Building Canada s Advanced Wireless Networks: Protocol Development

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Building Canada s Advanced Wireless Networks: Protocol Development"

Karen Carroll
5 years ago
Views:

1 Building Canada s Advanced Wireless Networks: Protocol Development Meeting with Markham Development Services Committee May 20,

Origins of this meeting Development Services Committee resolved to hold this meeting while considering Bell s proposal for a 20 m monopole on January 14 Bell s proposal was adjourned

2 Origins of this meeting Development Services Committee resolved to hold this meeting while considering Bell s proposal for a 20 m monopole on January 14 Bell s proposal was adjourned to this meeting While Bell is looking forward to having their opportunity to ask Council for concurrence, they recognize that today s meeting is meant to focus on protocol development 2

3 The Rules Federally Regulated Municipal and Provincial regulation may not impair the development or operation of wireless facilities. In other words, the normal planning approval process does not apply nor do these facilities require Building Permits To fill the vacuum created by federal jurisdiction, Industry Canada has put in place requirements that ensure local land-use review and consultation as part of its licensing process 3

The Rules Provincial Policy Statement Requirements 1.

4 The Rules Provincial Policy Statement Requirements Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by: g) ensuring that necessary infrastructure, are or will be available to meet current and projected needs; Infrastructure is defined to include communications/ telecommunications facilities 4

5 The Rules Spectrum Licenses The wireless carriers operate pursuant to spectrum licenses Spectrum licenses permit the deployment of wireless infrastructure subject to meeting certain mandatory conditions These conditions of license include ongoing compliance with: CPC CPC Health Canada s Safety Code 6 5

6 The Rules CPC Requires consultation with the relevant land use authority for wireless facilities that are not exempt Prohibits construction of a wireless facility without land use authority "concurrence" Sets out clear exemptions from the need to consult Creates a written dispute resolution process at the option of the proponent 6

7 The Rules CPC Provides authority for municipal protocols and requires that proponents follow the protocol unless its provisions are deemed by Industry Canada to be unreasonable Creates specific opportunities for local policy direction with respect to wireless facility development Where there is no protocol, or where the protocol is deemed to be unreasonable, Industry Canada's default process applies 7

8 The Rules CPC Sets out a detailed methodology for colocation of wireless facilities including provisions that may require a tower owner to allow another wireless proponent on their antenna support structure 8

9 The Rules Safety Code 6 human exposure guidelines to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy produced by Health Canada Current version released in 2009, however a revised draft was released in 2013 and was the subject of review by the Royal Society of Canada The calculation requires a proponent to demonstrate compliance with Safety Code 6 assuming a worse case scenario (all radio channels operating simultaneously at full power output) at all times, and cumulatively, by identifying the highest energy level experienced near the facility. 9

10 The Rules LTE Antenna Lobe Showing 50% of Safety Code 6 Nb. Each square represents 2 x 2 m. 10

11 The Carriers Challenge About 25 per cent of Canadian homes have no land lines, and about 50 per cent of all (emergency) 911 calls are wireless. Smartphone penetration in the Canadian marketplace went from 36 per cent in 2011 to 63 per cent in The industry is anticipating data growth of 900 per cent over the next five years Bernard Lord CWTA to Halifax Chamber of Commerce, April

12 The Carriers Challenge: Dense Coverage 12

13 The Carriers Challenge: Dynamic Networks 13

14 The Carriers Challenge: Shadowing Radio Signals are much like the light from a lamp 14

15 The Carriers Challenge: Frequency Allocation 15

16 The Carriers Challenge: New frequencies Network design now has to accommodate 700 MHz spectrum In general the lower the number, the easier it is for the signal to pass through objects. The 700 MHz band has better penetration than current networks Expect to get better, stronger signals that work in places such as elevators, basements and parking garages where they sometimes do not In urban areas 700 MHz is not going to mean fewer sites. Capacity is the main factor in determining network design. However there may be minor adjustments to accommodate the new spectrum 16

17 SITING CONSTRAINT SUMMARY expected usage patterns of wireless service including proximity to users local terrain and building types which can be a significant challenge as a result of shadowing interaction with existing radio base stations line of site requirements for high quality communications opportunities to use existing structures the availability of a willing landlord; and the industry s commitment to high service standards and customer satisfaction. 17

18 The natural consequence of policy on design: Set backs can result in higher towers 18

19 The natural consequence of policy on design: Set backs can result in higher towers 19

20 The natural consequence of policy on design: Collocation increases height and massing Visual Impact of Single-Carrier tower vs. Co-location tower Single-Carrier Tower Co-location Tower 20

21 The natural consequence of policy on design: Collocation increases height and massing 21

22 The natural consequence of policy on design: single carrier loading creates design opportunities 22

23 The natural consequence of policy on design: single carrier loading creates design opportunities 23

24 The natural consequence of policy on design: Relaxed sign rules 24

25 Examples of incentives that work Vaughan s recent Telecommunications Facility Siting Taskforce recommended that Council look at adopting a path of least resistance - the further from residential the easier the process 25

26 CPC Local Options The use of existing infrastructure The CPC requires that existing infrastructure be used where possible Industry Canada gives land use authorities the opportunity to influence or opt out of this requirement. Wireless Carriers are required to co-locate and allow colocation if feasible, unless it is the municipality's preference that a new structure be constructed To permit proposals which are less obtrusive, and less controversial, the Protocol ought to express a clear preference for single carrier designs over co-location where feasible in and adjacent to residential areas 26

27 CPC Local Options The identification of a representative for the purpose of consultation The CPC sets out the requirement that proponents must submit their plans directly to Council unless the Protocol provides otherwise Delegated approval often creates a path of least resistance which in turn encourages carriers to comply with municipal siting policies 27

28 CPC Local Options Adjacent municipalities The CPC expects notification of adjacent municipalities but restricts that to municipalities located within a radius of 3 times the tower height The details associated with such a notice should be set out in the Policy Protocol should set out process and policy interests when Markham is the adjacent municipality 28

29 CPC Local Options Limitations on public notice The CPC sets out Industry Canada s requirements for public consultation The CPC restricts notice to a radius of 3 times the tower height, measured from the tower base in recognition of the fact that the notice radius should be proportional to the expected land-use impact Notice exemptions can encourage siting away from residential areas by creating a path of least resistance 29

30 CPC Local Options Exemptions The CPC sets out 5 exemptions to the usual requirement for consultation with land use authorities and the public Protocol provisions may not require consultation where the CPC provides for an exemption However, the exemptions may be expanded Exemptions provide a powerful tool to encourage carriers to develop facilities in particular locations or in an identified built form because they provide a path of least resistance 30

31 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach With the exception of one. It is expected that all changes can be modified to meet local needs 31

32 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach CPC applies to everyone: The requirements of this document apply to anyone (referred to in this document as the proponent) who is planning to install or modify an antenna system, regardless of the type. This includes telecommunications carriers, businesses, governments, Crown agencies and the public. Anyone who proposes, uses or owns an antenna system must follow these procedures. The requirements also apply to those who install towers or antenna systems on behalf of others or for leasing purposes ( third party tower owners ). As well, parts of this process contain obligations that apply to existing antenna system owners. 32

33 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach Public Notification Requirement Public notification of an upcoming consultation must be clearly marked, making reference to the proposed antenna system, so that it is not misinterpreted as junk mail. The notice must be sent by regular mail or be hand delivered. The face of the envelope must clearly indicate that the recipient is within the prescribed notification radius of the proposed antenna system. 33

34 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach A sunset clause that cannot be modified by protocol Whether the proponent followed a land-use authority s process or Industry Canada s default public consultation process, construction of an antenna system must be completed within three years of conclusion of consultation. After three years, previous consultations will no longer be deemed to be valid. 34

35 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach The Section 6 Exclusions have been reworded and can be added to by the local protocol The only significant change is the removal of the 14.9m exclusion for ground mounted antennas An exemption for shorter towers promotes better unobtrusive design in proximity to residential areas. 35

36 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach New Antenna Systems: where the height is less than 15 metres above ground level. This exclusion does not apply to antenna systems to be used by broadcasting undertakings or telecommunications carriers; Existing Towers: modifications may be made, or the tower may be replaced, to facilitate sharing or the addition of antennas, provided that the total height increase is no greater than 25% of the height of the initial antenna system installation. No increase in height may occur within one year of completion of the initial construction; 36

37 Opportunities in the Expected Updates to CPC for a made in Markham approach Non-Tower Structures: antennas on buildings, water towers, lamp posts, etc. may be installed provided that the height of the structure is not increased by more than 25%; and Temporary Antenna Systems: used for special events or emergency operations and must be removed three months after the start of the emergency or special event. No consultation is required prior to performing maintenance on an existing antenna system. 37

38 Our Wish List The wireless industry wants to work with local government to develop protocols that enable us to meet the needs of your community...our customers...and the regulator (Industry Canada). Clarity, certainty and timeliness are key elements of any approval process. With these in place, the industry can focus its resources on securing successful sites, sensitive to their surrounds and land uses. 38

39 Our Wish List We recognize and are mindful of community concerns with regard to site aesthetics. Wherever possible, wireless providers will share (co-locate) facilities and/or locate infrastructure on existing structures For sensitive locations, we implement unobtrusive or stealth design options to minimize visual impact Going forward we want to partner with local government to leverage existing infrastructure and where possible to work with the development approvals process to ensure new buildings are designed to accommodate wireless communications equipment. 39

40 Thank you. 40

Guide to Assist Land-use Authorities in Developing Antenna System Siting Protocols

Issue 2 August 2014 Spectrum Management and Telecommunications Guide to Assist Land-use Authorities in Developing Antenna System Siting Protocols Aussi disponible en français Contents 1. Introduction...