Ce rapport est disponible en anglais seulement conformément aux exigences de la Politique sur les services en français de la Ville du Grand Sudbury.show/hide decisions
ResolutionTHAT the City of Greater Sudbury advise Industry Canada that they concur with the issuance of a licence for the development of a 76 metre high self support telecommunications tower at, PIN 73521-0407, Part Lot 11, Concession 1, Norman Township, City of Greater Sudbury by Bell Mobility.
Applications for telecommunications facilities are under the jurisdiction of Industry Canada. Industry Canada requires that the proponent of a new telecommunication facility must consult with the municipality and indicate whether the municipality concurs with the application. It is noted that telecommunications facilities are not subject to municipal zoning regulations and municipal concurrence is not necessarily required in order for Industry Canada to issue a licence.
Bell Mobility is proposing the construction of a 76 m (250 ft.) high telecommunications self-support tower on lands located to the north of Frank Street in Capreol. The closest dwelling to the tower is located approximately 220 m to the south at 24 Randolph Street. To the north is forested Crown land and to the west is a large forested Rural zoned property. Approximately 200 m to the south is Foch Street and the start of a residential area which extends further to the south along Lloyd, Randolph, James, Frank and other streets to the east. To the east of the tower is most of the 6.6 ha (16.5 acre) property on which the tower is to be located and Crown lands further to the east.
Bell Mobility has advised that the tower is intended to provide capacity relief and service to underserviced areas in Capreol and to provide HSPA/LTE (high speed packet access and long term evolution wireless broadband technology) service to Hanmer Lake and Frenchman Lake.
As required by Industry Canada and the City’s Telecommunications Policy, existing communication towers, water towers and other structures need to be considered by proponents prior to a new tower being installed. Bell Mobility has advised that the existing CN tower located in Capreol is too light to accommodate Bell Mobility’s equipment loading and would not provide adequate coverage of the targeted areas for service. Bell Mobility has indicated that the tower will accommodate additional carriers should another carrier express interest in locating on the tower.
Below is a summary of the details of the proposed tower.
Bell has also advised that the tower will comply with Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 limits and that the antenna system will be constructed in compliance with the National Building Code. Prior to installation NAV Canada and Transport Canada must review and approve assessment applications for the tower.
Department and Agency Comments
Traffic and Transportation Section
The tower will not require a building permit, however any building greater than 108 sq. ft. will require a building permit and regardless of size meet zoning setbacks.
In accordance with the Council adopted Telecommunication Facilities Policy, this tower is classified as "significant" as it is greater than 16.6 m in height and is located within 300 m (984 ft.) of a residential dwelling, residential zone or Living Area Designation in the Official Plan.
In accordance with the City’s policy, for "significant" structures the proponent was required to hold a neighbourhood meeting and provide notice in the following manner:
Bell has advised that in accordance with the City Telecommunications policy, on August 6, 2014 they mailed a notice to 6 property owners located within 228 metres from the base of the tower as well as Industry Canada, the Ward 9 Councillor and the City Planning Department. The notice included a survey sketch depicting the tower location, tower height and requesting comments by September 5, 2014. In addition, Bell placed a notice in the Sudbury Star on August 8, 2014 providing the public the opportunity to make written submissions via mail or email and the timing and location of the public information session which was held on August 18 at 7 PM at the Capreol Community Centre, 20 Meehan Avenue, Capreol. Bell has advised that in addition to the two owners of the land on which the tower is to be located one member of public, a resident owning the abutting property to the west, attended the information session.
Bell has advised that the abutting property owner to the west had no objection to the tower or its location but questioned why an access road could not be built from Lloyd/Foch Streets since this would enable him to gain more access to his property. The resident was advised that Bell and the owner had agreed to use the existing driveway on 31 Frank Street, as the north end of Lloyd and the west end of Foch Streets are unopened road allowances and a creek crossing would also need to be constructed on the road allowance.
Bell received one email from a resident from Randolph Street, questioning why he had not received a notice and expressing that the tower would be an eyesore and suggesting other locations where the tower could be located. Bell responded to the resident advising that his property was located outside of the three times the tower height (228 m) notification radius from the base of the tower. The resident suggested the use of Bell Canada lands located approximately 185 m to the east of Sellwood Avenue. Bell has advised that the 61 m (200 ft.) high tower on this property was dismantled in 2007 as it could not obtain access to it over Crown land from the Ministry of Natural Resources. Bell has noted that this landlocked property and former tower location was not considered as a candidate area for the new tower as it is located too far east of the target service area of Hanmer and Frenchman Lake.
In conclusion, Bell Mobility has completed the consultation requirements under the City’s Telecommunications Facility Policy and has considered opportunities for co-location. One member of the public attended the public information meeting and written comments were received from one other member of the public on the proposed tower. It is recommended that Industry Canada be advised of the City’s concurrence with the licence application.