Disclaimer The opinions and options contained in this document are for consultation purposes only, do not reflect final government policy and are not intended to constitute legal advice. The Government does not accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken as a result of reading, or reliance placed because of having read, any part, or all, of the information in this discussion document, or for any error, inadequacy, deficiency, flaw or omission from this document.
This report may be cited as: Ministry for the Environment. 2015. Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities: Preliminary evaluation under section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.
Published in March 2015 by the Ministry for the Environment Manatū Mō Te Taiao PO Box 10362, Wellington 6143, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-0-478-41265-9 Publication number: ME 1175
© Crown copyright New Zealand 2015
This document is available on the Ministry for the Environment’s website: www.mfe.govt.nz Contents
Tables
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 3 Executive summary
The Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Communications are proposing to amend the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 2008 (NESTF) to support the development of Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), the Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI) and fourth generation (4G-LTE) mobile infrastructure. This document presents the preliminary findings of the evaluation of the efficiency, effectiveness and risks associated with the proposed amendments under section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). In summary, the proposal to amend and broaden the scope of the current NESTF is seen as the most appropriate option for achieving the objectives of the NESTF. The current NESTF enables the development of telecommunications infrastructure by permitting certain activities in all districts across New Zealand. However, it does not provide for the development of telecommunications technologies such as those associated with UFB, RBI and 4G mobile infrastructure. There is minimal national consistency in consent requirements for this type of infrastructure, which has resulted in substantial processing and compliance costs for both industry and local government, and associated time delays in infrastructure deployment. As a result, the NESTF will not be able to continue to fully achieve its original policy objectives. As required by section 32 of the RMA, a preliminary assessment of the proposed amendments to the NESTF was undertaken to assess the efficiency, effectiveness and risk of introducing the provisions. This assessment found that, on balance, the benefits of implementing the proposed amendments are likely to exceed the costs. The main benefits associated with the proposed amendments to the NESTF were found to be: national consistency and certainty for the telecommunications industry reduced processing and compliance costs reduced time delays for infrastructure deployment enabling New Zealanders to realise the benefits of UFB and RBI sooner. In freeing up time and resources, the telecommunications industry and local government will also have more time and resources to invest elsewhere. The costs of implementing the proposed amendments were identified as: the potential environmental effects of telecommunications infrastructure the reduction in public participation in local decision-making. Consideration is being given to whether local environmental factors should override the permitted activity status in certain defined areas, such as areas of historic heritage or cultural significance, or areas susceptible to natural hazards. In doing so, this would allow local authorities to address special requirements in certain areas or protect specific features through district plan rules, enabling the effect of the proposed provisions to be managed in certain circumstances and providing for public participation if it is considered necessary. However, this has the potential to create additional costs for those councils that need to update their district plans to ensure these areas are identified and protected. This is a preliminary evaluation and should be read alongside the discussion document Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities: Discussion Document. This section 32 evaluation is intended to be revised following the consultation process as more information becomes available and to more accurately reflect the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments.
4 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 5 1 Introduction
The National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF), which came into force in 2008, facilitates the roll-out of telecommunications infrastructure by permitting certain types of activities across New Zealand. Its objectives are to assist telecommunications infrastructure design and development, reduce compliance costs and workloads for industry and local government, and enable New Zealanders to access improved telecommunications faster, while maintaining a balance between local participation in community planning and cost-effective national infrastructure investment. Since the introduction of the NESTF, however, a number of limitations have been identified that reduce its ability to achieve these objectives. In particular, the current NESTF does not facilitate the development of new and emerging telecommunications infrastructure, such as that associated with Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), the Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI), and fourth generation (4G-LTE) mobile infrastructure. This has resulted in avoidable ongoing costs and delays for the telecommunications industry and has limited the ability of the NESTF to achieve its objectives. To address these concerns, the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Communications, pursuant to section 44 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), are proposing to expand the scope of the NESTF to cover a wider range of telecommunications and mobile broadband infrastructure.
1.1 Purpose This draft report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of section 32 of the RMA (as revised by the 2013 RMA amendments). Section 32 requires an evaluation of a proposal to determine whether the: objectives of that proposal achieve the purpose of the RMA provisions of the proposal are appropriate in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, risk, costs and benefits to achieve those objectives. This is a preliminary evaluation and should be read in conjunction with the discussion document Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities: Discussion Document (the discussion document). This report will be amended following the consultation process as more information becomes available to accurately reflect the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments. A full list of sources of information obtained in producing this report is contained in appendix A.
1.2 Report structure This report is structured as follows: Background: an introduction to the existing NESTF and the statutory context for regulating telecommunication facilities in New Zealand. Problem statement: an outline of the limitations of the existing NESTF. Proposed amendments to the NESTF: an outline of the changes proposed to the NESTF to address the identified problem.
6 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Policy objectives: an evaluation of the policy objectives against the purpose of the RMA and the risks. Options: identification and assessment of the options to achieve the policy objectives. Effectiveness, efficiency and risk: an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the preferred option and the status quo, including a cost–benefit analysis.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 7 2 Background
2.1 National environmental standards National environmental standards (NES) are regulations that apply nationally and are issued under section 43 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). They are binding on local authorities. NES can be established to maintain a healthy environment, protect people and the environment, and secure a consistent approach and decision-making process nationally. They address a range of environmental issues, such as air quality or water quality, and manage the effects of specific activities on people and the environment, such as from electricity transmission or telecommunications technologies. Under section 43A of the RMA, an NES can: a) prohibit an activity b) allow an activity c) restrict the making of rules or granting of resource consents to matters specified in the NES d) require a certificate of compliance for activities that comply with the NES regulations e) specify, in relation to a rule made before the commencement of the NES: i. the extent to which a matter or standard continues to have effect ii. the time period the matter/standard continues to apply f) require local authorities to review existing permits within particular timeframes. Where an NES allows an activity, it can: a) state that a resource consent is not required for that activity; or b) do one or both of the following: i. state an activity is permitted subject to terms and conditions specified in the standards ii. require compliance with the rules in a plan or proposed plan as a term or condition. Section 43 and section 43A are provided in full in appendix B.
2.2 National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF) The current NESTF was developed to provide a nationally consistent planning framework for the radio-frequency fields of all telecommunications facilities operated by a person with network operator status under the Telecommunications Act 2001, and some telecommunications infrastructure on road reserves that have low environmental impact. The objectives of the NESTF are to: assist in network and equipment design and equipment sourcing for national network deployment reduce compliance costs and timeframes for service providers reduce the timeframe and lower the costs for the availability of new services to consumers contribute to a reduced council workload in processing and determining consent applications
8 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities set an appropriate balance between local participation in community planning and cost-effective national infrastructure investment. Under the NESTF, the following activities are permitted so long as they comply with certain standards and conditions: 1. radio-frequency fields: the planning and operation of a telecommunications facility by a network operator1 (such as mobile phone transmitter) that generates radio-frequency fields, provided it complies with the existing New Zealand standard (NZS 2772.1:1999 Radio-frequency Fields Part 1: Maximum Exposure Levels 3 kHz – 300 GHz) 2. roadside cabinets: the installation of telecommunications equipment cabinets in the road reserve, subject to specified limitations on size and location 3. noise: noise emitting from telecommunications equipment cabinets located in the road reserve, subject to specified noise limits 4. roadside masts and antennas: the installation or replacement of masts and antennas on existing structures in the road reserve, subject to specified limitations on height and size. The NESTF takes precedent over rules in district plans for these activities. However, where these activities are to be located adjacent to significant sites, such as sites with cultural or historic heritage significant, visual amenity, or the coastal marine area, the NESTF allows local authorities to continue to control these activities through district plan rules.
2.3 Review of the NESTF The Ministry for the Environment undertook an evaluation of the NESTF in 2013 to determine its effectiveness. This evaluation was undertaken with input from industry and councils. It was found that the NESTF is largely achieving its objectives. In particular, the NESTF has: reduced timeframes and compliance costs for mobile providers, and costs for the availability of new services to consumers in the mobile market assisted telecommunications providers in designing and sourcing equipment for roll-outs reduced council workloads for single processes, such as permitting individual cabinets. The evaluation also found that the scope of the NESTF is limited, reducing its ability to fully achieve the policy objectives for certain new infrastructure. The Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB) and Rural Broadband initiatives are two key Government programmes to expand and develop New Zealand’s broadband services. However, most of this telecommunications infrastructure is outside the scope of the NESTF’s provisions, which generally means resource consent is required. Both the telecommunications providers and the councils involved in the evaluation raised this as a concern. It was therefore determined that the NESTF needs to be reviewed to potentially include UFB and mobile infrastructure and installation activities.
2.4 The evaluation process
2.4.1 Amending the NESTF The Ministers propose to amend the NESTF under section 44 of the RMA. Section 44 requires that the Minister for the Environment prepare an evaluation report for the proposed amendments to the NESTF in accordance with section 32, and have particular regard to that report when deciding whether to notify the NESTF. When amending an NES, the Minister is not required to prepare an
1 ‘Network operator’ is a term defined in section 5 of the Telecommunications Act 2001.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 9 evaluation report if the effects are considered to be no more than minor. In this case, this report has been prepared under section 32 on the basis that the potential cumulative effects of the proposal, and particularly the environmental effects and the effects associated with reduced public participation in community planning, are considered to be more than minor.
2.4.2 Section 32 evaluation Section 32(1) of the RMA states that an evaluation must:
a) examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal being evaluated are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this Act; b) examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives by— i. identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives; and ii. assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the objectives; and iii. summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions; and c) contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposal. Section 32(2) says assessment of efficiency and effectiveness must also:
a) identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for— i. economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and ii. employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and b) if practicable, quantify the above benefits and costs; and c) assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the provisions. Further, if a proposal is to amend an existing NES, section 32(3) states that the evaluation of costs and benefits must relate to:
a) the provisions and objectives of the amending proposal; and b) the objectives of the existing proposal to the extent that those objectives— i. are relevant to the objectives of the amending proposal; and ii. would remain if the amending proposal were to take effect. Section 32 is provided in full in appendix B.
2.5 Scale and significance of the proposal Section 32(1)(c) of the RMA states that the evaluation must contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the effects of the proposal. Section 32(1)(c) means that the scale and significance of the proposal are the key factors influencing the level of detail required for this section 32 evaluation. They will also influence the choice of methods for assessing efficiency and effectiveness.
10 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities For the purposes of section 32(1)(c), ‘scale’ essentially refers to the scale or reach of the issue (eg, geographic area), the anticipated size or magnitude of the anticipated effects from the proposal, or both. ‘Significance’ refers to the importance or impact of the issue the proposal is intended to respond to, or the significance of the response itself (on the community). In this case, the scale and significance are as follows: the current NESTF and district plans set an existing baseline for regulating telecommunication facilities the proposal is an amendment to an existing NES; however, it significantly expands the scope of the NESTF the reach of the proposal relates to the entire country the effects (especially the cumulative effects) of outcomes of the proposal are likely to be more than minor in some cases the importance of the proposal is that the deployment of telecommunications technology will generally be able to be undertaken without requiring resource consent one impact of the proposal is that the activities will be permitted, subject to conditions stated in the NESTF, and not subject to district plans or local rules. As a result, the environmental impacts and effects on people no longer ned to be considered as a prerequisite for authorisation of a land activity another impact of the proposal is that the public and other stakeholders will not necessarily be included in decision-making processes for activities permitted by the NESTF (including district plan reviews and resource consents). Public participation will be limited to consultation on significant areas, as identified in district plans and protected by the NESTF. Based on the scale and significance of the proposal, the evaluation report must include: an evaluation of the assessment of the effects of the proposed changes versus the status quo (being the existing NESTF) – the assessment of effects is against the existing baseline, being what is currently provided for in the NESTF and generally provided for by district plans an assessment of efficiency, effectiveness and risk against the effects, costs and benefits of the proposal an evaluation of the proposed amendments and additions against the objectives of both the current NESTF and the objectives of the proposed changes a comparative analysis of the regulatory effects of the proposal against the status quo, and justification of the proposed degree of effect, because the provisions created should not be too stringent or too lenient. The level of analysis required in creating and assessing the proposal and the level of evaluation required needs to correspond with the level of effect, scale and significance arising from the proposed additions and alterations to the NESTF. The scale and significance of the proposal are described further throughout this assessment of effects, efficiency, effectiveness and risk of the proposed amendments and additions.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 11 3 Problem statement
3.1 Overview Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), Rural Broad Band Initiative (RBI) and forth generation (4G-LTE) mobile networks require the installation of new telecommunications infrastructure throughout New Zealand. The new infrastructure requirements were not anticipated when the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF) was developed, nor when many territorial authorities developed their operative district plans. As a result, the UFB, RBI and mobile infrastructure and installation activities are largely outside the scope of the existing NESTF. Resource consent is required if an activity is not permitted under the NESTF or district plan. This situation creates a number of issues, including: costs: telecommunication operators face costs for the time taken to understand different district plan provisions and to obtain resource consent (the estimated consent cost is shown in Table 1) councils face costs for staff time required for processing and monitoring resource consents and enforcing district plan provisions customers and/or shareholders face telecommunication operational costs, which are either passed on through charges to customers or lower investment yields for shareholders time delays in the work programme for installation of the telecommunications infrastructure due to undertaking planning checks, preparing consent applications, and council time to process applications uncertainty of outcomes where telecommunications infrastructure and/or associated installation activities are not permitted planning restrictions, which may reduce route optimisation, resulting in increased inefficiencies and network risk. The potential delays in deployment due to council consenting requirements can affect customers, such as businesses that rely on communications technologies to remain competitive internationally, health care and education providers, and individual users. Table 1: Cost required for resource consent compared to certificate of compliance for permitted activities
Estimated average cost Estimated average per certificate of Activity cost per consent compliance Antennas in rural areas $14,000 $3,900 Antennas on multi-storey buildings $5,000 $3,200 New masts to carry antennas in the road reserve $5,500 $3,300 Co-location of multiple telecommunications operators’ $4,800 $3,300 antennas Replacement or additional antennas at existing sites $4,900 $3,300
3.2 National variation in district plans The way different territorial authorities manage telecommunications infrastructure through their district plans varies across the country in terms of certainty, time and costs to telecommunications
12 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities operators. This variation is likely to be a consequence of the devolution of planning decisions to territorial authorities and generally does not reflect actual local environmental differences that would require different rules for telecommunications infrastructure. For some types of infrastructure, variability relating to the local environment is appropriate to reduce the potential environmental effects. However, the environments in which telecommunications infrastructure is placed are very similar across the country, and this inconsistency creates similar problems to those the NESTF was originally intended to address. The two main types of infrastructure that are not currently incorporated in the NESTF (as further discussed below) are: telecommunications cables mobile network infrastructure.
3.2.1 Telecommunication cables District plan rules for telecommunications cables, which are required for UFB, vary widely between districts. For example, a review of 54 district plans found that the installation of above-ground cables (both distribution and lead-ins) is a permitted activity in 36 districts but requires resource consent in 18 districts. Of the 36 districts where above-ground cables are permitted, 11 are subject to controls. Underground cables are permitted across all districts, but they are sometimes subject to various controls on the nature and management of earthworks. Table 2 illustrates the diversity in activity status across different district plans for the roll-out of telecommunications cables in urban areas. Table 2: District plan activity status for telecommunications cables
Above-ground cables Underground cables Activity status in district plans (urban areas) (urban areas) Permitted activity 25 52 Permitted subject to controls/conditions 11 2 Consent required 18 0
3.2.2 Mobile infrastructure Under the existing NESTF, the placement of antennas and associated mounts on existing structures such as power-poles or street-light poles (referred to as ‘original utility structures’) is permitted where the original utility structure is located within the road reserve and the equipment complies with specified limitations on height and size. However, a lot of mobile network infrastructure falls outside these criteria, and therefore is subject to district plan provisions. As with telecommunications cables, district plan rules regarding new wireless network infrastructure vary across the country. Table 3 illustrates the difference in activity status across different district plans for the roll-out of mobile antennas. Table 3: District plan activity status for mobile antennas
Antennas (on Micro-cells (on urban urban streetlights, streetlights, bus Rural masts and antennas rooftops, etc) stops, etc) 20 m 25 m 30 m Permitted activity 19 41 26 10 1 Permitted subject to 30 12 28 22 3 controls/conditions Consent required 5 1 19 41 69
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 13 3.2.3 Effects of variation on industry The section 32 report completed in 2008 outlined how the variable provision for telecommunication facilities can affect the resource use efficiency of the network. These comments are still relevant to the current proposal with regard to UFB, RBI and 4G-LTE mobile infrastructure, as follows: companies incur costs that consume labour and materials for no saleable output in the preparation and processing of applications for consents, in delays in authorisation of work, and in uncertainty of outcome inconsistent approaches in different districts may reduce the realisation of economies of scale through the use of standardised equipment these impacts on operational costs of the networks are either passed on to and recovered from the network’s customers, or met by reduction in profits and shareholder returns, slowing down the rate of new investment configuration of the networks may be redirected from its otherwise optimal route by the stringency of some local provisions, resulting in increased inefficiencies and risks to the ongoing network operation there is the potential for delays in rolling out new services, because resources used in additional compliance activity are diverted from new investment (regulatory compliance crowds out investment expenditure) the current situation is compounded for new-entrant operators, who have no existing network to build on and are particularly dependent on the rapid deployment of new facilities to provide viable services and competition against incumbent operators. In short, variable planning provisions both reduce the level of investment and delay any investment occurring. A local authority approach to work on telecommunications infrastructure that would make them permitted activities (subject to specific limitations) would reduce both impediments.
3.3 Activities not covered by the current NESTF Aside from the activities outlined above, there are further general limitations on the scope of the NESTF, including the following: Antenna placement: the existing council antenna placement rules do not always strike an optimal balance, as the following examples show: in most central city areas the placement of antennas on the sides or rooftops of buildings may provide the best coverage with the lowest visual impact in residential areas there are multi-storey buildings in excess of five storeys, such as apartment buildings and public buildings, which generally provide the most appropriate place to locate an antenna, providing the best coverage with the lowest visual impact existing structures in the road reserve (such as street-light poles) are not always in the optimal location to provide network coverage, and a telecommunications operator may require multiple antennas on existing structures within a relatively small area. Infrastructure in rural areas: the NESTF provisions rarely apply to telecommunications infrastructure in rural areas, because the most appropriate location for antennas is usually on private land outside of the road reserve (eg, on hill tops). Although the majority of district plans provide for cell sites 20 m or higher in rural zone areas, and many for 25 m, the associated rules are not nationally consistent.
14 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Co-location: co-location of different operators’ equipment on the same mast is generally encouraged because it results in fewer individual structures in an area. However, this generally requires taller structures than single-operator masts, and therefore a greater visual effect per site, because the equipment needs to be sufficiently spaced to avoid interference. Modern antenna specifications: existing antennas will not be able to meet the performance standards required to satisfy the modern demand for mobile telecommunications (such as carrying frequency ranges to include higher-spectrum bands, like the 700 MHz band). This means upgrades are required. Newer technology antennas are often larger, enabling them to increase their capability and allowing them to operate over new spectrum bands. This means network operators need to either replace existing antennas with new, larger antennas, or install additional antennas. Small units: a significant increase of small units associated with telecommunications is anticipated, including micro-cells, pico-cells, femto-cells and wi-fi. These units are used to fill gaps in the coverage of mobile networks and provide additional services, such as free public space wi-fi. However, these units do not always fit within the permitted antenna rules.
3.4 Non-Resource Management Act controls over telecommunications facilities In addition to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and the NESTF, other legislation affects telecommunications facilities and installation activities. This further contributes to inconsistency in the management of new telecommunications infrastructure. The Telecommunications Act 2001 is the other major piece of legislation governing telecommunications infrastructure. The Act provides telecommunications network operators with a statutory right to occupy the road, under agreement with the road controlling authority (as the land owner), “subject to reasonable conditions” regarding size and positioning of the facilities so as not to impede use of the road. This agreement process undertaken under the Telecommunications Act runs in parallel with the RMA process. The road controlling authority in most instances is the local territorial authority, but it can also be the New Zealand Transport Authority or the Department of Conservation, depending on the location of the proposed telecommunications facility. Under the provisions of the Telecommunications Act, telecommunications operators and the road controlling authorities reach what are essentially property agreements for occupation. These are subject to reasonable conditions that are primarily aimed at ensuring: the safe and efficient flow of traffic and pedestrians within road reserves, access is maintained, coordination with other works that may occur in the road, and reinstatement works are provided for. There are other minor pieces of legislation that have an impact on telecommunications structures and associated installation activities, including: the National Code of Practice for Utility Operators' Access to Transport Corridors, which prescribes requirements for the use of road corridors the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, which requires activities such as earthworks on sites that may have archaeological significance to obtain an archaeological authority.
3.5 Summary Overall, the main issue with the current NESTF is that UFB and 4G-LTE mobile telecommunications facilities often fall outside the scope of the NESTF, which means these activities are subject to resource management consenting processes. There is no unified regulatory approach due to the variation between the 67 territorial and unitary local authorities in New Zealand. A lack of national
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 15 consistency in the rules of district plans is leading to uncertainty and inconsistencies relating to time, costs and outcomes of the RMA process. Thisis seen as impeding the delivery of new and improved telecommunications services that can provide availability, choice of services and cost savings to consumers. The original NESTF sought to alleviate these costs and delays by permitting certain activities (subject to specific limitations). However, as the telecommunications landscape has evolved, these new technologies are often not permitted, creating the same issues of added cost, time and uncertainty. Enabling the roll-out of telecommunications infrastructure through a more permissive system can result in environmental, economic, social and cultural effects.
16 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 4 Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
The proposed amendments seek to include the infrastructure and installation activities required for the roll-out of Ultra-Fast Broadband and fourth generation (4G-LTE) mobile infrastructure in the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF), and to clarify some of the exiting NESTF provisions. This section summarises the proposed amendments to the NESTF. These proposed amendments have been evaluated in accordance with section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 in the remaining sections of this report. Each section outlines the evaluation approach that has been taken. The amendments are outlined in full in appendix C. A further outline and discussion of the proposed amendments is included in the Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities: Discussion Document (discussion document).
4.1 Permitted activities The proposed amendments to the NESTF will widen the scope of permitted activities. The proposed new permitted activities are to: deploy telecommunications cables (both underground and overhead) locate antennas on multi-storey buildings (except in residential areas), and erect new antenna structures in rural areas co-locate multiple telecommunications operators’ antennas erect new masts in the road reserve replace existing antennas to upgrade services to enable 4G-LTE place additional antennas at existing antenna sites to enable 4G-LTE erect new small-cell units in the road reserve or on the outside of buildings.
4.2 Amendments to existing permitted activities As well as introducing new permitted activities, the proposal will also make some amendments to the existing permitted activities. The proposed amendments are to: expand the area in which a replacement utility structure can be located in the road reserve modify (increase) the size envelope for antennas modify (increase) the size of replacement utility structures clarify the definition of ‘site’ allow for replacement cabinets to be erected before existing cabinets are removed
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 17 remove the existing reference to the 1990 national radio-frequency standard and replace it with the 2011 national radio-frequency standard2 increase the threshold at which reporting for radio-frequency exposure under Regulation 4 is triggered exclude small cells from Regulation 4 reporting requirements include ‘natural hazard zones’ in the list of plan zones that may be exempt from the NESTF expand the coverage of special protection zones to include all new activities covered by the NESTF, in and outside the road reserve.
4.3 Potential further amendments required It is important to note the proposed amendments and discussion document have not yet been notified, which means these are draft amendments and are still subject to change. More data regarding the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments to the NESTF will be collected during the public consultation on the discussion document. Further mitigation measures to manage the potential effects of the proposed amendments will also be considered. For example, consideration will be given to whether local environmental factors should override national standards set in the NESTF in certain defined areas, such as areas of historic heritage or cultural significance, or areas susceptible to natural hazards. It may be appropriate in these circumstances to provide for an exemption from the permitted activity status to ensure effects are managed and to allow local authorities to address special requirements in certain areas, or protect specific features, through district plan rules. As an example, the National Environmental Standards for Electricity Transmission Activities 2009 exempts all areas considered to be a historic heritage area3 from the permitted activity status. The discussion document on the NESTF seeks respondents’ views on when such exemptions might be appropriate for telecommunications facilities. We expect that the submissions we receive will enable us to fully test the assumptions and to help us ensure the mitigations in place are appropriate.
2 This relates to an additional proposal to update the radio-frequency national environmental standard, referred to in the NESTF, to the proposed AS/NZS 2772.2:2011 Radiofrequency Fields Part 2: Principles and Methods of Measurement and Computation – 3 kHz to 300 GHz. This update will affect practitioners working under the NESTF by making the measurement requirements more comprehensive. However, this will be a minor impact because the new standard is based on current best practice. Refer to the discussion document for more information.
3 Defined as an area that is protected by a rule because of its historic heritage, including an area that is protected by a rule because it is a site of significance to Māori.
18 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 5 Evaluation of objectives
5.1 Policy objectives The primary objective of the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF) is to “provide greater national consistency for a wider range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations”. This will, in turn, ensure the NESTF will remain fit for purpose and be able to fully achieve its original objectives, which are to: assist in network and equipment design and equipment sourcing reduce compliance costs and timeframes for service providers reduce the timeframe and lower the costs for the availability of new services to consumers contribute to a reduced council workload in processing and determining consent applications set an appropriate balance between local participation in community planning and cost-effective national infrastructure investment. The objective of the proposed amendments is compatible with the existing objectives of the NESTF and reinforces the fact that the current NESTF is unable to fully achieve its objectives.
5.2 Evaluation of objectives Section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires that the evaluation examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA. The purpose of the RMA is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources, which means:
… managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while— a. sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and b. safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and c. avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment. The original objectives of the NESTF were assessed against the purpose of the RMA in the original section 32 evaluation. For this evaluation, Table 4 contains an assessment of the objective of the proposed policy, which is to provide greater national consistency for a wider range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations, against the purpose of the RMA.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 19 Table 4: Evaluation of whether the proposal objectives are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA
Policy objective: to provide greater national consistency for a wider range of Relevance to the RMA telecommunications infrastructure and locations Directly related to a resource Amending the NESTF to provide greater national consistency is directly related management issue to Part 2, Section 5, of the Act, which seeks to enable the use and development of resources, including physical resources such as telecommunications networks, so that people and communities can meet their needs. Will achieve one or more Providing for national consistency will ensure that New Zealanders have access aspects of the purpose and to telecommunications facilities that provide for future needs, including: principles of the RMA enhanced teaching and learning resources contributing to education maintaining or enhancing access to up-to-date telecommunications technology, allowing New Zealand business to remain competitive in regional, national and international market places. This will provide for the social and economic wellbeing of New Zealanders, in accordance with Part 2 of the Act. Relevant to Māori Amending the NESTF seeks a balance between providing for cost-effective and environmental issues reliable national infrastructure and recognising the need for local community (sections 6(e), 6(g), 7(a), 8) input, where appropriate. Community participation enables the identification and management of issues important to maintaining cultural wellbeing. Thus, iwi and the wider public will be invited to comment on the proposed changes through formal consultation. Relevant to statutory The objective meets the statutory function of an NES. It builds on the already functions or to give effect to developed NESTF to develop regulations that apply more broadly across the another plan or policy development and implementation of telecommunications technology nationally. Activities that do not qualify as permitted activities under the regulations will continue to be managed by local councils through the existing rules in their district plans under the RMA. Will effectively guide The objective contributes to effective decision-making by allowing for a national decision-making approach for the implementation of a wider range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations. It will contribute to a streamlined planning process through updated national regulations that reduce the occasions when it is necessary to obtain resource consent from local authorities. This will result in a more streamlined and cost-effective process. Meets sound principles for This objective is achievable and fit for purpose. writing objectives Consistent with existing other The objective of the proposed amendments is consistent with the current objectives objectives of the NESTF. The existing objectives of the NESTF will not be changed as a result of the amendments. We consider that the amendments to the NESTF will mean the objectives of the current NESTF will be met more effectively.
5.3 Conclusion In summary, the objective of the proposed amendments is considered to represent the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA. Broadly, the objective is considered to appropriately reflect the balance contained within the RMA’s purpose between enabling the use and development of resources and managing the adverse environmental effects of this use and development.
20 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 6 Options for achieving the objectives
6.1 Overview of options Section 32(1)(b)(i) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires an evaluation to identify alternative practicable options for achieving the proposal objective, as outlined in section 5. We have conducted a high-level review of other reasonably practicable options for achieving the policy objective, which is to provide greater national consistency for a wider range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations. These options are: maintaining the status quo non-regulatory approaches (eg, partnership with district councils, production of voluntary guidelines, guidance notes) amending the RMA a national policy statement amendments to the current the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF) Of the options identified, only the proposed amendments to the NESTF are considered appropriate to meet the policy objective, as summarised in Table 5. The proposed amendments to the NESTF will be straightforward and time efficient to implement, and they will: ensure national consistency in decision-making and certainty of outcome enable new telecommunications activities be cost effective and reduce workloads provide New Zealanders with access to Ultra-Fast Broadband and Rural Broadband Initiative faster. For these reasons, the other options that were assessed are not considered appropriate to meet the policy objectives.
6.2 Maintaining the status quo The existing NESTF covers only a small proportion of telecommunications facilities that are now being installed. As discussed in section 3, any other facility that falls outside the NESTF, such as most of the Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI) and mobile infrastructure, is subject to district plan rules. If the status quo continues, then there will continue to be varying plan rules for this equipment across the country. This creates significant costs and uncertainties for telecommunications operators seeking to roll out new services, or to extend their networks and improve the capacity of their services, using their right to occupy road reserves in providing utility services. This may in turn create barriers to new services, choice and competition between service providers. The costs may then be ultimately passed on to consumers. Therefore, maintaining the status quo is not considered to be an appropriate option for achieving the policy objective.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 21 Table 5: Assessment of options for achieving the proposal’s objectives
Alternative options that did not satisfy Preferred the selection criteria option Non- regulatory Amend Criteria Status quo approaches RMA NPS Amend NES National consistency ~ ~ ~ ~ Manage effects of telecommunications ~ infrastructure Certainty of outcome ~ ~ ~ Local input ~ ~ Enables new telecommunications activities ~ ~ Cost-effective ~ ~ Timeliness of process ~ Reduced workload for councils and industry ~ ~ Key to table: Meets the criterion Does not meet the criterion ~ Partly meets the criterion
6.3 Non-regulatory approaches The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment could, through the use of voluntary measures, encourage and support district councils and telecommunications companies to develop consistent plan provisions and improve the processing of resource consents. There are a range of potential measures to support local government, which could include: issuing best practice guidelines on appropriate levels of permitted development for new telecommunications infrastructure, and how to develop appropriate district plan rules recommending protocols for consulting with affected parties on relevant resource consents partnership models to improve communication between district councils (planning and road controlling authority departments) and consent applicants issuing best practice guidelines on how to assess the potential effects of new telecommunications infrastructure on the built environment, and how to develop appropriate consent conditions and/or district plan rules. This approach could lead to greater consistency in how councils manage consenting requirements and the processing of consent applications for telecommunications infrastructure. Although this option would keep regulatory complexity to a minimum and allow greater flexibility for local decisions, there is no guarantee there would be significant improvement to the current situation. Without regulatory compulsion there is no guarantee councils would work together to provide national consistency. In essence, there is a risk that the status quo would prevail through a non-regulatory approach, and the objective would be unlikely to be achieved. Even if a non-regulatory approach did achieve national consistency, this approach would take significantly longer to implement. It may take up to 10 years for all councils to go through the process of plan changes. By this stage it is possible that much of the infrastructure would have already been completed, meaning the derived benefit would only apply to part of the UFB and RBI roll-out. Exactly how much development would have occurred will depend on the extension timeframes for UFB and
22 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities RBI roll-out, which are yet to be determined. Non-regulatory approaches are therefore not considered to be the most time-efficient option for achieving the policy objectives.
6.4 RMA amendment The RMA could be amended to clarify that councils need to explicitly provide for telecommunications infrastructure when preparing plans and making decisions on resource consents. However, the RMA is an enabling and broad-scale piece of legislation. Amending the head statute to accommodate specific matters as they arise would make the legislation unnecessarily complex. The RMA provides for more specific matters to be addressed through regulation-making powers (such as national environmental standards) for individual environmental management issues. Legislative amendments can be expensive and time consuming, for both central and local government, through the legislative development, select committee and submissions processes. In addition, it is more difficult to amend legislation if changes are needed at a later date (eg, if amendments are made to the Telecommunications Act). It would be an unnecessarily complex option to select for the amendments we are seeking to make. As with non-regulatory approaches, it is possible that much of the development would have already occurred by the time any RMA amendments came into force. The derived benefit would therefore only apply to part of the UFB and RBI roll-outs.
6.5 National policy statement Under Part 5 of the RMA the Minister for the Environment can issue a national policy statement (NPS) “to state objectives and policies on matters of national significance that are relevant to achieving the purpose of this Act”. Local authorities must then give effect to a NPS by amending regional policy statements and plans and having regard to the NPS in decision-making. A NPS could be prepared stating that enabling telecommunications infrastructure and services is a matter of national significance. This would give clear guidance to consent authorities that they need to make provision for this when making decisions on resource consents, and when preparing plans and regional policy statements. There are, however, limitations to the certainty of decision-making that could be achieved by a NPS alone. A NPS will not ensure there is national consistency at the required level of detail in the areas necessary for the roll-out of UFB and mobile infrastructure, because it can only state objectives and policies – not how to achieve them. As a result, a NPS alone cannot be sufficiently specific to ensure national consistency in the approach to allowing low-impact development in the road reserve. Further, although councils must have regard to a NPS when making a decision on a resource consent application (under section 104 of the RMA), to have full effect a NPS would need to be incorporated into the regional policy statement, then district plans. Therefore, it would be some time before the NPS could consistently enable telecommunications infrastructure.
6.6 Amended national environmental standard A national environmental standard (NES) can be more prescriptive instruments than a NPS and legislation. This provides some key benefits over other options. An extended NESTF would fulfil the policy objectives by providing certainty about the levels of permitted development provided for modern telecommunications in every local authority area in New Zealand. The NESTF requirements would remove any ambiguity over whether or not infrastructure equipment in the expanded scope would require resource consent or not.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 23 The updated NESTF will take precedence over the existing rules in every district plan in New Zealand. An immediate plan change would not be required for the expanded NESTF to become part of a district plan, although the NESTF will need to be eventually incorporated into district plans. Local authorities may choose to undertake a plan change process specifically to incorporate the new rules into their plan or through an unrelated plan change (ie, ‘piggy-backing’). The risks associated with this option remain the same as those identified in the previous section 32 report, which are: the potential environmental effects of telecommunications infrastructure the reduction in public participation in local decision-making. An assessment of the environmental effects of current methods of infrastructure deployment, which was commissioned as part of this evaluation, concluded that “with the exception of infrastructure in sensitive environments, most of the infrastructure and activities will have a low effect”. More than 96 per cent of foreseen effects are considered to have a less than minor environmental impact. The remaining effects, all classified as visual or amenity effects, were considered to be minor to moderate. The report did, however, highlight the cumulative effects of telecommunications infrastructure. When the same analysis was conducted to assess the cumulative effects, 24 per cent of the activities were considered to have a minor to moderate effect. These conclusions will be examined in more detail later in this report. These concerns have been managed in the existing NESTF in the following ways: the standards would only apply to low-impact activities the standards provide for the protection of matters of national importance and values identified by communities through district plans. In addition, the standards may contain links to district plan provisions, particularly for sensitive environments. Where specific values such as amenity or historic heritage have been identified as a local issue by the community, these values will continue to be preserved. It is appropriate that local input into identifying issues of importance to communities is through the plan process, and not on an ad hoc or case-by-case basis.
6.7 Uncertain or insufficient information Section 32(4)(b) of the RMA requires an evaluation to take account of the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter. The risks of acting and not acting have been refined through the discussion above.
6.7.1 Risks of not acting The existing NESTF does not cover many new and emerging telecommunications facilities, slowing down the process and increasing the time for telecommunications industries to get this infrastructure off the ground. In this sense, many of the risks identified in the section 32 evaluation for the existing NESTF remain and are impairing industry growth. The risks of not acting in this situation are: telecommunication networks may need to be rerouted to less optimal routes to comply with district plan rules and conditions, resulting in inefficiencies and network risk the introduction of new services may be delayed and may not be able to meet the deadlines for the UFB and RBI contracts
24 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities funds allocated for investment may be diverted to regulatory compliance, reducing investment expenditure new entrant operators may not be able to benefit from emerging new infrastructure technologies for building their networks if consenting delays the implementation of these technologies. The risks cannot be mitigated by continuing with the status quo.
6.7.2 Risks of acting The key risks of acting, as identified in the previous sections, are: the potential of new infrastructure to create adverse environmental effects the loss of local input in the decision-making process for telecommunications infrastructure. These risks can be mitigated by preserving significant areas, as identified in district plans. Through this preliminary section 32 evaluation and consultation approach we hope to receive additional feedback from the public on whether they believe the proposed amendments will adequately address the reduced local input in the decision-making process, and whether the risks of acting can be mitigated in any other way.
6.8 Conclusion The options assessment has identified that, while there are other options for achieving the policy objectives, the proposed amendments to the existing NESTF are the most appropriate means of achieving the policy objectives. The proposed amendments will ensure national consistency in decision-making and certainty of outcome, enable new telecommunications activities, be cost- effective and reduce workloads. While there are some risks associated with the proposed amendments, these can be mitigated through additional provisions in the NESTF and public consultation on this proposal.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 25 7 Efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed amendments
7.1 Overview Under section 32(1)(b)(ii) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities(NESTF) must be assessed for effectiveness and efficiency. The following is a preliminary assessment of effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed provisions. The assessment is based on information provided by local industry stakeholders, a high-level assessment of environmental effects, and other information obtained as part of the section 32 evaluation for the current NESTF. It is important to note that the information received is preliminary and incomplete, and so the information should be regarded as indicative only. The intention is that the consultation process will help further refine this assessment. In summary, the assessment has identified that the proposed amendments to the NESTF are the most effective and efficient means for achieving the objectives. The balance of costs and benefits shows that, while there are costs in implementing the proposed provisions – in particular, the potential environmental effects and reduction in public participation in decision-making – these are outweighed by the economic and social benefits of the proposal; namely, the time and cost savings to industry and local government, and the social benefits of providing improved telecommunications to the community faster, freeing up resources for further investment.
7.2 Effectiveness For the purposes of section 32, ‘effectiveness’ refers to the ability of a provision to meet the desired outcome or result. The fundamental question for assessing effectiveness is whether the provisions will achieve the outcome sought. To assess effectiveness, Table 6 evaluates the proposed amendments to the NESTF against the objective of this proposal. The proposed amendments have also been evaluated against the policy objectives of the current NESTF to ensure they are still fit for purpose and will help the current NESTF fully achieve its objectives. The evaluation identified that the proposed amendments will be effective in achieving the objectives of the proposed amendments and the original objectives of the NESTF. The proposed amendments will be more effective than the status quo in that they will widen the scope of telecommunications activities that are permitted under the NESTF, with particular regard to Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB) and mobile infrastructure. The proposed amendments will also be effective in helping the NESTF achieve its original policy objectives.
26 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Table 6: Evaluation of proposed provisions for effectiveness Object ives of the propos ed NESTF amend Propo ment Objectives of current NESTF sed Set an appropriate Contribute to a balance between amen Provide greater Assist in the Reduce the reduced council local participation consistency for a network and timeframe and workload in in community wider range of equipment design Reduce compliance lower the costs processing and planning and cost- dmen telecommunication and equipment costs and for the availability determining effective national s infrastructure sourcing for roll- timeframes for of new services to consent infrastructure ts and locations outs service providers consumers applications investment Increase the The proposed The proposed The proposed The proposed The proposed The proposed
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 27 scope of amendments will amendments will amendments will amendments will amendments will amendments will permitted enable assist in network further reduce reduce contribute to seek to set an activities telecommunication and equipment compliance costs timeframes and reduced workload appropriate through: s cables and mobile design through and timeframes for lower costs for for councils balance between (a)introducing infrastructure to be freeing up time service providers consumers by through removing local participation new installed in a and costs to invest by removing the being able to processing time and investment by provisions nationally in other requirement to deploy and resources for considering consistent way, infrastructure. obtain resource telecommunicatio resource consents whether certain (b)amending reducing costs and consent for ns infrastructure where activities areas can continue existing time delays. This telecommunication faster and not are permitted to be protected provisions will provide s activities in some needing to pass (note that further through district operators with districts, or to regulatory costs information about plan overlays. This certainty and comply with on to consumers. the processing will further consistency in permitted activity delays is being strengthen decision-making conditions. sought through existing provisions and aid the consultation to in the NESTF. national ensure this Information on deployment of objective can be this is being telecommunication met). sought through s infrastructure. the consultation process.
28 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications Facilities 7.3 Efficiency Section 32(1)(b)(ii) of the RMA requires an assessment of the efficiency of the proposed provisions. The assessment must identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for (i) economic growth and (ii) employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced. If practicable, the benefits and costs must be quantified. However, benefits and costs can also be qualitative where quantification is not possible. This section presents the findings of the preliminary efficiency assessment. In summary, the analysis shows, relative to the scale of costs and benefits, the proposed amendments are an efficient approach to achieve the objectives of the NESTF and to help address the identified problems.
7.3.1 Assessment approach The efficiency of the proposed amendments to the NESTF has been assessed by balancing the benefits and costs of the proposed amendments. Information about the costs and benefits has been gathered through preliminary consultation with industry, councils and environmental planners. At this stage, many of the costs and benefits have not been quantified for a number of reasons, including the following: Many of the benefits of the proposed amendments relate to the benefits of UFB and Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI) programmes generally. The actual net benefits to the economy of facilitating the roll-out of UFB, RBI and forth generation ( 4G-LTE) mobile upgrades through the proposed amendments, however, are currently unknown. The UFB and RBI will occur regardless of whether or not the proposed amendments are introduced. As such, many of the benefits relate to facilitating a faster roll-out of UFB, RBI and mobile to enable the industry and consumers to realise the benefits of these programmes sooner. Territorial authorities were unable to provide estimates of the financial benefits of the proposed amendments within the timeframe available, so estimates can only be made based on known processing costs and expected future consent applications (this will be further refined through consultation). The assessment of environmental effects is based on a general high-level review of the anticipated effects of UFB and 4G-LTE mobile infrastructure. It does not address the environmental effects of infrastructure in specific environments, such as sensitive or high-amenity areas. Further, environmental effects can only be assessed in a qualitative way, with no attempt made to quantify the value of the environment. The costs of the loss of public participation in community planning can only be assessed in a qualitative way and the actual effects are not well known. Public participation is provided through making submissions on plan changes or publicly notified consents. The effect of the amendment would be experienced predominantly in the consenting process, but would be tempered due to the likelihood that when resource consent is needed under the status quo, it is more likely than not to have been processed on a non-notified basis. These limitations and how they have been addressed are further discussed throughout this evaluation. The intention is for this cost–benefit analysis to be further refined following the consultation process. Data gained from submissions will be analysed in order to conduct a more complete and up-to-date cost–benefit analysis that will inform the case for amending the NESTF.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 29 7.3.2 Effects of proposed amendments To undertake the cost–benefit analysis, the economic, environmental, social and cultural effects of the proposal were identified in comparison to the status quo. Table 7 outlines the positive and negative effects that have been identified in relation to the status quo. Note that many of these effects will be a combination of environmental, economic, social or cultural effects, but they have been grouped in the area that is considered most relevant. The effects are further assessed in the following section. Table 7: Environmental, economic, social and cultural effects of the amendments to the NESTF as compared to the status quo
BENEFITS Realising the benefits of UFB and the RBI sooner: the New Zealand Economic economy will be able to realise the estimated $32.8 billion financial benefits over 20 years sooner. Cost savings for the telecommunications industry: the Economic telecommunications industry will be able to save costs spent on reviewing district plans and plan changes, applying for resource consents, attending hearings and complying with consent conditions. Reduced processing delays: telecommunications infrastructure will be Economic able to be installed faster without regulatory delays caused by rules in district plans and resource consent processing times. Reduced local government expenditure on resource consenting: councils Economic will save time and resources that would otherwise have been spent processing resource consents and ensuring compliance with consent conditions. Cost savings for the end consumer: regulatory costs will not need to be Economic, social passed on to the ultimate consumer, enabling them to have access to improved telecommunications services. Increased certainty and national consistency: telecommunications Economic, social providers and consumers will have increased certainty and national consistency in provision. COSTS Potential for moderate cumulative environmental effects: the cumulative Environmental environmental effects of telecommunications infrastructure could be moderate, particularly in sensitive environments. Dilution of public participation in community planning: the ability of the Social public to be involved in community planning decisions relating to telecommunications infrastructure will be reduced for those activities that are permitted. Policy development and implementation: there will be increased costs for Economic central government to develop and implement the proposed changes. Potential cost and resources spent on amending district plans: if the Economic amendments include reference to special protected areas in district plans, councils may have to spend time and resources updating their district plans to account for these areas. Proposed changes may enable infrastructure to be developed in Cultural culturally sensitive areas: this will only occur if these areas are not protected through additional proposed provisions. Reduction in amenity: there is the potential for reduction in amenity for Environmental residents and the community, particularly when the cumulative effects are considered.
30 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Reduced employment opportunities: the proposed amendments could Economic, social potentially reduce employment opportunities in both industry and local government by reducing the requirement for resource consent processing.
7.4 Economic
7.4.1 Economic growth The major benefit of the roll-out of RBI, UFB and mobile infrastructure in general is that it will provide improved and cheaper services to industries and New Zealand citizens. For example, an Alcatel-Lucent study found that in New Zealand the economic benefits to New Zealand end users of high-speed broadband applications will amount to $32.8 billion over 20 years. This only addresses the net benefits from upgraded high-speed broadband, but being able to deliver on this broadband faster and with minimal regulatory delays would also result in an economic benefit to New Zealand. While this benefit will be of a smaller magnitude than the net benefits of UFB and RBI, it will not be insignificant.
7.4.2 Cost savings for the telecommunications industry Information was sought from industry on the economic benefits of the proposed permitted activities. In general, consistent consenting requirements will result in more certainty for network operators. Improved certainty will enable operators to purchase equipment and commence site designs earlier, making their operations more efficient. It will also mean reduced time and resources spent reviewing and interpreting district plans and applying for varying resource consents nationally, cost savings through not needing to apply for resource consents, and time efficiencies. Table 8 provides an example of the costs currently faced by the telecommunications industry under the status quo. The following section discusses the benefits to the industry of reducing these costs through the proposed amendments. Table 8: Example savings that could be met by a large telecommunications operator under the amended NESTF
Resource consent Additional processing Reviewing district plans applications Appeals time $100,000 annually $4,800 to $14,000 per > $200,000 per appeal ~3 months per consent application
Telecommunications cables / UFB network While many of the consents required for the initial phase of the UFB build will be in place before the NESTF amendments, the expansions to the project mean the NESTF would still result in significant savings. There are up to 37 areas that have been announced as potential UFB extension candidate areas, covering 28 local authorities and over 30 district plans. Resource consent for aerial telecommunications cables is required in 19 of these areas. The remaining 21 plans that ‘permit’ aerial deployment are likely to impose a range of different conditions. There are considerable costs associated with reviewing plans and preparing applications for consent where such variation exists.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 31 Mobile network / RBI In addition, critical equipment roll-outs and upgrades will be required over the coming years. For example, to upgrade existing sites to operate over the new 700 MHz spectrum band because the required equipment does not fit under the existing NESTF provisions, making the actual potential savings much higher. All three mobile network operators expect an increase in their resource consenting costs if amendments to the NESTF are not made. Network operators’ involvement in council planning processes can also be a costly exercise. For example, two operators jointly spend between $350,000 and $400,000 per year reviewing district plans, and have spent $275,000 to date submitting on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. They expect further involvement in the Auckland planning process to cost up to $1 million. Each network operator may save around $100,000 per year reviewing and submitting on plans, bearing in mind that they will still have to review plans for activities not covered by the proposed NESTF. The expansion of the RBI will see the potential benefits of the NESTF extended even further. While policies are yet to be determined, there could be another 100 to 200 rural towers built under the RBI. Hypothetically, based on the analysis undertaken by Jacobs SKM, this could mean that 56 per cent (112) of the new towers would require a resource consent, costing the telecommunications operators an estimated $1,586,000. There are additional cost savings that would accrue as a result of the NESTF. The conditions attached to the permitted activity would be consistent across all regions, meaning telecommunications operators would be able to achieve certainty and economies of scale when planning their roll-out. This would result in additional savings, meaning the Government’s $100 million fund to extend the RBI could reach more people across rural New Zealand. While the proposed amendments are expected to generally benefit the telecommunications industry, some operators may face increased costs in some areas as a result of the changes. Costs will occur where the amended NESTF results in more stringent regulation for activities than is provided in district plans (eg, district plans may have more permissive conditions for permitted activities, or no conditions at all, than the proposed NESTF). This will apply in a minority of local authority districts, and is expected to be less significant than the opposite effect of benefit for industry from reduced and more consistent regulation country-wide.
7.4.3 Local government The proposed changes to the NESTF would likely result in financial benefits to local government as a result of reduced resource consent processing and compliance costs and workload. In assessing the benefits to local government, we were advised by local government members of the Technical Advisory Group that it would not be possible for councils to provide the type of information we sought within the available timeframe. Instead, we have ensured that this information can be collected through the consultation process by including additional questions for councils in the discussion document. Previous analysis conducted for the establishment of the current NESTF, however, indicated that councils may save around $1,300 per resource consent avoided. As an example, assuming 100 to 200 new rural towers will be built for the RBI network, and 56 per cent of these (112) will require resource consent, this could be a saving for local governments of $145,600. This does not take into account higher costs for notified resource consents and hearings. The proposed changes may also result in costs to local government to implement the changes, which will involve updating and training staff, particularly those processing applications. Territorial authorities may also need to update district plans to protect significant areas to align with the proposed amendments (if the amendments include specific protection for these areas). Preliminary
32 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities consultation with some councils has highlighted concerns about the costs of plan changes for areas of cultural or heritage value, and for natural hazard zones. The discussion document proposes that plan overlays, detailing areas where the proposed standards in the NESTF are not appropriate, may not have been developed by many councils. These plan overlays may be costly to develop and may not be available for the commencement of the amended NESTF. More feedback is requested from councils in order to better understand the costs and timeframes to councils in developing these overlays. Councils will also lose the option of controlling the visual and disruptive impacts of deploying cables and antennas, as proposed by the amendments to the NESTF. They may also face increased costs from managing road space between competing users, and for adjusting their district plans to be consistent with the amended NESTF, if introduced. There were concerns from some councils that amending the NESTF would result in costs associated with updating their plans to align with the NESTF. Councils do not have to do this immediately and may incorporate it into any other relevant plan change. However, a council undertaking a plan change specifically to incorporate the amended NESTF might incur an estimated one-off cost of $80,000 to $100,000. The Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications Facilitie: Discussion Document (discussion document) will provide councils with an opportunity to assess these assumptions further and to provide a better indication of likely costs and savings.
7.4.4 Central government The central government will incur costs as a result of amending the NESTF, which would not result from the status quo. These costs will be the costs associated with developing and implementing new legislation, including hearing and addressing submissions. These costs have not yet been quantified.
7.4.5 Residents The analysis conducted for the establishment of the NESTF in 2008 found evidence on the relationship between cellular facilities and property values to be mixed. While media reports and qualitative surveys of residents at the time suggested an expectation of substantial price falls following the installation of cell towers, quantitative analysis of actual transaction data suggested the negative impact is small and falls away rapidly with distance from the site. The perceived reduction in value from close location of towers is much greater than that realised across the neighbourhoods in which they are located. It is also greater in cases where tower location attracts a lot of media interest in the locality. The release of a discussion document will provide an opportunity to assess whether values have changed significantly since the establishment of the original NESTF. Given the rising popularity of smartphone use, and the expectation for cell phone connectivity, there may in fact be an opposing effect, such that reduced or bad mobile connectivity in a region has a negative effect on property values. The current analysis does not quantify such property value effects because: property value effects are often not considered in national cost–benefit assessment the facilities that are the main subject of the NESTF amendment are considered to have a less than minor, to a minor to moderate, environmental impact (the discussion document will provide residents with the opportunity to comment on these assumptions) attempting to model impacts on a geographical basis would be complex, costly and provide marginally useful information for a cost–benefit analysis.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 33 7.5 Environmental effects In order to assess the proposed amendments, a high-level review was undertaken of the environmental effects of installing telecommunications infrastructure across New Zealand. This review of effects was based on the RMA section 3 meaning of ‘effect’:
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, the term effect includes— (a) any positive or adverse effect; and (b) any temporary or permanent effect; and (c) any past, present, or future effect, and (d) any cumulative effect which arises over time or in combination with other effects – regardless of the scale, intensity, duration, or frequency of the effect, and also includes – (e) any potential effect of high probability; and (f) any potential effect of low probability which has a high potential impact. Telecommunications infrastructure is required wherever services are provided, so a large number of people will be affected in some way or another. The assessment of effects undertaken was generic, based on each piece of UFB and mobile infrastructure and the associated installation activities. The environmental effects were concentrated in two areas: the installation/construction phase, and permanent amenity effects. The key environmental effects are assessed below.
7.5.1 Installation/construction effects Environmental effects from the installation of telecommunications and mobile network infrastructure include: earthworks effects from trenching, and in some cases micro-trenching, including dust noise vibration land stability/erosion water quality and stormwater effects from sediment run-off traffic congestion and access effects during installation activities. Effects related to installation, specifically in relation to earthworks and traffic management, are temporary and can be managed and mitigated with appropriate control measures. Installation activities and earthworks are common in the built-up environment and tend to be focused on modest and discrete areas, so that the effect on people would be temporary and generally of a low level.
7.5.2 Permanent effects The ongoing permanent effects of telecommunications and mobile networks infrastructure include: permanent visual amenity effects from above-ground structures, including above-ground cables, above-ground cabinets, masts and antennas – the extent of visual amenity effect on the community will be increased with the visual clutter created cumulatively due to infrastructure. Note: there will be no permanent visual effects from underground cables and cabinets and their installation activities (such as trenching).
34 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 7.5.3 Overall effects Overall, the environmental effects from each piece of telecommunications infrastructure individually, and their installation activities, tend to be low (less than minor or negligible). However, cumulative visual effects of above-ground infrastructure were found to be greater (minor or more than minor). Note that under the consent process, when effects are more than minor, the consent is publically notified. Also, visual effects in the urban environment will largely be related to visual clutter from infrastructure. In the rural environment a single piece of infrastructure (mast and antenna) and the associated accessway created could create moderate visual effects. Note that the level of effect determined was generic and may be more or less significant depending on the local environment. The visual effects are unlikely to result in any quantifiable cost to the community. The risk of proliferation of telecommunication cables is considered to be low. Given the high capacity of these cables and the high costs of deployment, telecommunications operators have a big incentive to deploy as few cables as possible to meet demand. Appropriate mitigations for the proposals can ensure any environmental effects remain minor. Also, the risk of cumulative effects is low for two reasons. First, infrastructure can be expensive to install, providing an incentive for telecommunications network operators to design efficient networks that avoid installing more equipment than is necessary. Second, cumulative effects can be effectively mitigated via conditions on permitted activities proposed in the NESTF. For example, the installation of aerial cables is only permitted where aerial lines already exist. Insensitive siting of such structures in places that obscure sightlines or detract from the street appeal of properties is a potential concern. This will be mitigated by minimum separation distances (already in the current NESTF) and requirements to comply with performance standards in existing district plans. Through the district plan process the community has had the opportunity to identify whether the potential effects on amenity from street clutter is an issue for them. The extent to which residents have any effective say in that process is, however, difficult to judge. The level of response on previous RMA and other local government consultation has demonstrated that most residents are not active in trying to influence decisions, except where it affects them directly. Therefore, these effects are expected to be minimal. Comments on this assessment are welcome via the discussion document regarding this proposal and mitigations for these activities.
7.6 Social effects There are many social effects that arise as a result of fast, reliable broadband infrastructure. Education, health care, communities and small business all stand to gain from improved communications technologies. The NESTF will ensure that these benefits can be realised sooner, as well as ensuring the UFB and RBI programmes can reach as many people as possible. While these effects cannot always be quantified, some of the potential applications and benefits that could be furthered by fibre networks include the following: Business: businesses will have an improved capability to expand and compete globally through greater access to research and development, and investment, and greater ability to collaborate with customers, supplier and partners in real time. Health: new applications and improved health services over broadband are likely to make it easier to identify and treat people through electronic health records, to open up the ability for people to be diagnosed and treated from a distance, to allow people to better assess their personal health and know when to seek medical advice, and to ameliorate social isolation in older people and enable them to stay in their homes longer.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 35 Education: broadband in schools delivers a broad curriculum regardless of where a child lives, and promotes digital literacy. Environment: ultra-fast broadband promotes the development of technologies that enable better monitoring of the environment to assist the agricultural sector with crop care, and the development of more sustainable and environmentally friendly living practices through the use of devices that encourage smarter and more efficient use of resources (eg, smart cars and smart meters/grids). Quality of life: broadband enables other increases in quality of life through better enabling flexible working practices such as remote working, social networking, the ability to make better buying decisions online and the promotion of more sustainable living practices. Aside from the social benefits, there are also social costs. Under the current structure, local residents can be involved in the decision-making process for telecommunications infrastructure not currently covered by the NESTF. Local residents can be involved through making submissions on their district plans and making submissions on notified resource consents or resource consents where they are considered an affected party. The proposed amendments to the NESTF will reduce the ability of residents to comment on proposals or rules that may affect them. This effect will be mitigated by protecting sensitive areas, as identified in district plans. However, the discussion document will provide people with an opportunity to comment further on this, and whether or not it is perceived that the proposed amendments constitute a significant loss to residents.
7.7 Cultural effects The cultural impacts of the proposals are considered to be very limited. There is a risk that permitting a wider range of activities will mean that telecommunications infrastructure may be installed in areas of cultural or heritage value, where they should not be. Regulation 6 of the existing NESTF provides that a district plan’s rules need to be complied with if consent is already required for works within the drip line of a tree, or where the adjacent site is accorded specific protection under the relevant district plan, such as for historic heritage, visual amenity or coastal protection. The existing NESTF allows these district plan rules to be more stringent than the standards in the NESTF. If the plan’s rules are not complied with, then resource consent may be required. Regulation 6 was intended to preserve existing district plan rules relating to protecting trees and vegetation, historic heritage values, visual amenity values and the coastal marine area. It is not intended to create new consenting requirements where none previously existed. Under the existing NESTF, district plan rules relating to historic heritage values, visual amenity values and the coastal marine area must specifically relate to network utility structures in road reserves (not just the adjacent land) for these to be applicable under Regulation 6. It is not proposed that the application of Regulation 6 to the existing standards in the NESTF be changed. These existing protection provisions relate to the status of the adjacent site. However, in extending the scope of the NESTF to a wider range of infrastructure and beyond the road reserve, it is important to ensure that cultural impacts for the new proposed permitted activities are also managed.
7.8 Conclusion Preliminary consultation with industry, territorial authorities and environmental planners indicates that there will be a substantial net benefit from adopting the proposed amendments to the NESTF. Although there are costs associated with potential environmental effects and the loss of public
36 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities participation in decision-making, these can be mitigated through further refinement of the proposal. For this reason, it is important to obtain more data from key stakeholders. The discussion document will provide an opportunity to gather this information. Data gained from submissions will be analysed in order to conduct a more complete and up-to-date cost–benefit analysis that will inform the case for amending the NESTF.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 37 8 Summary of evaluation
A preliminary section 32 evaluation has been undertaken to test the efficiency, effectiveness and risk of the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities(NESTF). The proposed amendments have been assessed against the status quo of keeping the current NESTF provisions unchanged. The evaluation has found that the proposed amendments would ensure that the objectives of the NESTF could be fully achieved to enable the delivery of the current communication infrastructure, including the development of the Ultra-Fast Broadband and mobile infrastructure. Further, the proposed amendments are considered compatible with the current policy objectives, which would remain in the event the amendments are adopted, consistent with section 32(3) of the Resource Management Act 1991. The preliminary cost–benefit analysis suggests that, on balance, the proposed amendments would provide the most cost-efficient means for achieving the policy objectives. There are some risks associated with acting in this instance, and these risks mainly relate to the potential cumulative environmental effects of the proposed amendments and the loss of public participation in community planning decisions.
38 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Appendix A: Information sources
Alcatel-Lucent. 2012. Building the Benefits of High-speed Broadband for New Zealanders. Retrieved from: www.alcatel-lucent.com/press/2012/002592. Jacobs SKM. 2014. Environmental Effects of Implementing Ultra-Fast Broadband, Innovation and Employment. Prepared for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment by Jacobs SKM. Wellington: Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Ministry for the Environment. 2015. Outcome Evaluation of the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 39 Appendix B: Relevant sections of the Resource Management Act 1991
Section 32. Requirements for preparing and publishing evaluation reports (1) An evaluation report required under this Act must— (a) examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal being evaluated are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this Act; and (b) examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives by— (i) identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives; and (ii) assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the objectives; and (iii) summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions; and (c) contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposal. (2) An assessment under subsection (1)(b)(ii) must— (a) identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for— (i) economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and (ii) employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and (b) if practicable, quantify the benefits and costs referred to in paragraph (a); and (c) assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the provisions. (3) If the proposal (an amending proposal) will amend a standard, statement, regulation, plan, or change that is already proposed or that already exists (an existing proposal), the examination under subsection (1)(b) must relate to— (a) the provisions and objectives of the amending proposal; and (b) the objectives of the existing proposal to the extent that those objectives— (i) are relevant to the objectives of the amending proposal; and (ii) would remain if the amending proposal were to take effect.
Section 43. Regulations prescribing national environmental standards (1) The Governor-General may, by Order in Council, make regulations, to be known as national environmental standards, that prescribe any or all of the following technical standards, methods, or requirements: (a) standards for the matters referred to in section 9, section 11, section 12, section 13, section 14, or section 15, including, but not limited to— (i) contaminants (ii) water quality, level, or flow
40 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (iii) air quality (iv) soil quality in relation to the discharge of contaminants (b) standards for noise (c) standards, methods, or requirements for monitoring. (2) The regulations may include: (a) qualitative or quantitative standards (b) standards for any discharge or the ambient environment (c) methods for classifying a natural or physical resource (d) methods, processes, or technology to implement standards (e) exemptions from standards (f) transitional provisions for standards, methods, or requirements. (3) Section 360(2) applies to all regulations made under this section.
Section 43A. Contents of national environmental standards (1) National environmental standards may— (a) prohibit an activity: (b) allow an activity: (c) restrict the making of a rule or the granting of a resource consent to matters specified in a national environmental standard: (d) require a person to obtain a certificate from a specified person stating that an activity complies with a term or condition imposed by a national environmental standard: (e) specify, in relation to a rule made before the commencement of a national environmental standard,— (i) the extent to which any matter to which the standard applies continues to have effect; or (ii) the time period during which any matter to which the standard applies continues to have effect: (f) require local authorities to review, under section 128(1), all or any of the permits to which paragraph (ba) of that subsection applies as soon as practicable or within the time specified in a national environmental standard. (2) A national environmental standard that prohibits an activity— (a) may do one or both of the following: (i) state that a resource consent may be granted for the activity, but only on the terms or conditions specified in the standard; and (ii) require compliance with the rules in a plan or proposed plan as a term or condition; or (b) may state that the activity is a prohibited activity. (3) If an activity has significant adverse effects on the environment, a national environmental standard must not, under subsections (1)(b) and (4),— (a) allow the activity, unless it states that a resource consent is required for the activity; or (b) state that the activity is a permitted activity. (4) A national environmental standard that allows an activity— (a) may state that a resource consent is not required for the activity; or
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 41 (b) may do one or both of the following: (i) state that the activity is a permitted activity, but only on the terms or conditions specified in the standard; and (ii) require compliance with the rules in a plan or proposed plan as a term or condition. (5) If a national environmental standard allows an activity and states that a resource consent is not required for the activity, or states that an activity is a permitted activity, the following provisions apply to plans and proposed plans: (a) a plan or proposed plan may state that the activity is a permitted activity on the terms or conditions specified in the plan; and (b) the terms or conditions specified in the plan may deal only with effects of the activity that are different from those dealt with in the terms or conditions specified in the standard; and (c) if a plan’s terms or conditions deal with effects of the activity that are the same as those dealt with in the terms or conditions specified in the standard, the terms or conditions in the standard prevail. (6) A national environmental standard that allows a resource consent to be granted for an activity — (a) may state that the activity is— (i) a controlled activity; or (ii) a restricted discretionary activity; or (iii) a discretionary activity; or (iv) a non-complying activity; and (b) may state the matters over which— (i) control is reserved; or (ii) discretion is restricted. (7) A national environmental standard may specify the activities for which the consent authority— (a) must give public notification of an application for a resource consent: (b) is precluded from giving public notification of an application for a resource consent: (c) is precluded from giving limited notification of an application for a resource consent.
42 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Appendix C: Proposed amendments
Table AC1: Proposed new permitted activities with associated standards Permitted activities Aerial distribution Aerial placement of telecommunications cables by a telecommunications operator over road reserve and other land, including all necessary ancillary equipment, subject to the following conditions: no additional poles are installed there is existing aerial cabling using the poles to be used for the new telecommunications cables (for electricity or telecommunications or other utilities) the diameter of the new cabling does not exceed 30 mm cables use existing crossing and corridors (ie, no new road crossings may be installed). Necessary associated earthworks and ancillary equipment affixed to poles may include (but is not limited to) fibre access terminals, fibre coils or loops, protection guards, ducting, and aerial to underground connections. Ongoing operation and maintenance of the network is permitted. Relocation and/or replacement of poles where necessary for structural or safety reasons may be up to 3 m from the original location. Aerial Aerial provisioning of telecommunications cables by a telecommunications operator is permitted, including all necessary ancillary equipment, subject to the following provisioning conditions: no additional poles are installed in the road reserve the aerial provisioning uses existing crossing and corridors (ie, no new road crossings are installed) the diameter of the new cabling, including hybrid solutions such as a copper-fibre hybrid cable, does not exceed 30 mm. Necessary associated earthworks and ancillary equipment affixed to poles may include (but is not limited to) fibre access terminals, fibre coils or loops, protection guards, ducting, and aerial to underground connections. Ongoing operation and maintenance of the network is permitted. Relocation and/or replacement of poles where necessary for structural or safety reasons may be up to 3 m from the original location. Underground Underground placement of telecommunications cables by a distribution telecommunications operator is permitted, including any necessary drilling and trenching and associated earthworks and underground ancillary equipment, including (but not limited to) ducting, feeder breakout points, and hand holes or plinths. Underground Underground provisioning of telecommunications cables by a provisioning telecommunications operator is permitted, including any necessary drilling and trenching and associated earthworks and underground ancillary equipment, including (but not limited to) ducting, feeder breakout points, and hand holes or plinths. Antennas on The placement of antennas on the roof or side of a building is permitted, subject to multi-storey the following conditions: buildings the building is no less than 15 m high
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 43 Permitted activities rooftop antennas do not extend beyond 5 m higher than the part of the building to which they are attached the diameter of the antenna at its widest point does not exceed 0.8 m. Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antennas. Associated cabinets with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m high are permitted. All other equipment necessary for the operation of the antenna, such as the mast or other support structure, feeder cables and ancillary antennas, is permitted. Antennas in rural The placement of an antenna in an area zoned rural in the relevant district plan is areas permitted, subject to the following conditions: the total height (of the mast and antenna) does not exceed 25 m the diameter of the structure at its widest point (excluding the concrete plinth) does not exceed 6 m the site is not a scheduled site or area subject to any special rules (eg, landscape provisions for outstanding natural landscapes or outstanding natural features) the antenna is not located closer than 50 m from the boundary of an area zoned residential the antenna is not located closer than 50 m from the closest external wall of a dwelling in a sensitive land-use area lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antenna all equipment necessary for the operation and security of the antenna, such as the mast or other support structure, casing or coverings, feeder cables, ancillary antennas, cabinets, security equipment, fences, handrails, and steps or ramps, is permitted the support structure is coloured recessive grey or recessive green if any earthworks are required to prepare the site: the earthworks do not occur closer than 20 m from the nearest waterbody the ground must be reinstated within 72 hours if any vegetation clearance (trimming or removal) is required to prepare the site: the tree(s) must not be scheduled any indigenous vegetation must be reinstated or replaced within the practicable vicinity of the site. New masts to The installation of a new mast with antennas attached in the road reserve is carry antennas in permitted, subject to the following condition: the total height and width of the mast and antenna are no larger the road reserve than they would have been if installed in accordance with Regulation 7 (of the existing NESTF) on an existing utility structure within 100 m of the installation site. If there are multiple poles in the 100 m radius, operators must take the average of the poles . Co-location of Increasing the total height of an existing mast and antenna by up to 5 m is permitted, multiple subject to the following conditions: telecommunicatio one or more additional telecommunications operators place an antenna on the existing mast at the time the height is increased
44 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Permitted activities ns operators’ the area is not zoned residential in the relevant district plan antennas the existing mast and antenna are lawfully established (i.e., authorised by a regulation, plan or consent under the RMA) this provision is not applied to a single site more than once telecommunications operators cannot exercise this right of activity until they have disclosed their co-location agreement with the relevant local authority and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antenna. An additional cabinet with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m high housing the necessary equipment of the additional telecommunications operator(s) may be installed at the site. Additional ancillary equipment (such as feeder cables) on the outside of the support structure is permitted. Replacement of Replacing an existing antenna with a larger antenna capable of operating over existing antennas additional or new spectrum bands is permitted, subject to the following conditions: to improve the total height of the replacement infrastructure (mast and service or operate antenna) is no more than 2 m higher than total height of the on additional or existing infrastructure new spectrum the diameter of the replacement antenna is no more than the bands such as the diameter of the existing antenna plus 50% new 700 MHz the diameter of any existing mast is extended no more than the spectrum band diameter of the existing mast plus 30% the existing mast and antenna is lawfully established (i.e., authorised by a regulation, plan or consent under the RMA). Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antennas. An additional cabinet with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m high housing the necessary equipment of the additional telecommunications operator(s) may be installed at the site. Additional ancillary equipment (such as feeder cables) on the outside of the support structure is permitted. Additional Installation of additional antennas at a telecommunications operator’s existing site (ie, on an existing mast on which that telecommunications operator has an existing antennas at antenna) to ensure that the site is capable of operating over additional or new existing sites to spectrum bands is permitted, subject to the following conditions: improve service the total height of the replacement infrastructure (mast and or operate on antenna) is no more than 2 m higher than the total height of the additional or new existing infrastructure spectrum bands the total diameter of the headframe of the structure at its widest such as the new point is no more than the diameter of the existing structure plus 700 MHz 100% spectrum band the diameter of any existing mast at its widest is extended no more than the diameter of the existing mast plus 30% the area is not zoned residential in the relevant district plan the existing mast and antenna are lawfully established (i.e., authorised by a regulation, plan or consent under the RMA). Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antenna.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 45 Permitted activities An additional cabinet with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m high housing the necessary equipment of the additional telecommunications operator(s) may be installed at the site. Additional ancillary equipment (such as feeder cables) on the outside of the support structure is permitted. Small-cell units in Installation of a small-cell unit on a structure (eg, bus stop, cabinet, traffic pole, signage, light pole) and all ancillary equipment necessary for the operation of the the road reserve small-cell unit (eg, mounts, cables, combiner/junction boxes) by a telecommunications operator within the road reserve is permitted, subject to the following condition: the small-cell unit and the ancillary equipment do not exceed a volumetric dimension of 0.11 m3 (eg, 700 mm h x 500 mm w x 300 mm d). Small-cell units on Installation of a small-cell unit on private land (eg, on the outside of a building) and all ancillary equipment necessary for the operation of the small-cell unit (eg, mounts, private land (eg, cables, combiner/junction boxes) by a telecommunications operator is permitted, on the outside of subject to the following condition: buildings) the small-cell unit and the ancillary equipment do not exceed a volumetric dimension of 0.11 m3 (eg, 700 mm h x 500 mm w x 300 mm d).
46 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities Table AC2: Proposed amendments to standards for existing permitted activities Amendments Location of A replacement utility structure may be moved to within a replacement utility 3 m radius of the original utility structure location, provided structures the structure is still located on the road reserve. Size envelope for The antenna(s) – excluding the mount, if there is one, and antennas the shroud, if there is one, and ancillary equipment, if there is any – must fit within the dimensions of a cylindrical shape that, when measured along the centre line of the mast (new structure, original utility structure or replacement utility structure), is not more than 3.5 m high and no more than 0.7 m in diameter. The height of the replacement utility structure must be no more than the original utility structure’s highest point plus the lesser of 3.5 m or 35%. Size of replacement The replacement utility structure must not have a diameter utility structure that is more than the original utility structure’s diameter at (including the its largest point plus 100%. antenna and the mast) Clarification of per ‘Site’ will be defined as an area where cabinets are located. ‘site’ terminology The requirement that each site must be located a minimum of 30 m from another site will remain unchanged. Time for cabinets to Two cabinets on the same side of the road may be located within 30 m of each other, but more than 500 mm apart, as a permitted activity subject to the be replaced following conditions: the purpose of the new cabinet is to replace the existing cabinet the existing cabinet must be removed no later than 12 months following installation of the replacement cabinet. Additional cabinets This condition applies if two or more cabinets are located at the same site in a road reserve next to land that a relevant district plan or proposed district plan classifies as primarily for residential activities. Each cabinet’s footprint must be no more than 1.4 m². The total footprint of all the cabinets must be no more than 2 m². The distance between each cabinet and the cabinet or cabinets closest to it must be no more than 500 mm. The cabinets must be no higher than the height of the concrete foundation plinths, if there are any, plus 1.8 m. Incorporation by Replace reference to NZS 6609.2:1990 Radiofrequency reference Radiation – Principles and Methods of Measurement – 300 kHz to 100 GHz with reference to AS/NZS 2772.2:2011 Radiofrequency Fields Part 2: Principles and Methods of Measurement and Computation – 3 kHz to 300 GHz. Amendment of To expand the conditions under section 6 to include all new section 6 – protection activities (in and outside the road reserve) covered by the
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 47 zones amended NESTF and adding a provision that would allow zones classified as ‘natural hazard zones’ to be exempt from the NESTF.
48 Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities