)

Staff or contractors undertaking maintenance or operations activities.

It is clear from the survey results in the Marshall Day report that noise emissions from all sites exceed the maximum noise levels permitted by the District Plan (40dBA L10 at residential zone boundaries during ‘night time’ hours), in some cases to a significant degree. Examples of levels at residential boundaries taken from the MDA report are:

Forrest Hill: 34 – 46 dB LAEq

Mayfield Rd: 38 – 48 dB LAEq

Hurstmere Rd: 42 – 55 dB LAEq

The main perpetrators of this noise are the condensers required for cooling of plant and equipment. As the surveys were undertaken without the engine alternators running, noise levels would be higher again when the EA’s are operational. We were informed that even though the EA’s are used only for backup electricity generation, they must be tested regularly. Weekly tests take about an hour and annual tests about 5 hours. From time to time the engine alternators may also be used for ‘load shedding’ to relieve some of the pressure on the electricity grid during periods of high power demand, and at the request of the electricity company.

The MDA report advises that equipment noise is likely to be higher in summer when the condensers are running more often and that the potential exists for an increase in overall site noise emissions with growth in the telecommunications sector and installation of additional equipment at the exchange sites.

The report recommends that further “benchmark noise surveys” be carried out during summer as well as during generator operation to accurately assess the total noise emissions from each site.


Mr Styles’ peer review generally agreed with the MDA report and concurred with the MDA recommendation that the measurements should be repeated in the warmer months to determine what the typically highest noise levels will be.

The Requiring Authorities have advised that over time, and as each site is upgraded, they will strive to improve the noise levels, should pre-existing noise issues continue to occur. They assert that it will not always be economically feasible to resolve all existing noise issues from all units on site, and have proposed a condition requiring all new equipment to meet the proposed boundary noise limits in their own right, and to not result in any cumulative increase in existing noise emitted from the site.

They consider that this approach would ensure that there will be improvements in noise levels over time, but that there will be enough flexibility to allow upgrades to occur that are economically feasible. An assessment of existing noise and the effect of any upgrading, replacement or addition of new equipment can be assessed in any outline plan for such works.

However, the acoustic experts agreed that it is generally impractical for engine alternators to meet residential noise limits. As these are upgraded over time, they will need to demonstrate the best practicable option as part of any outline plan process for any new or upgraded equipment. This in turn will allow Council the opportunity to assess and comment on the reasonableness of noise levels and mitigation for any such projects. It is noted that this process normally provides the opportunity to improve any existing noise effects from EA operation.

Mr Styles considered that the proposal to exclude emergency generators from the normal operational noise limits is reasonable on the basis that they are used very infrequently and for relatively short durations.

Mr Styles also recommended that when the noise measurement results from the repeat tests are submitted, they are accompanied by a site-specific action plan that sets out the plant maintenance and upgrade schedule as best as it is known at the time. This would provide some certainty as to the contemporary noise levels and the timeframe and magnitude of the reductions that can be expected to arise through the implementation of the recommended conditions.

Following discussion of this matter at the hearing, the proposed conditions have been further revised by the Requiring Authorities and Council consultants. This was in response to our concerns that the benchmark noise surveys recommended by MDA and the ‘action plan’ approach suggested by Mr Styles did not incorporate a process that allowed for the Council to respond in any meaningful way to the Requiring Authorities’ information. Any timeframe for achieving improvement would accordingly be completely open-ended.

The latest version of the conditions would require that the first outline plan of works involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise (other than engine alternators) be accompanied by a comprehensive acoustic report by a suitably qualified acoustic expert. The report would include a noise measurement survey of the site, undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of noise-generating equipment. An assessment would be made as to whether the proposed works would meet a ‘reasonable’ level of noise within the meaning of section 16 of the Act. Any subsequent outline plan of works involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating noise would include sufficient detail to confirm compliance with the District Plan standards (except engine alternators).

While this condition would eventually result in further noise assessments of individual sites, we still have a level of disquiet that existing non-complying noise levels could


continue at some sites for a considerable period of time if no further upgrades occur (which would trigger an overall assessment of noise and/or replacement of the condensers). However, we accept that it would be unreasonable for the Requiring Authorities to bring all of their sites up to standard immediately and note Mr McCarrison’s statement, which was submitted with Mr Hinchey’s written reply, that four of the subject sites have scheduled work planned during the next 2 years. Despite public notification of the Notices of Requirement, there have been no submissions from any adjoining residents on the issue of noise from mechanical plant. The overarching obligations under sections 16 and 17 of the Act must, in this case, be applied in a practical but expedient manner to ensure that over time, noise emissions are reduced to a reasonable and ultimately, complying level. However, we are not persuaded that the Requiring Authorities should be given carte blanche to continue exceeding the District Plan’s noise standards for an indefinite period of time. We have accordingly recommended that on any site where the Marshall Day Acoustics surveys undertaken in June 2012 have found that the noise standards are already exceeded at a residential boundary by more than 5 dB LAEq, an outline plan of works should be submitted within 3 years of the designations being confirmed to demonstrate how the BPO will be applied. This condition would only apply if no upgrades occur beforehand.

Noise from maintenance contractors is also recognised as a potential issue. However, a distinction can be made between urgent maintenance that may be needed at any time of the day or night, and regular scheduled work undertaken during normal business hours. Following discussion of this matter during the hearing, the Requiring Authorities and Council consultants have submitted revised conditions which include proposed restrictions on the hours that contractors undertake normal maintenance to weekdays only. We consider these an acceptable way of mitigating the potential noise effects of maintenance activity (including associated traffic noise).

5.6 Visual/Landscape and Vegetation Effects

Visual/landscape and vegetation effects differ greatly from site to site, depending on the topography of the land, the size and configuration of buildings, masts, equipment and structures, the size of the site and the sensitivity of the environment. In general terms, residential areas are more sensitive than business areas.

However, some of these effects can and should be treated in a consistent manner. These are:

The total number of masts allowed on a site

The maximum height of buildings

The number and height of antennas attached to buildings

The potential effects of shading and dominance by buildings and structures in residential areas

The relationship of buildings and structures to the public realm (i.e. to the road frontage and other public spaces)

The Requiring Authorities and assessments by the reporting planners have recommended conditions based primarily on whether the underlying zoning of the site is residential or business, and the nature of development adjacent to each site.

In residential areas, these conditions include:


A restriction on the height of any new mast and antennas attached to the mast or buildings.

Any new masts and antennas to comply with height in relation boundary control for adjoining residential and road boundaries.

Any new masts and antennas are limited to a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

Existing antennas can be upgraded or reconfigured, or additional antennas installed, provided that there is no overall increase in height of the mast.

Antennas attached to buildings do not extend more than 3m above the maximum height of the highest part of the roof provided that compliance with height in relation to boundary controls is achieved.

The total number of masts for use by the requiring authority of either the primary or secondary designation is limited to 1.

Any new building is contained within an envelope of 8m in height, a 3m front yard and height in relation to boundary controls from residential and road boundaries.

The seven residential sites are:



69 Stredwick Drive, Torbay

9 Mayfield Road, Glenfield

161 Forrest Hill Road, Forrest Hill

43 Greenhithe Road, Greenhithe

187 Hurstmere Road, Takapuna

We accept that an overall limit on the height of buildings that is consistent with the height limit in the underlying zone is appropriate. We also agree that a 3m front yard setback is sufficient in residential areas, as it enables future development to occur towards the front of the site, and away from adjoining residential property boundaries. This approach is consistent with other telecommunications designations within the Auckland Council area, and also reflects the likely setbacks required under the upcoming Unitary Plan.

The height in relation to boundary control taken from the Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus Section 1999) is consistent with conditions applied to other designated telecommunications sites within the Auckland Isthmus and has the advantage of applying the recession planes according to the orientation of the site. It is also consistent with the probable height in relation to boundary controls in the upcoming Unitary Plan.

For the most part, we are satisfied that the conditions will restrict building envelopes and masts/antennas in a manner that will ensure adverse visual effects are acceptable and maintain an adequate level of visual amenity between the site and adjoining residential development, while enabling sufficient scope for the Requiring Authorities to adapt and change in order to meet their objective. However, we have recommended further modifications in relation to the sites at 43 Greenhithe Rd and 363 Albany Highway, which we discuss under site-specific matters.


We have also discussed the less stringent conditions proposed by the Requiring Authorities for the two business-zoned sites (Albany Highway and Akoranga Drive) under site-specific matters.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS APPLICABLE TO INDIVIDUAL NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT

6.1 356 Glenvar Road, Torbay

6.1.1 Site Description

The current zoning of the site is Residential 4B and had been notated under the East Coast Bays District Scheme (Third Review) as “Telecom” but is not designated under the current District Plan. Seven applications have been made since 1998 for resource consents, including to: install two dish antennas; install two replacement dish antennas; install a panel antenna and four further dish antennas; install a radio microwave link; install two further dish antennas; and install two whip antennas, a GPS antenna and a further dish antenna.

The site is located on a prominent, elevated hilltop and the 40m high telecommunications tower is widely visible from the Torbay and Long Bay area. This tower has numerous antennas including omni-directional whip antennas and horizontally-orientated dipole antennas, all located less than 22m above ground level. Other structures on the site include a radio equipment building and radio equipment container. The entire site is a compound covered in concrete or chip and enclosed by a security fence. Security lighting and cameras are also located around the edge of the compound. The site itself contains no vegetation although vegetation on surrounding land screens the lower structures from the road frontages.

Access is shared with two residential dwellings and there is a sealed parking area in front of the fenced compound.

To the south-west is Torbay Heights Reserve and to the east is Glenvar Close Reserve, both of which are heavily vegetated. A designated Vector sub-station is located diagonally opposite the site to the north-west.

The wider area beyond Fitzwilliam Drive and Glenvar Road is residential in character, with widely spaced detached dwellings in a generally well-treed environment.

6.1.2 Designation 195 - Chorus

Chorus proposes to designate the existing radio site, which incorporates the following existing infrastructure:

Telecommunications tower;

Radio equipment building;

Back-up electricity generators (electricity alternators) and associated fuel storage;

Air conditioning plant;

Asphalt parking area;

Chip compound and security fence and cameras


The Torbay Radio Site is a major linking hub for the Chorus network. It provides microwave and radio links with other strategic telecommunications sites. The site also houses equipment associated with a Telecom mobile facility that is co-located on the same telecommunications tower. Future work will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.

6.1.3 Designation 196 – Telecom

Telecom also proposes to designate the existing radio site, which incorporates existing infrastructure described above. Telecom is seeking its own secondary designation to enable ongoing use of the site for infrastructure and services associated with its network operations.

Future work is as stated above in relation to the Chorus Notice of Requirement.

6.1.4 Site Specific Effects

Visual effects

Visual effects are dominated by the telecommunications tower in the centre of the site. The site also contains a radio-equipment shed and container, and other equipment. Any increase in the number or height of built structures has the potential to cause adverse visual effects, overshadowing or dominance.

Chorus and Telecom state that the site is a long established network utility operation that forms part of the character of the local area and that no specific conditions are required (in terms of the size and location of equipment) due to the [large] scale of the existing equipment on the site. The Requiring Authorities envisage that future works will most likely include changed antenna configurations on the existing tower, and comparatively minor ancillary works within the fenced compound.

From our site visit, we agree that the existing telecommunications tower is visually prominent, not only because of its height but also because of the large scale and number of multiple antennas and microwave dishes fixed to it. We agree with the reporting planner that no additional masts should be permitted, to avoid further visual cluttering, although it is appropriate to provide for replacement of the existing tower with another tower or mast of the same (or smaller) dimensions.

In addition to the above, the planner’s report has recommended, and the Requiring Authorities have accepted, a condition that no dish antennas should be allowed to establish above the height of existing dish antennas. Slimline panel antennas above this height are acceptable.

The Requiring Authorities have also agreed that any new buildings should not exceed the scale of buildings generally expected in a residential area and that a maximum height of 8m (the zone limit) should apply, as well as a control on height in relation to boundaries, to avoid dominating or overshadowing neighbouring properties particularly those on the southern side of the shared driveway.

We agree that the proposed conditions will adequately avoid, remedy or mitigate further adverse visual effects.


Access and Parking

As discussed earlier, there are no identified issues with existing parking or access arrangements and the Requiring Authorities have agreed with Auckland Transport to the inclusion of a new condition relating to access, as follows:

“Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing shared vehicle crossing provided from Fitzwilliam Drive, existing as of [date of Council recommendation on requirement], unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.”

Overall, having considered the relevant information and the submission from Auckland Transport, we are satisfied that any adverse traffic effects associated with further development of the site can be addressed at outline plan stage and the additional condition as agreed between the Requiring Authorities and Auckland Transport relating to vehicle crossing location is appropriate.

Stormwater Runoff

The site is located within the Awaruku Stormwater Management Area (SMA2) under the District Plan. The rules relating to SMA2 require that impermeable surface on a site not exceed 60% of site coverage. However, virtually the whole site is covered in impermeable surfaces, and additional structures on the site are unlikely to cause any additional effect. We therefore accept that no conditions are considered necessary in relation to stormwater runoff.

6.2 634-636 Beach Road, Browns Bay


The site is a long established telecommunications site that was previously designated under the East Coast Bays District Scheme (Second Review) for the purpose of “PO TEL-EX”, which was not rolled over into the current District Plan. The Requiring Authorities have advised that the site is currently operating under existing use rights and resource consents.

The exchange site is zoned Residential 4b under the District Plan. It comprises an area of 1,453m² with the exchange building located in the centre of the site. The building appears as a single storey from Beach Road and two storeys from the lower land to the west. Whilst the exchange is located in a residential area, it is not residential in appearance.

Access to the site is via either of two vehicle crossings from Beach Road. The southern-most vehicle crossing leads to a narrow parking pad at the front of the exchange building, and the northern crossing provides access to the asphalt parking area at the rear of the exchange building. This vehicle crossing is also shared with four residential units that were built on land previously used for a line depot, and which became surplus to requirements. All four units have a no-complaints covenant registered against their respective titles that acknowledges the exchange and its operation. However, there are other residential dwellings in close proximity to the exchange.

A 16m high telecommunications mast, to which nine panel antennas are attached in a ‘carousel’ configuration, is located at the rear of the site behind the exchange building.


6.2.2 Designation 197 – Chorus

Chorus proposes to designate the existing exchange site as described above, which incorporates the following existing infrastructure:

Telephone exchange building;

Back-up electricity generators (electricity alternators) and associated fuel storage;

16m mast and associated antennas;

Air conditioning plant; and

Asphalt parking area.

The site contains one of Chorus’s local access network exchanges. Chorus have stated within the Notice of Requirement that exchanges are the hubs of the telecommunications system, forming strategic sites without which the network cannot function.

Future work at the site will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.


Telecom also proposes to designate the existing exchange, which incorporates the infrastructure described above.

Although the site is owned and operated by Chorus (as a local access network exchange), Telecom owns and operates the mobile infrastructure on the site.



Visual Effects

Chorus and Telecom have proposed conditions for the site that have been tailored to the residential zoning of the site and adjoining sites. If the existing mast was to be replaced, the proposed conditions would limit any new mast and antennas attached the mast or buildings to 15m in height, resulting in a 1m reduction in height and smaller antennas than those currently existing. Accordingly, the proposed conditions require that:

Any new mast and antennas attached to the mast or buildings do not exceed 15m in height.

Any new masts and antennas comply with height in relation to boundary control for adjoining residential and road boundaries.


Existing antennas can be upgraded or reconfigured, or additional antennas installed, provided that there is no overall increase in height of the mast.



The total number of masts for use by the Requiring Authority of either the primary or secondary designation is limited to 1.


The reporting planner recommended an additional restriction that antennas attached to the existing mast must be attached to the mast head, the purpose being to confine additional equipment to the existing structural envelope. In his evidence, Mr Horne was of the opinion that the condition would preclude the ability to place any antennas or ancillary RF units on the shaft of the mast, which would have less width than if attached to the outside of the mast head. He did not consider it necessary to add this restriction, and the mast head (which he described as being commonly referred to as a ‘carousel’ configuration) is already relatively bulky. Mr Horne thought that any antenna additions to the mast head or shaft would not result in any significant visual change in the overall appearance of the existing facility3. Mr Horne referred to photographs of the site, and indicated that the Requiring Authorities did not agree with the recommended amendment to conditions. He suggested that instead, antennas fixed to the mast could be limited to a maximum envelope around the mast of about 1m in diameter.

We accept Mr Horne’s suggestion, which is included in the revised conditions offered by the Requiring Authorities following the hearing and restricts the horizontal dimension of antennas fixed directly to the mast stem to a maximum of 0.6m radius, calculated from the centre of the mast.

Access and Parking

As referred to earlier in this decision, Auckland Transport sought a new condition relating to access at several sites, in this case, to consolidate site access to the existing northern vehicle crossing onto Beach Road should any new buildings or an increase of the intensity of the activities on the site be proposed. This would result in the southernmost vehicle crossing onto Beach Road being removed and reinstated to road berm.

Prior to the hearing, the Requiring Authorities and Auckland Transport reached agreement over the wording of the condition as follows:

“Where new buildings or extensions of existing buildings are proposed, other than minor works such as minor equipment shelters, air conditioning plant enclosures, telecommunication poles/masts, cabinets or like works, the vehicle access to the site shall be consolidated to provide single access at the northern end of the site’s frontage to Beach Road. The maximum width of any such vehicle crossing shall be 6m. Any redundant crossings shall be reinstated to footpath or berm to the satisfaction of Auckland Transport. These requirements may be varied if agreed to in writing by Auckland Transport.”

Overall, having considered the Requiring Authorities’ assessment and the submission from Auckland Transport, we are satisfied that any adverse traffic effects associated with further development of the site can be addressed at outline plan stage and the additional condition as agreed between Chorus and Auckland Transport relating to vehicle crossings is appropriate.

3 Horne evidence, para 45


6.3 69-71 Stredwick Drive, Torbay


The current zoning of the site under the District Plan is Residential 4B. The site was previously designated under the East Coast Bays District Scheme (Second Review) for the purposes of “PO TEL-EX” but the designation has not been taken forward into the current District Plan.

Resource consent was granted in 2011 for the removal of existing underground diesel storage tanks (and any associated contaminated material). It is not known if this consent has been implemented. Resource consent was also granted in 2012 for retrospective consent for the existing exchange building to exceed zone height and height in relation to boundary development controls, as documentation confirming that the building was lawfully established could not be presented. The NoR documentation notes that the site contains external air conditioning plant and diesel fuel storage; however these were not evident during our site visit or that undertaken by the reporting planner. These matters highlight the need for provision of adequate plans before the designation of the site is confirmed, to avoid uncertainties and difficulties in establishing which works will be subject to outline plans and those which will not.

The site is located on a right-angled bend in Stredwick Drive and thus has the appearance of a corner site. It has an area of 1,783m² and is generally flat. Development comprises a large two-storey exchange building, which is approximately 10m in height. The building also includes an exhaust flue with a height of approximately 12m. A large paved parking area covers the southern half of the site, and trees line the street frontage. A vehicle crossing to Stredwick Drive is located near the eastern boundary of the site.

The site is low-lying and surrounded by housing on the elevated slopes. Titoki Montessori School and Stredwick Reserve are located on the opposite side of Stredwick Drive to the south of the site.

6.3.2 Designation 199 (Telecom)

Telecom proposes to designate the existing exchange site, which incorporates the following existing or proposed infrastructure:


Back-up engine alternators and associated fuel storage;

Air conditioning plant;


Further work may include maintenance, upgrades and replacement of equipment/new equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunication and radio-communication services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.

The subject site does not currently contain a mast or any RF equipment. However, the designation would enable a mast and antennas to be established in the future.

Telecom, in acknowledging that this exchange site is in a residential location, has proposed a set of conditions to avoid and mitigate adverse visual and dominance effects on the surrounding environment.


The conditions cover the following matters:

Limit the number of masts to one;

Limit the height, diameter and location of any new mast and attached antennas;

Limit the height above the roofline of any antennas attached to the roof of buildings;

Provide a building envelope to control the scale of any future buildings


Visual Effects

The site is located within a residential area where buildings are generally one or two storeys in height. The existing building is approximately 10m in height, making it taller and bulkier than surrounding buildings. The building also already infringes height in relation to boundary controls along the northern boundary, for which resource consent has been obtained. The existing situation has been used as the justification for allowing future buildings up to 10m in height, subject to height in relation to boundary controls, on the basis that, should the building need to be replaced in the future, the visual effects of its replacement would be no worse than the existing, lawfully established building, and there would be no additional effect.

We do not agree with this proposition, having regard to the duty under the Act to avoid, remedy and mitigate adverse effects. We heard that less space is needed for modern equipment than older technology4 and it seems highly likely that over time, the spatial requirements for telecommunication and radio-communication services on this site will be reduced. We accept that the existing building is lawfully established, but see no reason why any new or replacement buildings should perpetuate an existing non-compliance that results in greater visual effects than necessary. Whilst Telecom might be able to use to advantage a taller (10m) building for the installation of antennas on the roof, provision for a 15m high mast is also sought as part of the designation.

We consider that provision for one new mast, limited in height to 15m (and subject to height to boundary controls) is appropriate, given the height of the existing building and low-lying topography of the site. We find that public notification of the Notices of Requirement and consultation undertaken by the Requiring Authorities prior to lodging the NoR’s provided adequate information regarding the possibility of a mast on this site and there were no submissions on this matter. However, we have recommended a condition restricting the height of any new building to avoid perpetuating and potentially increasing the existing level of non-compliance.

Stormwater

The subject site is located within the Awaruku Stormwater Management Area (SMA4) under the District Plan. The rules relating to SMA4 require that impermeable surface on a site not exceed 70% of site coverage. The erection of future buildings or extension of existing paved areas has the potential to exceed this.

Telecom did not assess this potential effect and has not provided any details for proposed mitigation measures.

The reporting planner has opined that, given the size of the existing building on the site and the extensive paved area, it is unlikely that further development of the site would

4 Horne evidence, para 67


significantly increase the total impermeable surface above that already existing. However, we note that the installation of a mast and any external equipment (i.e., if not installed in the existing building) would add a small increase in the impermeable area. Nonetheless, should any significant increase in impervious area be proposed, the Council will be able to address any stormwater effects at the outline plan stage and for this reason we accept that no conditions are necessary as part of the designation.

Access and Parking

No issues have been identified in relation to access and parking on this site.

6.4 363 Albany Highway, Albany


The site is located on two lots south of the Albany Highway/Rosedale Road intersection, on the eastern side of the Highway. It is zoned Business 9 under the current District Plan.

The site was previously designated for a telephone exchange under the Takapuna District Scheme (Second Review) but the designation did not roll over into the current District Plan. The site is currently operating under existing use rights and resource consents for the antennas on the existing mast. The most recent resource consent in 2008 was to erect a total of 6 panel antennas and a GPS antenna on the top portion of the existing 20m high mast.

The site has a 5.6m high, single storey building in the middle of the site and a formed parking area at the front. Access is from Albany Highway, with an unformed (and therefore unused) pan-handle access leg to Rosedale Road.

The surrounding area on the eastern side of the Albany Highway is also zoned Business 9 and is fully developed. Within this zone, there is a childcare centre adjoining the site’s northern boundary (406 Rosedale Road) and a mixed use development located to the rear (400 Rosedale Road). A local retail centre, Kristin School and a medical centre, are located to the south and west respectively.


Chorus proposes to designate the existing exchange site, which incorporates the following existing infrastructure:


20m mast with attached antennas;




The existing building contains one of Chorus’s local access network exchanges and also houses equipment associated with Telecom’s mobile facility. Future work at the site will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.



Telecom also proposes to designate the existing exchange site, which incorporates existing infrastructure described above. Telecom is seeking its own secondary designation to enable ongoing use of the site for infrastructure and services associated with its mobile network operations.



Visual Effects

The Requiring Authorities state that the site is a long established network utility operation that forms part of the character of the local area. They consider that the conditions they have proposed will allow them some flexibility to operate and upgrade services on the site while controlling the scale of structures on the site to ensure that any adverse effects on sensitive land uses in the area are not unreasonable.

Proposed conditions do not restrict the number of masts or antennas; however, a height limit of 20m would apply to any additional masts. The Requiring Authorities have advised that this is the standard condition sought in a commercial area, and is generally consistent with the current controlled height limit for masts and antennas in the Business 9 zone.

No building envelope condition has been proposed but an additional condition to control the height of new buildings to 9m as per the District Plan standards (the site is within 30m of a Residential zone) has been recommended by the reporting planner and accepted by the Requiring Authorities. We agree that this is appropriate given that the surrounding area has a relatively high level of amenity, and buildings within the immediate area do not exceed 2 storeys in height. However, we do not consider it appropriate that the designation should permit a building which could potentially be 9m high on the eastern boundary adjacent to the existing development at 400 Rosedale Road. The apartments within the block adjoining the exchange site receive most of their sunlight and daylight on their western side, and have their outdoor living areas/balconies facing the subject site. While we acknowledge that residents in a business zone are not entitled to the same level of amenity as in a residential zone, we find that in terms of avoiding, remedying or mitigating potential adverse effects arising from shading and loss of sunlight, it is appropriate to recommend a condition requiring compliance with the height to boundary control that the Requiring Authorities have accepted on other designation sites with residential neighbours. The child care centre is less sensitive to loss of sunlight and daylight owing to its orientation and site layout.

We are also concerned at the potential cumulative effects of an unlimited number of masts on the site, having regard to the nature of existing development and level of amenity. We do not consider that the Requiring Authorities have provided sufficient justification for this approach, or evaluation of potential visual effects. We have accordingly recommended that the number of masts be limited to two, which would allow for one additional mast.

Parking and Access



“Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from Albany Highway, existing as of [date of Council recommendation on requirement], unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.”


6.5 9 Mayfield Road, Glenfield


The current zoning of the site under the current District Plan is Residential 4A. The site was previously designated under the City of Takapuna District Scheme (Second Review) for the purpose of “Telephone Exchange,” but the designation was not rolled over into the current District Plan.

Resource consents were granted in 1996, 2008 and 2011 for additional antennas and removal of in-ground diesel storage tanks.

The site sits in an elevated location on the Glenfield Road ridge, and above Mayfield Road. It is dominated by a large 6m high exchange building to which three antennas are attached, above the roofline (we note that the 2008 consent allowed for 4 panel antennas). The site also contains an exhaust stack, external vents, outdoor air conditioning equipment and diesel fuel storage. Vehicle access is via a vehicle crossing on Mayfield Road, which rises to a sealed parking area in front of the building.

The site contains trees which are protected by the District Plan, including 3 puriri, 6 pohutukawa, a rewarewa, a totara and a kauri. All of these trees are located to the north of the exchange building (adjacent to Mayfield Road).

The site fronts Mayfield Road and Glenfield Road on three sides, and abuts the Council-owned Mayfield Centre to the south. The Centre accommodates a senior citizens club and the North Shore Women’s Centre. Further south is the Glenfield Kindergarten.

The area is predominantly residential in character, comprising mostly one and two storey detached bungalows.


Telecom proposes to designate the existing exchange site, which incorporates the following existing infrastructure:





Further work on the site may include maintenance, upgrades and replacement of equipment/new equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunication and radio-communication services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.



Visual effects

Telecom states that the site is a long established network utility operation that forms part of the character of the local area and has proposed a set of conditions to avoid and mitigate adverse visual and dominance effects on the surrounding environment.





Provide a building envelope to control the scale of any future buildings

The proposed conditions by Telecom that restrict new buildings in terms of height are acceptable as they reflect the expectations of the underlying zoning (8m height limit).

We consider that provision for one new mast, limited in height to 15m (and subject to height to boundary controls) is appropriate, having regard to the site’s location. We find that public notification of the Notices of Requirement and consultation undertaken by the Requiring Authorities prior to lodging the NoR’s provided adequate information regarding the possibility of a mast on this site and there were no submissions on this matter.

Access and Parking


“Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing shared vehicle crossing provided from Mayfield Road, existing as of [date of Council recommendation on requirement], unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.”


6.6 1 Akoranga Drive, Northcote - Takapuna Cable Station


The Takapuna Cable Station is located on the corner of Akoranga Drive and Northcote Road, Northcote. The site is zoned Business 9 under the District Plan and has an area of 8,215m².

The site is a long-established telecommunications site that was previously designated under the City of Takapuna District Scheme (Second Review) for the purpose of a ‘Line Depot’. The designation was not rolled over into the current District Plan and Telecom has advised that the site is currently operating under existing use rights and resource consents.


The telecommunications mast was originally established in 1992 and resource consent granted for the attachment of 12 panel antennas to the top of the existing mast in 2007.

The industrial appearance of the site is in contrast to the more ‘commercial’ character of other, more recently established land use activities in the surrounding area (e.g. Fox retail outlet, McDonald's, Z, BP and Mobil service stations, liquor outlet, video store and seafood shop). There are two large utilitarian buildings on the southern section of the site, and two smaller buildings on the northern portion which are associated with the international cable terminal and exchange. A number of smaller buildings such as sheds and water tanks are also spread throughout the site. A Telecom mobile telecommunications mast is located near the centre of the site, between the two largest buildings. The mast accommodates a number of panel antennas and reaches a maximum height of 16.5m above ground level. An equipment container associated with the mast is located near the base of the mast.

The site is enclosed within a mesh security fence with sparse vegetation. Vehicle crossings on both Akoranga Drive and Northcote Road frontages provide access to the site.

The surrounding area comprises a mix of commercial, recreational and residential activities and a 2Degrees telecommunication facility is co-located on a streetlight within Northcote Road, opposite the site. There is another (Vodafone) mast just beyond the site’s southern boundary, next to the Fox outlet.


Telecom proposes to designate the existing cable station site, which incorporates the following existing infrastructure:

Cable terminal buildings;


16.5m mast with attached antennas;




The cable terminal site is of strategic importance, forming part of New Zealand’s international fibre optic cable network. The site also accommodates the North Shore exchange and a Telecom mobile facility.

Future work at the site will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.


Visual Effects

Telecom’s assessment of the potential visual effects associated with the designation of this site and proposed conditions have taken into consideration the surrounding environment and business zoning. Telecom has not proposed any conditions controlling


the bulk and location of buildings on the site. It does propose a condition limiting the maximum height for masts and antennas on the site to 20m, with no restriction on mast and antenna numbers on the site. Telecom’s rationale is that the maximum height of masts is similar to what the District Plan provisions allow for as a controlled activity in the zone (under Rule 14.4.2 of the District Plan) and that it is an appropriate approach not to limit mast and antenna numbers given the site’s zoning and location within a “light industrial” area.

On Telecom’s behalf, Mr Horne argued in his evidence that a 12m height limit for buildings was more appropriate than the 9m recommended by the Council’s reporting planner because of the general commercial nature of the adjacent properties. He considered it particularly important not to unnecessarily restrict the development of the site given the strategic importance of the cable station.

For the most part we accept the assessments and evidence insofar as the proposed conditions achieve consistency with the District Plan’s provisions for mast height (20m as a controlled activity) and a separate condition is accepted by Telecom that provides for antennas attached to buildings to not exceed the height of the point of attachment on any building by more than 5m. This would ensure that antennas would be of a scale that is in proportion to the scale of the buildings, in recognition of the potential for an increase in adverse visual effects on the residential land to the north of the site.

We have given careful consideration to Telecom’s reasoning for not limiting the number of masts and antennas, taking into account the large size of the site, its underlying business zoning, and the separation distance from residential and recreational activities on the opposite side of Northcote Road and Akoranga Drive. Notwithstanding the presence of commercial activity, the wider area has relatively high visual amenity and the site is in a prominent location at the intersection of two arterial roads with high traffic volumes. The long-established use of the subject site is now arguably out of character with its surroundings, and its ‘light industrial’ appearance is at odds with the more recent development that has occurred around it.

Furthermore, A F Thomas Park and Onewa Domain are a focal point for sporting activity, with many hundreds of participants and spectators visiting the area. The potential viewing audience is accordingly significant. We do not consider that Telecom has offered sufficient justification for a designation which would allow an uncontrolled number of masts and antennas on the site. While slender masts of the types shown in the photographs submitted as part of Mr Horne’s evidence may be acceptable, the combination of multiple masts and larger mast heads in a ‘carousel’ configuration similar to the existing mast, together with unlimited antennas on the buildings, has the potential to degrade the existing environment to an unacceptable level. For these reasons, we have recommended an additional condition limiting the number of masts to three.

We have also given careful consideration to Mr Horne’s evidence in support of a 12m height limit for buildings on the site. One of the difficulties we have with making a determination on this matter is that we do not have a ‘point of reference’ in terms of the heights of any existing buildings on the site. The legacy plans submitted with the NoR did not include elevations, though it would appear that none of the buildings exceeds a height of 9m. We have accordingly determined that the condition recommended by the reporting planner, to control the height of the buildings on the site, should be included in a modified form. We recommend that no new building should exceed a height of 9m, but if existing buildings are higher than 9m they could be replaced or extended as long as they do not exceed their present height. We are concerned that 12m high buildings of comparable bulk and design to the existing utilitarian buildings would further degrade visual amenity. In making this recommendation we have taken into consideration that the site may need to accommodate additional equipment associated with additional fibre optic cables (should


these be established in the future) but the likelihood is that new equipment will require less space than existing equipment.

Access and Parking

Access crossings to the site on Akoranga Drive and Northcote Road are utilised by Telecom contractors when visiting the site. There is ample vehicle parking available within the site as well as small areas outside the security fence which surrounds the site’s periphery.

No substantive changes to access and parking are envisaged for any future works on the site given that the site is developed already.

As referred to earlier in this decision, Auckland Transport sought that a new condition(s) be added to the designation to ensure vehicle access is limited to the current location unless otherwise approved by Auckland Transport. Prior to the hearing the Requiring Authorities and Auckland Transport reached agreement over the wording of the condition as follows:

“Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossings provided from Akoranga Drive located adjacent to the south eastern boundary, and Northcote Road located adjacent to the northwestern boundary, existing as of (date of Council recommendation on requirement), unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.”

Overall, having considered Chorus’ assessment and the submission from Auckland Transport, we are satisfied that any adverse traffic effects associated with further development of the site can be addressed at outline plan stage and the additional condition as agreed between Chorus and Auckland Transport relating to vehicle crossing location is appropriate.

Extent of Designation

Auckland Transport also sought to explore the possibility of acquiring additional land from Telecom in the northern corner of the site (adjoining the intersection of Akoranga Drive and Northcote Road) and requested that the extent of the designation be reduced to enable this acquisition.

Telecom responded by suggesting that it would be more appropriate to discuss this possibility at a time when Auckland Transport have a funded project in place for the intersection that would require land acquisition. Telecom advised that they would not unreasonably block any future proposal by Auckland Transport to upgrade the intersection, provided that the acquisition did not compromise the prime function of the site as an international cable terminal.

Auckland Transport has agreed that the matter of land acquisition can be addressed via another process rather than through the designation.

6.7 161 Forrest Hill Road, Forrest Hill


The site is located on the eastern side of Forrest Hill Road and is zoned Residential 4A. It was previously designated for a Telephone Exchange under the Takapuna District Scheme (Second Review) but the designation did not roll over into the current District Plan. The site is currently operating under existing use rights.


The main building is a substantial 6m high telephone exchange located on the higher land towards the front of the site. Ancillary buildings and structures include back-up engine alternators and associated fuel storage; air conditioning plant; and vents and exhaust stacks.

Vehicle access is from Forrest Hill Road, with parking provided at the rear and northern sides of the building. The carpark is separated from a lower grassed area by a retaining wall. A pedestrian walkway runs alongside the sealed driveway, providing access from Regal Place to Forrest Hill Road.

The immediately surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature.


Chorus proposes to designate the existing local access network exchange site as described above.

Future work at the site will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand. Chorus has stated that a mast or antennas on buildings may be required at this site.

6.7.3 Site Specific effects

Visual effects

Chorus, in acknowledging that the site is in a residential location, has proposed a set of conditions to avoid and mitigate adverse visual and dominance effects on the surrounding environment.





Provide a building envelope to control the scale of any future buildings.

We agree that the proposed conditions that restrict new buildings in terms of height are acceptable as they reflect the expectations of the underlying zoning (8m height limit).

We consider that provision for one mast, limited in height to 15m (and subject to height to boundary controls) is appropriate, having regard to the site’s location. We find that public notification of the Notices of Requirement and consultation undertaken by the Requiring Authorities prior to lodging the NoR’s provided adequate information regarding the possibility of a mast on this site and there were no submissions on this matter.

Access and Parking

No issues have been identified in relation to access and parking on this site.


6.8 43 Greenhithe Road, Greenhithe


The site is located on the southern side of Greenhithe Road and is zoned Residential 1.

The site was previously designated for a telephone exchange under the Takapuna District Scheme (Second Review) but the roll-over of this designation into the current District Plan did not occur. The site is currently operating under existing use rights.

A small, 4m high telephone exchange building is located in the front (north-western) corner of the site. This building resembles a small dwelling or bach on a predominantly grassy, fenced section which rises towards the rear boundary. Ancillary buildings and structures comprise an air conditioning plant, a cable pressure hut and a water tank/stand.

Vehicle access and parking are provided adjacent to the building via a sealed driveway.

The immediately surrounding area is zoned Residential 1 and is residential in nature. Wainoni Park South is located opposite the site on the northern side of Greenhithe Road.

6.8.2 Designation 205 (Chorus)

Chorus proposes to designate the existing local access network exchange site. Future works will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand. Chorus have stated that a mast or antennas on buildings or engine alternator plant may be required at this site.

The exchange site contains noise generating equipment, including a condenser unit. However, unlike the eight other sites to be designated, the Greenhithe site currently has no engine alternators installed. Chorus has requested that future provision for these be included in the designation.


Visual Effects

In recognition of the residential zoning of the site and adjoining sites, a package of conditions has been proposed by Chorus to limit the height, bulk and location of new equipment, masts and antennas, while any buildings are limited to 8m in height.

The site contains no masts at present and existing buildings and equipment are modest in scale. A condition has been proposed that will allow for a maximum height of a mast and antennas on the site of 11m, with a diameter restriction of 1m for equipment (masts and antennas) above 8m in height. Any mast and antennas will need to comply with the Height in Relation to Boundary Control and antennas mounted on buildings are restricted in height to no more than 3m above the highest part of the roof.

From our site visit, we have concluded that there are key differences between this site and the other sites subject to Notices of Requirement in residential areas that we have considered in this decision. In particular, the Greenhithe exchange site is capable of substantial further development. Given the potential for more residential development in the area, expansion of the exchange requiring a new or enlarged building, as well as establishment of mobile services, can reasonably be expected. While the proposed building envelope is acceptable, we consider that the greater sensitivity of the area to


change needs to be recognised. There is more scope on this site for undertaking future works in an environmentally more sustainable manner by ensuring that any buildings are sympathetically designed, and boundaries are appropriately screened.

For these reasons we have recommended an additional condition specifying the particular matters to be addressed in an Outline Plan of Works - namely design and appearance of buildings and structures, landscaping/screening of boundaries directly adjoining residential properties and location/screening of any additional parking. We recognise that some of these matters are already stated in section 176A of the RMA, but inclusion in the recommended conditions will signal that these matters do have greater importance on this particular site.

Access and Parking

No issues have been identified in relation to existing access and parking on this site.

6.9 187 Hurstmere Road, Takapuna


The exchange site is zoned Residential 6a under the District Plan and was previously designated under the City of Takapuna District Scheme (Second Review) for the purpose of “Post Office and Telephone Exchange”. The designation was not rolled over into the current District Plan and Chorus have advised that the site is currently operating under existing use rights.

The Takapuna Exchange occupies a flat site on the edge of the Takapuna town centre comprising some 1,500m² and has a commercial appearance and character. The exchange building occupies a large portion of the site, with a small setback from the northern and southern site boundaries. This leaves a small grassed area at the front of the site adjoining Hurstmere Road and a sealed asphalt area at the rear of the site used for off street car parking.

The building is 6.5m high. Access to the site is from two vehicle crossings off Hurstmere Road or a separate vehicle crossing off Earnoch Avenue (which utilises a right of way over 187A Hurstmere Road). The parking area at the rear of the site can only be accessed from Earnoch Avenue.

The surrounding area comprises a mix of residential apartments, detached dwellings, converted dwellings and retail tenancies, restaurants and bars.

6.9.2 Designation 206 (Chorus)

Chorus proposes to designate the local access network exchange site, which incorporates the following existing infrastructure:





Future work at the site will include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of


telecommunications and radio-communications services to meet evolving technology and customer demand.

There are no masts or antennas established on the site; however, provision for a future mast forms part of the proposed designation.


Visual Effects

Visual effects on this largely developed site are confined principally to the impacts of a new mast and installation of additional antennas on the mast or on the existing building. Chorus have proposed conditions for the site that have been tailored to the residential zoning of the site and adjoining sites, which would require that:

Any new mast and antennas attached to the mast or buildings do not exceed 15m in height.

Any new masts and antennas comply with the height in relation to boundary control for adjoining residential and road boundaries.



The total number of masts for use by the requiring authority be limited to 1.


We agree that provision for one new mast, limited in height to 11m (subject to height to boundary controls) as recommended by the reporting planner and accepted by Chorus is appropriate, given the nature of surrounding development. We find that public notification of the Notices of Requirement and consultation undertaken by the Requiring Authorities prior to lodging the NOR’s provided adequate information regarding the possibility of a mast on this site and there were no submissions on this matter.

The remaining conditions relating to any new buildings on the site are acceptable as these will enable any future buildings on the site to remain of a scale and location that is consistent with the current scale of the exchange building, while also adequately addressing the interface between the site and the residential properties to the south of the site.

Access and Parking

No issues have been identified in relation to existing access and parking on this site and Chorus has agreed with Auckland Transport to inclusion of a new condition relating to access, as follows:

“No new crossing shall be permitted on Hurstmere Road, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.

Where new buildings or extensions of existing buildings are proposed, other than minor works (such as minor equipment shelters, air conditioning plant enclosures,


telecommunication masts, cabinets or like works) the vehicle access to the site shall be consolidated to provide single access on Earnoch Avenue. The maximum width of any such vehicle crossing shall be 6m. Any redundant crossings shall be reinstated to footpath or berm to the satisfaction of Auckland Transport. These requirements may be varied if agreed to in writing by Auckland Transport”.

Overall, having considered the relevant information and the submission from Auckland Transport, we are satisfied that any adverse traffic effects associated with further development of the site can be addressed at outline plan stage and the additional condition as agreed between Chorus and Auckland Transport relating to vehicle crossing location is appropriate.

7.0 OVERALL FINDINGS IN RELATION TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Having regard to all the evidence, comments from Council staff and submissions, we find that there will be positive effects from the proposal, particularly in regard to enabling the provision and upgrading of telecom and radio-communications services that are essential to the social, economic and cultural wellbeing of the community. We consider that subject to conditions, adverse environmental effects will be adequately avoided, remedied or mitigated.

8.0 STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

The statutory matters relating to Notices of Requirement are set out in full in each of the Planner’s reports and we do not propose to reiterate them. Of most relevance to our determination is Section 171(1) which sets out the matters to which particular regard needs to be had by territorial authorities in considering the effects on the environment of allowing a requirement. Those matters are:

(a) any relevant provisions of—

(i) a national policy statement:

(ii) a New Zealand coastal policy statement:

(iii) a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement:

(iv) a plan or proposed plan; and

(b) whether adequate consideration has been given to alternative sites, routes, or methods of undertaking the work if—

(i) the requiring authority does not have an interest in the land sufficient for undertaking the work; or

(ii) it is likely that the work will have a significant adverse effect on the environment; and

(c) whether the work and designation are reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of the requiring authority for which the designation is sought; and

(d) any other matter the territorial authority considers reasonably necessary in order to make a recommendation on the requirement.


Other relevant provisions are sections 168 (“Notice of Requirement to Territorial Authority”), 176A (“Outline Plan”), and Part 2 of the RMA.

We have considered the Notices of Requirement having regard to the relevant statutory documents and the relevant provisions of the RMA, and our conclusions with regard to those considerations are set out below.

For the reasons set out above, we are satisfied that any adverse effects will be avoided, remedied or mitigated so that they are no more than minor, and there will be significant positive effects. We have had regard to the broader statutory matters discussed below within this context.

8.1 Section 171(1)(a) – Any relevant provisions of a national policy statement, a New Zealand coastal policy statement, a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement, a regional plan, a district plan or proposed district plan.

The relevant planning documents are:

Auckland Regional Policy Statement (ARPS)

Auckland Plan

Auckland Council District Plan (North Shore Section), especially the existing zones for each of the sites, as identified in Table 1 of this decision.

8.1.1 Auckland Regional Policy Statement (ARPS)

The ARPS makes specific reference to the consideration of significant physical resources when determining the sustainable management of the Auckland region’s overall resources and recognises that:

infrastructure is essential for the community’s social and economic wellbeing and is of strategic importance, but these physical resources can give rise to adverse effects, including cumulative effects on the environment, and on communities.

infrastructure can be adversely affected by conflicts if sensitive uses are allowed to develop near them or if they are inappropriately located.

not all adverse effects can be avoided as a result of development processes. In such circumstances “the strategic response is to seek a direction that leads to the least adverse effect which is most capable of being managed over the long term”.

Key issues which are relevant to this proposal include the need for replacement or upgrading of infrastructure in order to increase its capacity, to accommodate growth. In addition, the need to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects generated by proposed changes to infrastructure and to consider alternative ways of avoiding or remedying them.

The above direction is reflected in the Strategic Objectives and Policies for the Auckland Region (2.6.1 and 2.6.2) which together, seeks to ensure that the region has the capacity to accommodate growth and development, and at the same time to protect the quality and efficient use of the natural and physical resources.

Chorus and Telecom have both provided an assessment against the ARPS, noting that:


“… A modern and reliable telecommunications system is critical to the regional economy, and enabling the efficient use of telecommunication sites through designation with appropriate conditions is considered to be consistent with these provisions”.

We accept that the proposed works by the two Requiring Authorities are consistent with the relevant strategic objective and policies namely; 2.6.1.1, 2.6.1.12, 2.6.1.17 and 2.6.14.1, 2.6.14.2, 2.6.14.4 and 2.6.14.5 which relate to growth and the provision of infrastructure.

8.1.2 Auckland Plan

The Auckland Plan, which is a spatial plan for the Auckland region, is a non-RMA document (having been prepared under the legislation creating the Auckland Council), and represents the Council’s and its Community’s most recent aspirations for Auckland. The purpose of the Auckland Plan is to:

“Contribute to Auckland’s social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being through a comprehensive and effective long-term (20 to 30 year) strategy for Auckland’s growth and development.”

Strategic Objective 12 of the Auckland Plan is:

“Plan, deliver and maintain quality infrastructure to make Auckland Liveable and Resilient”.

Priority 1 for network utilities is to optimise, integrate and align network utility provision and planning. In terms of telecommunications Clause 707 acknowledges that telecommunications assist in the delivery of educational resources, help businesses compete in the global economy, and connect with global communication development trends.

The Notices of Requirement are generally consistent with the Strategic Direction and relevant Strategic Objectives of the Auckland Plan. The designations will enable the Requiring Authorities to deliver up to date telecommunications technology for the benefit of the whole community and will assist Auckland’s economic growth and competitiveness.

8.1.3 The District Plan

The District Plan’s objectives and policies specifically refer to:

the community’s need for network utilities,

the potential for reverse sensitivity issues to arise,

the need for adverse effects of network utility construction, operation and maintenance to be avoided, remedied or mitigated, and

maintaining an environment in which the health and safety of the community is not adversely affected by network utilities.

Objectives and policies for business zones focus on maintaining or enhancing levels of amenity within the different business zones consistent with the purpose of the zone, and the nature of activities permitted in the zone, and protecting the amenity of residential and recreation zones that are in close proximity to business zones.


The Plan’s objectives for residential zones are intended to protect the environmental and amenity values of residential areas but to provide opportunities for the establishment of activities required by people and communities in a manner which is compatible with the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values.

The Plan has specific policies (14.3.2.7 and 14.3.2.8) to encourage the co-location of structures and the shared use of structures, and to encourage the location of aerials and antennas on buildings, and the location of antennas on street lights, to reduce the need for masts. We have had particular regard to these policies in our consideration of the individual NoR’s.

The effect of designating the land gives the Requiring Authorities the rights to undertake activities on the land subject to the designation and give primacy to the designation over the rules of the District Plan. We find that the proposal is consistent with these objectives and policies and will provide for the ongoing operation and maintenance of an effective network whilst avoiding adverse effects on surrounding residential areas. The proposed designations will ensure that existing amenity values are maintained or enhanced, whilst allowing essential non-residential activities to continue in a way which provides a positive benefit to local communities (in the form of telecommunications services).

8.2 Section 171(1)(b) – Adequate consideration has been given to alternative sites, routes, or methods of undertaking the work or that it is likely that the work will have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

Section 171(1)(b) requires a territorial authority to consider whether adequate consideration has been given to alternative sites, routes, or methods of undertaking the work if:

(i) The requiring authority does not have an interest in the land sufficient for undertaking the work; or

(ii) It is likely that the work will have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

Both Requiring Authorities have established that they have an interest in the land subject to the Notices of Requirement, sufficient for undertaking any future works.

A discussion on alternative methods to designation is included in the supporting information submitted with each NoR. The only practicable alternative to designation is reliance on District Plan rules and utilising the resource consent process for future works at each site.

We accept that designation is the best method for achieving the Requiring Authorities’ objective, taking into account the disadvantages of the alternative methods and we note that neither Chorus nor Telecom needed to provide this assessment given that they have sufficient interest in the land.

We also find that the works associated with the designations will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons discussed in section 5 of this decision.


8.3 Section 171(1)(c) - Whether the work and designation are reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of the requiring authority for which the designation is sought.

Section 171(1)(c) requires a territorial authority to consider whether the work and the designation are reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of the Requiring Authority for which the designation is sought.

The stated objective of the Requiring Authorities is:

“To provide a World Class telecommunication and radio-communication network, to enable the most up to date products and services available to be delivered via its local access network to the community.”

We find that the work itself is reasonably necessary for achieving the Requiring Authorities’ purpose, as proposed works include maintenance, upgrade and replacement of equipment and other ancillary works as necessary and as required for the continued provision of telecommunications and radio-communications services.

8.4 Section 171(1)(d) Other matters considered reasonably necessary in order to make a recommendation on the requirement.

8.4.1 Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications Facilities) Regulations 2008

The Notices of Requirement refer to Regulation 4 of the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities) Regulations 2008, which prescribes that radio frequency exposures be in accordance with the public exposure levels in NZS2772.1:1999 as a permitted activity.

All of the Notices of Requirement include a proposed a condition that existing and proposed installations will comply with the NZS2772.1:1999 levels, as required by the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications Facilities) Regulations 2008), or any successor standard. This applies to existing facilities as well as to those sites which currently have no antennas or masts.

8.4.2 Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 2011

The Notices of Requirement provide an assessment against Regulation 8 of the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 2011 (Contamination NES). This applies to any sites with existing underground diesel storage should any removal of redundant fuel systems or site excavation be required.

The Requiring Authorities consider, and we accept, that as these regulations override any designation confirmed in a District Plan, no specific designation conditions in relation to hazardous substances are required. They advise in the Notice of Requirement that confirmation of compliance with relevant regulations would be provided in any outline plan.

It is considered that there are no other matters, which require further assessment in making a recommendation on these Requirements.


8.5 Section 176A - Requirement of Outline Plans of Works

We have considered the Requiring Authorities’ request that the requirement for an outline plan be waived for specified works on each site and agree that no outline plan is necessary for the following:

a) any internal building works (excluding equipment generating external noise);

b) replacement of equipment where the new equipment is of a similar size in height, breadth and depth and subject to compliance with noise conditions set out below;

c) the replacement of any antennas with antennas of similar size, provided that there is no increase in the overall height of the facility;

d) general site maintenance and repair work, or boundary fencing otherwise permitted by the District Plan.

9.0 CONSIDERATION OF PART 2 (PURPOSE AND PRINCIPLES) OF THE RMA

Sections 5, 7 and 8 are all relevant to the proposal. In regard to Section 5, we conclude that the proposed Notices of Requirement are consistent with Part 2 in that they enable the sustainable management of existing physical resources and their future maintenance and upgrading, in a manner which will ensure the continued provision of modern and reliable telecommunications and radio-communications services for future generations.

By so doing, people and communities will be able to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety. Conditions attached to the designations will ensure that any potential adverse environmental effects such as visual effects and noise associated with the future upgrade works at each site will be appropriately avoided, remedied, or mitigated.

In terms of Section 6, we have not found any matters of national importance to be applicable in relation to the proposed designations.

With reference to Section 7(b), we conclude that designating the subject sites is an efficient use of existing physical resources. Any effects on amenity values and the quality of the environment (Sections 7(c) and (f)) will be mitigated by the recommended designation conditions, which are designed to minimise environmental effects, whilst recognising the telecommunication and radio-communication functions of the sites, including their operational and location constraints.

In terms of Section 8 of the RMA, we find that the proposed designations are not in conflict with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and we note that no submissions were received from any iwi group.

Overall, we find that the Notices of Requirement are consistent with Part 2.

10.0 SUBMISSIONS

Submitters’ concerns were confined to specific matters to which we have referred earlier.


11.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

We conclude that the proposed designations are reasonably necessary for the Requiring Authorities to achieve their objectives. The designation method recognises existing activities and provides for future upgrades and changes in a manner that clearly indicate the proposed works and activities to the community through their inclusion in the District Plan.

11.1 Recommendation to the Requiring Authorities

It is recommended that:

(i) Pursuant to Section 171(2) of the Resource Management Act 1991, Chorus and Telecom’s Notices of Requirement referenced by the Council as designation numbers 195 – 206 inclusive be confirmed subject to the conditions recommended in Section 11.2 of this decision.

(ii) That the necessary amendments be made to the Auckland Council District Plan (North Shore Section) incorporating:

Amendments to the District Plan maps to show the sites to be designated.

Amendments to the Designation Schedule, including insertion of the final version of the conditions.

The reasons for these recommendations are:

1. The designations are reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of the Requiring Authorities.

2. Adequate consideration has been given to alternative sites, routes, or methods of achieving the project.

3. It is unreasonable to expect the Requiring Authorities to use an alternative site, route or method.

4. The designations are generally in accordance with the relevant regional and district planning documents.

5. The designations are generally in accordance with Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

6. The amendments that have been made to the proposal as a result of further investigations, or in response to submitters’ concerns, are within the scope of changes that can be authorised.

7. Restrictions, by way of conditions, imposed on the designations have been included to avoid as far as practicable, remedy or mitigate adverse environmental effects of the designations.


11.2 Recommended Conditions for the Notices of Requirement

11.2 Recommended Conditions on Individual Notices of Requirement

1. Designation 195 – Torbay Radio (Chorus)

Plans and Information

1. Prior to the designation being included in the District Plan pursuant to section 175 of the RMA, the Requiring Authority shall submit to the Council, plans and such other information (e.g. photographs, schedules) that accurately identify the existing location, heights and overall dimensions of buildings, structures, antennas and noise-generating equipment on each site and any consented but unimplemented resource consents. The information must contain sufficient detail to provide a benchmark against which any future upgrades or new works can be assessed.

Towers, Masts and Antennas

2. Any new tower or mast shall not exceed the height of the telecommunications tower existing at 28 August 2013.

3. Any new dish antennas (mounted on a tower or mast) with a diameter greater than 600mm shall not exceed 22m above ground level.

4. The total number of towers or masts on the site shall not exceed 1. For the avoidance of doubt this is the total number on the site, irrespective of the operator.

5. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the maximum height of the roof at the point of attachment, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential boundaries and the road boundaries.

6. All antennas and support structures shall be painted or supplied in a recessive colour or supplied in a material that will weather to a dull finish (e.g galvanised steel brackets and antenna components), excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna.

Buildings

7. Any building, excluding masts, exhaust flues, antennas and air conditioning equipment shall be contained within the following building envelope:

a) Maximum Height – 8m

b) Minimum Front yard – 3m

c) Maximum Height in relation to boundary – shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.

Except this shall not restrict the maintenance and upgrading of any existing building where it already infringes this condition provided there is no additional exceedance of the standards within this condition.


Outline Plans

8. That an Outline Plan of works shall not be required for:



c) the replacement of any antennas with antennas of similar size provided that there is no increase in the overall height of the facility;


Noise

9. Any new noise generating equipment (excluding any engine alternator required for emergency back-up power generation) shall not exceed the following noise limits:

a) At the boundary of any adjacent residential zoned property:

7am – 10pm on any day: Leq 50 dB(A)

10pm – 7am on any day: Leq 40 dB(A)

10. Any new noise generating equipment (excluding any engine alternator required for emergency backup power generation) shall not cumulatively, in combination with any other noise generating equipment on the site, result in any increase in existing noise levels received at any other property boundary where the noise levels in Condition 9 are exceeded.

11. For any changes or additions to the engine alternators on the site, where the noise from all engine alternators exceeds the noise limits in Condition 9, an outline plan shall be required which demonstrates how the equipment and any mitigation is the best practicable option (BPO) to ensure that noise levels do not exceed a reasonable level.

12. The requiring authority shall adopt the best practicable option to ensure emission of noise from its designated site does not exceed a reasonable level.

13. (a) The first outline plan of works following confirmation of this designation involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise (other than engine alternators) shall be accompanied by an Acoustic Report prepared by a suitably qualified person. The Acoustic Report shall include a noise measurement survey of the site undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of the noise generating equipment during the day time and night time. The report shall include an assessment of whether or not the proposed works will enable those works to meet a reasonable level of noise as required by condition 12 of this designation. Any subsequent outline plan of works involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise shall include sufficient detail to confirm compliance with conditions 8 and 9.


(b) Where the Marshall Day Acoustics surveys undertaken in June 2012 have found that the District Plan noise standards are already exceeded at a residential boundary by more than 5 dB LAEq, and condition 13(a) above has not been triggered by the replacement or addition of equipment generating external noise, an outline plan of works shall be submitted within 3 years of the designation being confirmed to demonstrate how the best practicable option will be achieved. The outline plan of works shall be accompanied by an Acoustic Report prepared by a suitably qualified person. The Acoustic Report shall include a noise measurement survey of the site undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of the noise generating equipment (excluding engine alternators) during the day time and night time. The report shall include an assessment of the mitigation proposed to meet a reasonable level of noise as required by condition 12 of this designation, and the timeframe in which the mitigation will occur.

14. A communication plan shall be prepared for the site and shall include:

a) A procedure to ensure that all contractors and staff working at the site are aware of designation conditions.

b) Instructions to all those entering the buildings regarding actions required to respect residential neighbours; parking, talking outside, music, avoiding doors banging etc.

c) A procedure to advise immediate neighbours of any proposed capital works that will generate external noise or require any external work outside normal working hours of 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday (incl).

15. The hours of operation for routine external maintenance and upgrade works (excluding emergency or urgent works, or internal works within buildings), and routine testing and maintenance of engine alternators, shall be between the hours of 7am-6pm Monday to Friday.

For the avoidance of doubt, this condition shall not prevent the delivery and installation of large equipment items outside of these hours where transport of such items is subject to restrictions on time of travel on public roads or road closure or traffic management is required.

16. Engine alternators shall not be operated for the purpose of ‘load shedding’ during the hours of 10pm to 7am on any day.

Radiofrequency Fields

17. Any equipment transmitting radiofrequency energy shall comply with the exposure levels stated in New Zealand Standard NZS2772.1:1999 or any successor standard as required for by the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications Facilities at any place where the public has reasonable access.

Traffic

18. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from the existing shared vehicle crossing provided from Fitzwilliam Drive, existing as of 28 August 2013, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.


Advice Note

1. Compliance with the terms and conditions of the designation does not preclude the requirement to obtain consent under other relevant legislation such as the Historic Places Act 1993 – which may require an application for an Authority to destroy, damage or modify an archaeological site.

2. Designation 196 – Torbay Radio (Telecom)



Towers, Masts and Antennas

2. Any new tower or mast shall not exceed the height of the telecommunications tower existing at 28 August 2013.

3. Any new dish antennas (mounted on a tower or mast) with a diameter greater than 600mm shall not exceed 22m above ground level.

4. The total number of towers or masts on the site shall not exceed 1. For the avoidance of doubt this is the total number on the site, irrespective of the operator.

5. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the maximum height of the roof at the point of attachment, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential boundaries and the road boundaries.


Buildings



b) Minimum Front yard – 3m




Outline Plans






Noise





10. Any new noise generating equipment (excluding any engine alternator required for emergency backup power generation) shall not cumulatively, in combination with any other noise generating equipment on the site, result in any increase in existing noise levels received at any other property boundary where the noise levels in Condition 9 are exceeded.





(b) Where the Marshall Day Acoustics surveys undertaken in June 2012 have found that the District Plan noise standards are already exceeded at a residential boundary by more than 5 dB LAEq, and condition 13(a) above has not been triggered by the replacement or addition of equipment generating external noise, an outline plan of works shall be submitted within 3 years of the designation being confirmed to demonstrate how the best practicable option will be achieved. The outline plan of works shall be accompanied by an Acoustic Report prepared by a suitably qualified person. The Acoustic Report shall include a noise measurement survey of the site undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of the noise generating equipment (excluding engine alternators) during the day time and night time. The report shall include an assessment of the mitigation proposed to meet a reasonable level of noise as required by condition 12 of this designation, and the timeframe in which the mitigation will occur.





15. The hours of operation for routine external maintenance and upgrade works (excluding emergency or urgent works, or internal works within buildings), and routine testing and maintenance of engine alternators, shall be between the hours of 7am-6pm Monday to Friday.





Traffic

18. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from the existing shared vehicle crossing provided from Fitzwilliam Drive, existing as of 28 August 2013, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.


Advice Note


3. Designation 197 – Browns Bay (Chorus)


1. Prior to the designation being included in the District Plan pursuant to section 175 of the RMA, the Requiring Authority shall submit to the Council, plans and such other information (e.g. photographs, schedules) that accurately identify the existing location, heights and overall dimensions of buildings, structures, antennas and noise-generating equipment on each site and any consented but unimplemented resource consents. They must contain sufficient information to provide a benchmark against which any future upgrades or new works can be assessed.

Masts and Antennas

2. The height of any new mast and any antennas (mounted on a mast) shall not exceed 15m above ground level (excluding any lighting rod).

3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Notwithstanding Conditions 2 and 3, antennas attached to masts existing as at 1 June 2012 may be upgraded, reconfigured or additional antennas installed, provided that:

a. there is no overall increase in height where Conditions 2 and 3 would otherwise not be met; and

b. all antennas are attached either to the mast head, or if on the stem of the mast then in a manner that ensures they do not extend horizontally beyond a 0.6m radius calculated from the centre of the mast.

5. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment, provided that they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.

6. The total number of masts for use by the Requiring Authority shall not exceed 1 (one). For the avoidance of doubt, as both Chorus and Telecom have a designation on this site, the total number of masts on the site for use by these requiring authorities shall not exceed 1 (one).

7. The total number of antennas attached to buildings on the site for the use of the requiring authority shall not exceed 8 (eight), excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna. For the avoidance of doubt, as both Chorus and Telecom have a designation on this site, the total number of antennas attached to buildings,


excluding any GPS antenna, for use by these requiring authorities shall not exceed 8 (eight).

8. All antennas and support structures shall be painted or supplied in a recessive colour or supplied in a material that will weather to a dull finish (e.g galvanised steel brackets and antenna components) excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna.

Buildings

9. Any building, excluding masts, exhaust flues and air conditioning equipment, shall be contained within the following building envelope:

a. Maximum Height – 8m

b. Front Yard – 3m

c. Maximum Height in relation to boundary – shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.

Except that the above shall not restrict any maintenance and upgrading of any existing building where it already infringes this condition, provided there is no additional exceedance of the standards within this condition.

Outline Plans


a. any internal building works (excluding equipment generating external noise);

b. replacement of equipment where the new equipment is of a similar size in height, breadth and depth and subject to compliance with noise conditions set out below;

c. the replacement of any antennas of similar size provided that there is no increase in the overall height of the facility;

d. general site maintenance and repair work, or boundary fencing otherwise permitted by the District Plan.

Noise


a. At the boundary of any adjacent residential zoned property:



b. At the boundary of any adjacent business zoned property:




12. Any new noise generating equipment (excluding any engine alternator required for emergency backup power generation) shall cumulatively in combination with any other noise generating equipment on the site not result in any increase in existing noise levels received at any other property boundary where the noise levels in Condition 11 are exceeded.




(b) Where the Marshall Day Acoustics surveys undertaken in June 2012 have found that the maximum permitted noise levels in condition 8 are already exceeded by more than 5 dB LAEq, and condition 15(a) above has not been triggered by the replacement or addition of equipment generating external noise, an outline plan of works shall be submitted within 3 years of the designation being confirmed to demonstrate how the best practicable option will be achieved. The outline plan of works shall be accompanied by an Acoustic Report prepared by a suitably qualified person. The Acoustic Report shall include a noise measurement survey of the site undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of the noise generating equipment (excluding engine alternators) during the day time and night time. The report shall include an assessment of the mitigation proposed to meet a reasonable level of noise as required by condition 14 of this designation, and the timeframe in which the mitigation will occur.






16. The hours of operation for routine external maintenance and upgrade works (excluding emergency or urgent works, or internal works within buildings) and routine testing and maintenance of engine alternators, shall be between the hours of 7am-6pm Monday to Friday.





Access

19. Where new buildings or extensions of existing buildings are proposed, other than minor works (such as minor equipment shelters, air conditioning plant enclosures, telecommunication masts, cabinets or like works) the vehicle access to the site shall be consolidated to provide single access at the northern end of the site’s frontage to Beach Road. The maximum width of any such vehicle crossing shall be 6m. Any redundant crossings shall be reinstated to footpath or berm to the satisfaction of Auckland Transport. These requirements may be varied if agreed to in writing by Auckland Transport.

Advice Note


4. Designation 198 – Browns Bay (Telecom)


1. Prior to the designation being included in the District Plan pursuant to section 175 of the RMA, the Requiring Authority shall submit to the Council, plans and such other information (e.g. photographs, schedules) that accurately identify the existing location, heights and overall dimensions of buildings, structures, antennas and noise-generating equipment on each site and any consented but unimplemented resource consents. They must contain sufficient information to provide a benchmark against which any future upgrades or new works can be assessed.


Masts and Antennas


3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Notwithstanding Conditions 2 and 3, antennas attached to masts existing as at 1 June 2012 may be upgraded, reconfigured or additional antennas installed, provided that:

a. there is no overall increase in height where Conditions 2 and 3 would otherwise not be met; and

b. all antennas are attached either to the mast head, or if on the stem of the mast then in a manner that ensures they do not extend horizontally beyond a 0.6m radius calculated from the centre of the mast.

5. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment, provided that they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.

6. The total number of masts for use by the Requiring Authority shall not exceed 1 (one). For the avoidance of doubt, as both Chorus and Telecom have a designation on this site, the total number of masts on the site for use by these requiring authorities shall not exceed 1 (one).

7. The total number of antennas attached to buildings on the site for the use of the requiring authority shall not exceed 8 (eight), excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna. For the avoidance of doubt, as both Chorus and Telecom have a designation on this site, the total number of antennas attached to buildings, excluding any GPS antenna, for use by these requiring authorities shall not exceed 8 (eight).

8. All antennas and support structures shall be painted or supplied in a recessive colour or supplied in a material that will weather to a dull finish (e.g galvanised steel brackets and antenna components) excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna.

Buildings


a. Maximum Height – 8m

b. Front Yard – 3m


c. Maximum Height in relation to boundary – shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.


Outline Plans






Noise














Access

20. Where new buildings or extensions of existing buildings are proposed, other than minor works (such as minor equipment shelters, air conditioning plant enclosures, telecommunication masts, cabinets or like works) the vehicle access to the site shall be consolidated to provide single access at the northern end of the site’s frontage to Beach Road. The maximum width of any such vehicle crossing shall be 6m. Any redundant crossings shall be reinstated to footpath or berm to the satisfaction of Auckland Transport. These requirements may be varied if agreed to in writing by Auckland Transport.

Advice Note


5. Designation 199 – Torbay Exchange



Masts and Antennas

2. Any new mast and any antennas (mounted on a mast) shall not exceed 15m above ground level (excluding any lightning rod).

3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residentially zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment, provided that they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential boundaries and the road boundaries.


5. The total number of masts for use by the Requiring Authority shall not exceed 1 (one).

6. The total number of antennas on buildings for use by the Requiring Authority shall not exceed 8 (eight), excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna.


Buildings

8. Any new building or additions to the existing building, excluding masts, exhaust flues, antennas and air conditioning equipment shall be contained within the following building envelope:


b) Minimum front yard – 3m



Outline Plans






Noise











Advice Note


6. Designation 200 – Albany Exchange (Chorus)



Masts and Antennas

2. The height of any new mast and any antennas (mounted on a mast) shall not exceed 20m above ground level (excluding any lightning rod).

3. The total number of masts for use by the Requiring Authority shall not exceed 2 (two).

4. Antennas attached to buildings shall not extend more than 5m above the maximum height of the roof at the point of attachment.




b) Maximum height in relation to boundary – shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to this notice, from the site’s eastern boundary.


Outline Plans


a) Any internal building works (excluding equipment generating external noise);

b) Replacement of equipment where the new equipment is of a similar size in height, breadth and depth and subject to compliance with noise conditions set out below;

c) The replacement of any antennas of similar size provided that there is no increase in the overall height of the facility;

d) General site maintenance and repair work, or boundary fencing otherwise permitted by the District Plan.

Noise





b) At the boundary of any adjacent business zoned property:








Vehicle Access

17. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from Albany Highway, existing as of 28 August 2013, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.’

Advice Note


7. Designation 201 – Albany Exchange (Telecom)



Masts and Antennas



4. Antennas attached to buildings shall not extend more than 5m above the maximum height of the roof at the point of attachment.



b) Maximum height in relation to boundary – shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from the site’s eastern boundary.

6. All antennas and support structures shall be painted or supplied in a recessive colour or supplied in a material that will weather to a dull finish (e.g galvanised steel


brackets and antenna components), excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna.

Outline Plans






Noise











12. (a) The first outline plan of works following confirmation of this designation involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise (other than engine alternators) shall be accompanied by an Acoustic Report prepared by a suitably qualified person. The Acoustic Report shall include a noise measurement survey of the site undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of the noise generating equipment during the day time and night time. The report shall include an assessment


of whether or not the proposed works will enable those works to meet a reasonable level of noise as required by condition 11 of this designation. Any subsequent outline plan of works involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise shall include sufficient detail to confirm compliance with conditions 8 and 9.












Vehicle Access

17. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from Albany Highway, existing as of 28 August 2013, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.

Advice Note


8. Designation 202 – Glenfield Exchange



Masts and Antennas


3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residentially zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment provided that they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential boundaries and the road boundaries.





Buildings




c) Maximum Height in relation to boundary – shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.


Outline Plans






Noise










Protected Trees

19. All excavations within the dripline of any tree scheduled in the District Plan shall be under the direct supervision of a suitably qualified arborist. An outline plan shall be submitted for any such works. This shall include a mitigation plan prepared by a suitably qualified arborist.

20. All work involving trimming of a scheduled tree shall be carried out by a suitably qualified arborist in accordance with accepted arboricultural practice.

21. There shall be no storage of produce, materials, spoil or machinery within the dripline of any scheduled tree on the site.

22. No tree scheduled in a District Plan shall be removed from the site, unless otherwise authorised by a resource consent.

Vehicle Access

23. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from Mayfield Road, existing as of 28 August 2013, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.

Advice Note


9. Designation 203 – Takapuna Cable Station



Masts and Antennas


3. Antennas attached to buildings shall not extend more than 5m above the point of attachment.


4. The total number of masts for use by the Requiring Authority shall not exceed 3 (three).


Buildings

6. Any new building, excluding masts, exhaust flues, antennas and air conditioning equipment shall not exceed a height of 9m.

Except this shall not restrict the maintenance, upgrading or extension of any existing building where it already infringes this condition, provided that the existing height is not exceeded.

Outline Plans






Noise
















Access

14. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossings provided from Akoranga Drive located adjacent to the south eastern boundary, and Northcote Road located adjacent to the north western boundary, existing as of (date of Council recommendation on requirement), unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.


Advice Note


10. Designation 204 – Forrest Hill Exchange



Masts and Antennas


3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residentially zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment provided that they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential boundaries and the road boundaries.




Buildings







Outline Plans






Noise

10 Any new noise generating equipment (excluding any engine alternator required for emergency back-up power generation) shall not exceed the following noise limits:




11 Any new noise generating equipment (excluding any engine alternator required for emergency backup power generation) shall cumulatively in combination with any other noise generating equipment on the site not result in any increase in existing noise levels received at any other property boundary where the noise levels in Condition 10 are exceeded.

12 For any changes or additions to the engine alternators on the site, where the noise from all engine alternators exceeds the noise limits in Condition 10, an outline plan shall be required which demonstrates how the equipment and any mitigation is the best practicable option (BPO) to ensure that noise levels do not exceed a reasonable level.

13 The requiring authority shall adopt the best practicable option to ensure emission of noise from its designated site does not exceed a reasonable level.

14. (a) The first outline plan of works following confirmation of this designation involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise (other than engine alternators) shall be accompanied by an Acoustic Report prepared by a suitably qualified person. The Acoustic Report shall include a noise measurement survey of the site undertaken to replicate typical maximum operating conditions of the noise generating equipment


during the day time and night time. The report shall include an assessment of whether or not the proposed works will enable those works to meet a reasonable level of noise as required by condition 13 of this designation. Any subsequent outline plan of works involving the replacement or addition of any equipment generating external noise shall include sufficient detail to confirm compliance with conditions 10 and 11.












Vehicle Access

19. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to the existing vehicle crossing provided from Forrest Hill Road located adjacent to the northern boundary, existing as of 28 August 2013, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.

Advice Note


11. Designation 205 – Greenhithe Exchange



Masts and Antennas

2. Any new mast and any antennas (mounted on a mast or building) shall not exceed 11m above ground level (excluding any lightning rod).

3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions, from any adjoining residentially zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment provided they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential boundaries and the road boundaries.




Buildings







Outline Plans

9. An Outline Plan of Works shall, in addition to the information required under s176A of the Act, include plans to illustrate the design and appearance of any buildings, structures, antennas and noise-generating equipment, landscaping/screening of boundaries directly adjoining residential properties and screening of any additional parking.






Noise










Advice Note


12. Designation 206 – Takapuna Exchange



Masts and Antennas


3. Any new mast and associated antennas shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries. Any new mast and associated antennas shall not exceed a diameter of 1m for those parts of the equipment exceeding 8m in height above ground level.

4. Antennas mounted on the roof of buildings shall not extend more than 3m above the point of attachment, provided that they comply with Condition 2, and shall comply with the height in relation to boundary controls included in Attachment 1 to these conditions from any adjoining residential zoned boundaries and road boundaries.


6. The total number of antennas attached to buildings on the site for the use of the requiring authority shall not exceed 8 (eight), excluding any Global Positioning System (GPS) Antenna.



Buildings






Outline Plans


a. Any internal building works (excluding equipment generating external noise);

b. Replacement of equipment where the new equipment is of a similar size in height, breadth and depth and subject to compliance with noise conditions set out below;

c. The replacement of any antennas of similar size provided that there is no increase in the overall height of the facility;

d. General site maintenance and repair work, or boundary fencing otherwise permitted by the District Plan.

Noise














Access

19. No new crossing shall be permitted on Hurstmere Road, unless otherwise agreed by Auckland Transport.

20. Where new buildings or extensions of existing buildings are proposed, other than minor works (such as minor equipment shelters, air conditioning plant enclosures, telecommunication masts, cabinets or like works) the vehicle access to the site shall be consolidated to provide single access on Earnoch Avenue. The maximum width of any such vehicle crossing shall be 6m. Any redundant crossings shall be reinstated to footpath or berm to the satisfaction of Auckland Transport. These requirements may be varied if agreed to in writing by Auckland Transport.

Advice Note


Ms J Hudson Chairman:

Date: 28 August 2013


ATTACHMENT 1 – HEIGHT IN RELATION TO BOUNDARY CONTROL: APPLICABLE TO ALL NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT EXCEPT DESIGNATION 203 (TAKAPUNA CABLE STATION)

Telecom - recommendation report: Notice of requirement

Documents

Transcript of Telecom - recommendation report: Notice of requirement