~Oshawa· Reportapp.oshawa.ca/.../2013/06-17/DS-13-187-Telecommunication-Tower-420-King.pdfthat the...

~Oshawamiddot Report

To Development Services Committee Item Date of Report

DS-13-187 June 12 2013

From Commissioner Development File Date of Meeting

Services Department SPA-2013-02 June 17 2013

Subject Proposed New Telecommunication Tower and Related Equipment 420 King Street West Rogers Communications Inc PUBLIC REPORT

10 PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to provide a recommendation on a proposed telecommunication tower by Rogers Communications Inc (Rogers) at 420 King Street West

Rogers proposes to erect a 299 metre (98 ft) high telecommunication tower with related at-grade equipment and fencing to the north of the existing commercial building at 420 King Street West

Rogers proposes to lease the area for the telecommunication tower from the owner of the site 1689884 Ontario Inc

Attachment No 1 is a map showing the location of 420 King Street West the location of the proposed telecommunication tower and the existing zoning for the area

Attachment No 2 is a copy of the Site SelectionJustification Report dated February 14 2013 from Standard Land Company Inc on behalf of Rogers

Attachment No 3 is a copy of the Citys Telecommunication Policy approved by Council in June 2007 and amended in June 2008

A public meeting was held on March 25 2013 in accordance with Councils Telecommunication Policy At the conclusion of the public meeting the proposal was referred back to the Development Services Department for further review and the preparation of a subsequent report and recommendation The minutes of the public meeting form Attachment No 4 to this report

98 98011-0704

Report to the Development Item DS-13-187 Services Committee (Continued) -2- Meeting Date June 17 2013

20 RECOMMENDATION

That the Development Services Committee recommend to Council

1 That pursuant to Report DS-13-187 dated June 12 2013 Development Services staff be authorized to advise Industry Canada that the City has no objection to the proposal by Rogers Communication Inc to install a telecommunication tower and related equipment at 420 King Street West (File No SPA-2013-02) subject to

(a) Rogers addressing such matters as siting and tower design to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services

(b) Rogers ensuring that the design of the tower can accommodate co-location of other telecommunication service providers and agreeing that it will accept co-location users on the tower

(c) Industry Canada undertaking a peer review of Rogers tower proposal to confirm that the search area for the tower is accurate and the location is required for safety and operational purposes and

(d) Industry Canada providing the City with its peer review comments

2 That a copy of Report DS-13-187 dated June 12 2013 and related Council resolution be forwarded to Rogers Communication Inc and Industry Canada

30 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Not Applicable

40 INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES

41 Public Comments

)gt The minutes of the March 25 2013 public meeting form Attachment No 4 to this report

)gt The City received one letter from the representative of the OwnerProperty Manager of the Dines Plaza at 400 King Street West in opposition to the proposed telecommunication tower The key concerns are

bull The height of the tower since it is out of proportion with the surrounding neighbourhood

bull The location of the tower is in an area considered as a Gateway to Downtown Oshawa

bull Potential health impacts and bull Decreased property values in the area

)gt The City also received one letter of support from the Executive Director of Studio 0

99

Report to the Development Item DS-13-187 Services Committee (Continued) - 3- Meeting Date June 17 2013

42 Other Departments or Agencies

)gt No department or agency that provided comments has any objection to the proposed telecommunication tower

)gt The Airport Manager has confirmed that the height of the proposed telecommunication tower complies with the Federal Airport Regulations

43 Auditor General

)gt The Auditor General does not provide comments on reports of this nature

50 ANALYSIS

51 General

511 Oshawa Official Plan and Zoning By-law

)gt Telecommunication facilities are permitted in any land use designation in the Oshawa Official Plan subject to any regulatory requirements Telecommunication facilities are also permitted in any zone in Zoning By-law No 60-94 under the Public Use section provided the proposal conforms to the Oshawa Official Plan

512 Industry Canada

)gt Industry Canada approves licenses for radio and telecommunication companies to operate and ultimately authorizes and approves the locations of telecommunication antennas and towers

)gt A goal of Industry Canada is to find mutually acceptable locations for new antennas or towers As such it has defined roles for the City the telecommunication company and Industry Canada

)gt The City has an opportunity to influence the location of the antenna and tower not only from a land use compatibility perspective but from the communitys perspective The City cannot however prohibit the installation of a tower or an antenna It is Industry Canadas position that telecommunication facilities licensed by authority of the Federal Government are not subject to municipal planning regulations such as the Oshawa Official Plan Zoning By-law No 60-94 or site plan approval

)gt Telecommunication companies wishing to establish new towers or antennas must do the following

bull For certain proposed installations telecommunication companies are required to consult with the City and follow any reasonable land use consultation process established by the City including public consultation

100


bull Consult with Transport Canada where applicable to ensure antennas and tower structures comply with painting and lighting requirements for aeronautical safety

bull Ensure that telecommunications facilities operate in a manner that complies with Health Canadas limits of exposure to radio-frequency field emissions

bull If necessary undertake an Environmental Assessment to comply with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

)gt Consultation between the City and telecommunication companies is intended to

(a) Discuss site options (b) Ensure that local processes related to telecommunication systems are respected (c) Address reasonable and relevant concerns and (d) Obtain City concurrence in writing

)gt A telecommunication company is prohibited from starting the installation of a telecommunication system until any required consultation process with the City has been completed or Industry Canada confirms concurrence with the consultation portion undertaken Consultation responsibilities will normally be considered complete when a telecommunication company has

(a) Concluded consultation requirements with the City (b) Carried out public consultation through the process established by the City and (c) Addressed all reasonable and relevant concerns

)gt All consultation is to be completed within 120 days of a telecommunication companys initial formal contact with the City Where unavoidable delays are encountered the City is expected to indicate to the telecommunication company when a response can be expected to the proposal If the City is not responsive the telecommunication company may contact Industry Canada Depending on individual circumstances Industry Canada may support additional time or consider the Citys consultation process complete

)gt In the event a radio and telecommunication company and the City cannot reach an agreement on the location of the telecommunication facility then Industry Canada can make a decision as to what is appropriate

513 Council Policy for New Telecommunication Facilities

)gt The Citys policy for new telecommunication facilities was adopted by Council in June 2007 and amended in June 2008 A copy of the Council policy forms Attachment No 3 to this report

52 420 King Street West

)gt Rogers is proposing to construct a 299 metre (98 ft) high telecommunication tower with at-grade equipment and fencing to the north of the existing building at 420 King

1 0 1

Report to the Development Item DS-13-187 Services Committee (Continued) - 5 - Meeting Date June 17 2013

Street West This property is occupied by a commercial building (see Attachment No 1) with the following uses retail stores offices and a personal service establishment

~ The subject site is designated as Planned Commercial Strip within the Main Central Area in the Oshawa Official Plan and is zoned PSC-A (Planned Strip Commercial) in Zoning By-law No 60-94

~ To the east of the subject site is a restaurant and offices To the west of the subject site is a financial institution To the north of the subject site is the Centennial United Church The Oshawa Centre shopping centre is located to the south of the subject site across King Street West

~ Rogers has advised that the proposed telecommunication facility is required to improve coverage for the area surrounding the subject site

~ Rogers advises that it investigated the potential to use other buildings and alternative service provider sites in the area However Rogers was unable to find alternative sites that met its locational needs in this area

~ In accordance with City Council policy Rogers has submitted a Site SelectionJustification Report including a site plan for the proposed telecommunication facility (see Attachment No 2)

~ This Department has concerns regarding urban design considerations given the proposed towers location along a main arterial road and gateway into Downtown Oshawa from the west

~ Rogers has submitted a significant amount of technical information to justify the need for the proposed tower in this location

~ This Department does not have the technical expertise to challenge or confirm the information submitted by Rogers

~ Industry Canada has advised that the safety and operational needs of Rogers will likely override any urban design issues particularly since the proposed tower is not close to any residential uses

~ This Department recommends that the City have no objection to the proposed tower subject to conditions One of the conditions is that Industry Canada be requested to peer review the technical information submitted by Rogers to determine if this area is the only reasonable location

102


60 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

~ There are no financial implications associated with the Recommendation in this Report

70 RESPONSE TO THE OSHAWA STRATEGIC PLAN

~ Providing a Recommendation on the proposed telecommunication tower advances the Accountable Leadership Goal of the Oshawa Strategic Plan

-(_ __gt -2---Q--shyPaul Ralph BES RPP Director Planning Services

Thomas B Hodg S MA RPP Commissioner Development Services Department

RBc Attachments

103

Attachment No 1

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Item No DS-13-187 Subject Proposed New Telecommunication Tower

and Related Equipment Address 420 King Street West File No SPA-2013-02

104 ~ Subject Site I~

N

I Item No Ds~ lS~~ V57

Standard Land Company Inc (Toronto) middot7

Suite 600 366 Bay Street Attachment No Toronto ON M5H 4B2

Standard Land Email standard(ii)standardlandcom

February 14 2013

Mr Robert Bedic Development Planner RECEIVED

FPl _lJ 1i _ U ~ middotmiddot IJ

DEVELOPMEWT SERVICES

City of Oshawa 50 Centre Street South Oshawa Ontario L1H 327

Dear Mr Bedic

Subject Proposed Rogers Telecommunications Facility (299 metre monopole)

Location 420 King Street West Oshawa Ontario L 1 J 2K8 Coordinates Latitude N 43deg 53 3967

Longitude W 78deg 52 4553 Rogers Site C4784 - Stevenson and King

Standard Land Company Inc (Standard Land) is representing Rogers Communications Inc (Rogers) in the land use consultation for the installation and operation of a telecommunications facility Preliminary consultation with the City of Oshawa has occurred to identify a suitable site for a 30 metre monopole installation to address coverage gaps in the Oshawa area in order to provide dependable wireless data and voice communication services

1 Introduction

The on-going increase in the use of personal cellular telephones and other wireless devices such as smartphones and broadband internet for personal business and emergency purposes requires the development of new antennas and their support structures which are required to meet the demands of increased capacity and broadening service areas Without antennas in close proximity to the wireless device wireless communication is simply not possible

Canadians currently use more than 25 million wireless devices on a daily basis including wireless phones pagers mobile radios mobile satellite phones and broadband internet devices Two-thirds of every Canadian household have access to a wireless phone More importantly each year Canadians place more than 6 million calls to 911 or other emergency numbers from their mobile phones

As part of its on-going commitment to providing high quality wireless cell phone and wireless internet services Rogers has determined that a new wireless telecommunication facility is required in the City of Oshawa

105

This report documents Rogerss site selection process the details of the proposal and the applicable Industry Canada provisions

Wireless telecommunications facilities are regulated by the Federal Government under Industry Canada and need not follow municipal or provincial planning approvals However Rogers is committed to consulting with the local land use authority and public when seeking the location for telecommunication facilities

2 Rationale for New Telecommunication Infrastructure

In identifying a potential tower location and design Rogers examined the surrounding area assessed the visibility of the structure and considered a possible tower design Rogers evaluated the best location for a new facility using the following criteria

a) Technical Requirements Tho performance of a wireless network is dependent on the geographical location of its equipment height of its antennas as well as the demand customers place on the network In expanding its wireless network Rogers is seeking to improve service in the central core of the City of Oshawa Rogers is proposing a new telecommunications facility at 420 King Street West

b) Evaluation of Existing Structures When a part of a network requires improvement the first step is to evaluate existing structures (rooftops or towers that are located within the specific geographical area offering the required height and that may be available to support new equipment or to use for co-location The map below shows the location of the proposed tower in relation to other existing structures

106

ADDRESS APPROXIMATE DETAILS HEIGHT

A 33 Richmond Street West 45 metres Rooftop installation 121 km from proposed site Too far from search ring

B 40 King Street West 26 metres Rooftop installation 117 km from proposed site Too far from search ring

c 50 Centre Street South 42 metres Rooftop installation 112 km from proposed site Too far from search ring

D 419 King Street West 35 metres Rooftop installation 056 km from proposed site Too far from search ring

E 380 Gibb Street 21 metres Rooftop installation 082 km from proposed site Too far from search ring

The existing structures in the area were identified with the nearest being 056 kilometres and 082 kilometres from the proposed sitelocation These options were disqualified as they are outside the required geographical area determined by Rogers engineers and would not meet the coverage requirements suitable for the Rogers network

c) Willing Property Owner Rogers has entered into agreement with 1689884 Ontario Inc for the installation of telecommunications equipment Only when all required approvals are obtained will the land agreement be finalized

d) Land Use Consideration In consideration of Rogerss technical requirements and securing a land agreement with a willing property owner Rogers considers the proposed location appropriate Preliminary discussions have occurred with the City of Oshawa Planning Revisions to the proposed site location have been undertaken to ensure that the proposed installation is screened from view by the existing commercial retail building Rogers will also utilize the existing access driveway from King Street West for the proposed installation

3 Proposed Site

We have identified a location at 420 King Street West in the City of Oshawa The location of the proposed monopole is at the rear of a commercial property The tower compound will be screened by the existing commercial retail building A wood privacy fence will be provided to additional screening of the equipment shelter and base of the tower Please see Appendix 1 Proposed Tower Location

4 Proposed Tower Design

In order to enhance wireless service Rogers is proposing to install a 299 metre monopole on the subject property to support a new telecommunications facility Rogers has completed a site plansurvey plan and tower profile Please see Appendix 2 Survey Plan A photo simulation has been prepared to provide a visual representation of the tower structure in the existing landscape Please see Appendix 3 Photo Simulation These preliminary design plans are subject to finalizing the engineering design final land survey and approval of Transport Canada Transport Canada approval may require tower lighting andor marking The photo simulation is

107 3

intended to be a close representation and is for conceptual purposes only The tower structure design and colour are design elements for consideration

5 Consultation Process with the City of Oshawa

Wireless facilities are exclusively regulated by the Federal Government and as a result are not required to obtain municipal permits of any kind Notwithstanding Rogers is committed to consulting with the local land use authority and public when seeking the location for telecommunication facilities

Following the City of Oshawa Telecommunication TowerAntenna Facilities Protocol members of Standard Land agents for Rogers completed a preliminary consultation meeting with Planning Staff on July 2012 Comments provided at the preliminary consultation with staff indicated general support of the proposed 30 metre high monopole structure design as it is less visible to the adjacent land uses

The Citys protocol requires proponents to prepare a site selection package and notify landowners within 120 metres from the property boundary A newspaper advertisement will not be required as the proposed tower is below 30 metres in height Please see Appendix 4 Notification Package to view the proposed notification package to be issued to the City of Oshawa Industry Canada and land owners within 120 metres of the property base or equipment shelter~

Rogers would like to issue the notification package as soon as possible Rogers will invite the public to comment within 30 days During the 30 day comment period Rogers will acknowledge receipt of any comments or questions within 14 days and address all reasonable and relevant concerns within 60 days

6 Concurrence Requirements

At the conclusion of the consultation process Rogers will prepare a summary of comments received from the community and the replies provided by Rogers As a form of comment Rogers will be requesting concurrence from the City of Oshawa in the form of a letter that addresses the following items

bull That the City of Oshawa has been consulted and concurs with the tower location bull That Rogers complied with the consultation requirements and process and the proposal

met the location and design objectives of this proposal

7 Health and Safety Compliance

Industry Canada requires that all antenna installations comply with Health Canadas Safety Code 6 which limit the publics exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and ensure public safety The Code also outlines safety requirements for the installation and operation of devices that emit radiofrequency fields such as mobile phones and base station antennas This Code is based on current accepted scientific data Additional information on health and safety may be found on-line at

Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association

108 4

httplcwtacawordpresswp-contentuploads201108Connectingpdf

The installation and operation of the proposed tower will be in compliance with the middotfollowing safety standards

a) Safety Code 6

Rogers attests that the proposed monopole will at all times comply with Health Canadas Safety Code 6 limits For more information on Safety Code 6 please refer to

httpwwwicqccaeicsitesmt-gstnsfengh sf01702html

b) Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

Industry Canada requires that the installation and modification of antenna systems be done in a manner that complies with appropriate environmental legislation including the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Rogers ensures that the environmental assessment process is applied early in the planning stages for new wireless communication site proposals in order to meet the requirements for exclusion from the environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

Rogers attests that the radio antenna system as proposed for this site will comply with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act as this facility is excluded from assessment

c) Engineering Practices

Rogers attests that the radio antenna system as proposed for this site will be constructed in compliance with The Canadian Standard Association The National Building Code and comply with good engineering practices including structural adequacy

d) Transport Canadas Aeronautical Obstruction Marking Requirements

Aerodrome safety is under the exclusive jurisdiction of NAV Canada and Transport Canada An important obligation of Rogers installations is to comply with Transport Canada I NAV CANADA aeronautical safety requirements Transport Canada perform an assessment of the proposal with respect to the potential hazard to air navigation and notify Rogers of any painting andor lighting requirements for the antenna system Rogers does not anticipate that the proposed installation will require markings andor lighting

8 Conclusion

As communities grow to depend on wireless products for personal business and emergency purposes it is necessary to improve service in Oshawa In response to the publics demand for high quality wireless services Rogers is proposing a telecommunications site that is

bull in a location that is technically suitable for Rogers network

109 5

bull in a location that minimizes the visibility of the equipment

bull in a non-residential zone where a utility structure is appropriate

bull in a location that minimizes the visibility from the residential areas

bull a monopole tower design that will reduce visibility

During the consultation process Rogers is committed to working with the City of Oshawa and the community to find an acceptable location and infrastructure design We look forward to the opportunity to further discuss the proposed project and consultation process Should you require anything further please do not hesitate to contact us at 416-598-1116 or by e-mail at omarl standardlandcom

Thank you for your attention to this matter

Sincerely

STANDARD LAND COMPANY INC Agents for Rogers Communications Inc

Omar Lababidi MCIP RPP Municipal Affairs Specialist

110 6

APPENDIX 1 PROPOSED TOWER LOCATION

Location 420 King Street West The approximate location of the proposed Owner Name 1689884 Ontario Inc Rogers monopole is indicated above by the Coordinates N 43deg 53 3967 W 78deg 52 4553 yellow push-pin

1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8

~~~ src OF orPROPOSEO MONOPOIpound bull-Mlaquobullbull LOTS 4 5 AND 6Cgt(IAL HOl TO SAd s~r~poundci~oP- ~A~] ~ REGISTERED PLAN 263

BOND STREET w I s 1 AN[) ALL or PROPOSED COMPOUND DETAil LOTS 4 AND 5 PART OF LOT 6 SHEET 14Cj ~~~ ~~n NOT TO SCAL~ EAST WHITBY MUN PLAN REG AS No 370 ebullbullbullbullobullbull CITY OF OSHAWA

RECIONAJ MUNCrfAITY JF )IJRH4Y____ ~ I lt1 Eigt BOND~S~t ~EST I~ ~ ~~~~

I SCALE amp NOTES

=~middotl-) ~~~~i~~mmiddot~ scoto bullrooI 0

I Obulllgto~ltouo~~bullltTOSltltoo~wcobull_

I L------------------------1 EDWARD J GRENKIE I ONfARIO IAfD SURVEYORn ~~jJ middotIt lfi COIIlllltff201l-igt~middot~middot c~ II

LEGENDI bull SVR11gt ~tnoUIENl 01gtlt0

I __ j_L ~ ~ lt middotmiddot~~ i -------+--

I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)

KTNG~r~ffJ lt ~~~WEST ~ ~~] I I li~02 I I SEARING NOTE

8CAinNOSAAtAltTRONO~ltbullCIINDARREfRREOlOTI((poundASTpoundRLYLbullMITOF

I ~~ CISBONS STREET AS S~OWN 0~ A PLAN Of SuR1bullrY B~ IVJN B WAUACpound OS rllpoundSbull0747HAVIHCAIpoundARINCotNT51100W = ~~ i ElEVATION NOTE

I pound~10~ All[ ~IT(~tO 10 BNfl IMRK Tlo 001190MIT~ HAVNG Arl poundoE-OTI0N OF 10~ 7J~ METRES

middot j ~ I

~middot I

SCFORE OLGUIN() All UN0tAG1ltQli~O StRVICpound $HC010 BE LCCATD~~~~~~k L _____ middot---------------NOTE

ON SilE Bl T~E RESPpoundCflll( AG~TIICitS bull TRIpoundPflOTpoundCliONASRpound0VIRpoundD

0q 1HE SU~VEY WAS COMPLElpound0 1 SCltgtTWampR 201~

1

I I METRIC OISTONCtS SHOriN ON miS Plt~N ARE IN lripoundTRltS ~NO CAN 8pound

D I 00NIpoundRTW 10 rpoundET 8Y DMDIIltC tlY Ol0~8

GEOGRAPHrC COORDINATES LAT bullY5n97

O LON( 8middot~~-~14

I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~

0 ltgtRQPpoundR1VAA(I 1bull~1 9 Sqrn 0 ~ ii j 8UJl01t(AREA ~ 32~ri~M 1 ~~kSltlfllLOT C0vpoundR~GE

1flfA LtAU08Y RClaquoRS OIRfUSS CQtOgtQlJND 2~01 Sq m

~ ACCpoundSSPJ61ltpound 20593 Sq m TOTAl 289SSqM

~__ ___

IWA111bull11CI9111tl 1 OHOigtOlE~

(A bull ~-middot S~T9JCltS (PROPOSED tIQNOPOLE) FROTJl(KINCSTR(ElwfSl)

SE16~CKS (PROPOSED ----middotmiddot--- ~

Cll8NET) ~1 (KING Sl~(T I~ESl) 3015 m

-~

~

~middotrmiddot----shy~ ~~~ middot iampi (~

f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T

~~_ampL ONTARIQlJIN0SURVpoundVOR

OVpound(1 tOU~toENT CONT~ltifR 280912

RpoundVISE0H[IGHTOfiONOPOLE Tl02lJ CHKSt [G

shy

- ---

--

ELEVATION VIEV OF PART OF

LOTS 4 5 AND 6 REGISTERED PLAN 263 AND ALL OF

LOTS 4 AND 5 PART OF LOT 6 SHEET 14C EAST WHITBY MUN PLAN REG AS No 370 1--shyIN THE

CITY OF OSHA WA r---- shyREGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM

SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO

rAIN UNK fENCE0301 NORTH

DOOR

i i i I

i i

vrROPOSEDBOARD FENCE

-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE

LcONCRETE WALKWAY r--shy M 2711 0983

s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST

REVISED HEIGHT OF MONO POLE - 110213

SITE NAME STEVENSON amp KING (C4784) 420 KING STREET WEST OSHAWA

OWN BY W LA FORME

CHK BY EG11 4 20-428 MILLEN ~OA ~EY CREEK ONT

r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy

poundLpoundVIJTON VfpoundW PART


LOTS 4 AND 5 PART OF LOT 6 SHEET 14C EAST WHITBY MUN PLAN REG AS No 370 IN THpound

CITY OF OSHA WA RpoundGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM

SCALE 1100

- -- -middot-middotmiddot-middotmiddotmiddot middot-middot--- - middot-middot-middotmiddot- -middot-middot-shy

VIEW LOOKING SOUTH UNDER GROUND J ~ HYURO

115

or or

APPENDIX 3 ~ PHOTO SIMULATION

Proposed Tower- Before Construction

Proposed Tower- After Construction

Photo Simulation is a close representation and isfor conceptual purposes only- not to scale Proposed design is subject to change based on final engineer plans

The tower will be marked in accordance with Trans ort Canada Obstruction Marking and NAV Canada re uirements

11 6 9

APPENDIX 3 M PHOTO SIMULATION

Pro osed Tower- Before Construction


Photo Simulation is a close representation and is for conceptual purposes onlymiddot- not to scale Proposed design is subject to change based on final engineer plans

77te tower will be marked in accordance with Trans ort Canada Obstruction Marking and NAV Canada re uirements

11 7 10

APPENDIX4

NOTIFICATION PACKAGE

11 8 11

ROGERSTM Your World Right Now

Public Consultation -Wireless Communications Installation

420 King Street West Oshawa Ontario L 1J 2K8

Rogers Site C4784 - Stevenson and King

Standard Land Company Inc Agents for Rogers Communications Inc Suite 600 366 Bay Street Toronto ON M5H 482 Omar Lababidi Municipal Affairs Specialist Phone (416) 598-1116 Extension 512 11 9

Purpose

This information package is an invitation to the public to provide comments regarding a proposed wireless communication installation in the area of King Street West and Gibbons Street in the City of Oshawa at an address known as 420 King Street West Oshawa Ontario L 1 J 2K8

Background amp Coverage Requirement

The selection of a wireless communications site works similarly to fitting a piece into a puzzle In this case the puzzle is a complex radio network situated in an urban setting Client demand radio frequency engineering principles local topography and land use opportunities working in concert with one another direct the geography of our sites

In order to achieve a reliable wireless network carriers must provide a seamless transmission signal to alleviate any gaps in coverage Gaps in coverage are responsible for dropped calls and unavailable service to clients Rogers Communications Inc would utilize the following proposed site location in order to provide high quality network signal for its high speed wireless voice and data network

Wireless communication carriers constantly strive to improve coverage and network quality for the sake of their clients In the recent past due to subscriber feedback our Network Planning and Engineering departments have become aware of coverage deficiencies near the area of King Street West east of Stevenson Road in Oshawa

Oshawa is an area of continuous growth resulting in wireless coverage deficiencies which are recognized by Rogers In consultation with the City of Oshawa Rogers has surveyed the area of King Street West and Stevenson Road and have identified a proposed site which will achieve the necessary engineering coverage objectives to satisfy the demands for wireless services from our customers The site location is shown on the below map

120 2

PUBLIC INFORMATION SESSION relating to proposed wireless communication site will be held in the Council Chamber- Oshawa City Hall on March 25 2013 at 630pm

Proposed Site Location

Rogers Communications Inc proposes to install a new wireless communications installation on a site located at 420 King Street West Oshawa Ontario L 1 J 2K8 The site itself is located approximately 53 metres south of Bond Street approximately 32 metres north of King Street West and approximately 50 metres west of Gibbons Street

The propertys legal description is L T 4 SHEET 14 C PL 370 EAST WHITBY L T 5 SHEET 14 C PL 370 EAST WHITBY PT LT 6 SHEET 14 C PL 370 EAST WHITBY PT LT 4 PL 263 EAST WHITBY PT L T 5 PL 263 EAST WHITBY PT L T 6 PL 263 EAST WHITBY AS IN 0424777 OSHAWA

The geographic coordinates for the site are as follows Latitude (NAD 83) N 43o 53 3967 Longitude (NAD 83) W 78deg 52 4553

Description of Proposed System

As determined by Rogers radio frequency engineers a monopole 299 metres in height is required for the proposed installation to meet our network requirements This particular site will provide 3-sectored UMTS ano L TE service

When looking for site options Rogers initially reviewed the co-location opportunities in the area However there were no suitable alternative structures readily available for co-location to accommodate the network coverage requirements

Rogers in conjunction with the City of Oshawa have been working together to provide an adequate installation that will be situated and designed to have minimal impact on surrounding land uses The monopole design is an installation that is well suited for the proposed location

Our current coverage along King Street West east of Stevenson Road is below our acceptable standards and we need to respond to our customers requests for improved wireless coverage in these areas The proposed location can significantly improve our wireless signal quality for the local residents those traveling along King Street West east of Stevenson Road and those members of the community that use wireless phones and other devices

The monopole design and height of the proposed installation would provide an opportunity for future coshylocation with other licensed carriers helping reduce the number of future structures in the area which is encouraged by Industry Canada and will also accommodate future technology services

A copy of Rogers surveyed site plan has been attached for your reference and information

Photo Simulation

For your reference a photo simulation provided below is of the installation proposed at 420 King Street West Oshawa Ontario L 1 J 2K8 The process of simulating the proposed facility into the existing conditions of the viewscape was done by superimposing an image of the proposed installation on a photograph taken of the viewscape

Below is a photographic simulation illustrating how the proposed tower may appear

121 0ROGERS~ 3

Photo Simulation is a close representation and is for conceptual purposes only- not to scale Proposed design is subject to change based on final engineer plans

The tower will be marked in accordance with Transport Canada Obstruction Marking and NA V Canada requirements

Control of Public Access

The site facility would include 1) radio equipment walk-in cabinet on a cast in place reinforced concrete slab Pressure treated board security fencing would be installed around the base of the installation and would include one locked gate access point The compound will also be equipped with a silent alarm system The walk-in equipment cabinet WIC) will contain radio equipment backup battery power maintenance tools manuals and a first aid kit The compound area will be 3 7 m x 62 m and will be equipped with a silent alarm system

Municipal and Public Consultation Obligations

In recognition of the Federal Governments exclusive jurisdiction and in an attempt to promote balance Industry Canada requires that proponents of wireless communication facilities consult with the land use authorities as part of their licensing process The requirement to consult can be found in Industry Canadas document Client Procedure Circular CPC 02-0-03 According to the CPC the purpose of the consultation is to ensure that land-use authorities are aware of significant antenna structures andor installations proposed within their boundaries so antenna systems are deployed in a manner which considers local surroundings Consultation must respect the Federal exclusive jurisdiction and specifically does not give a municipality the right to veto the proposal As a result of the Federal Governments exclusive jurisdiction this proposed wireless facility does not require permitting of any kind Similarly Zoning By-laws and Site Plan approvals do not apply to wireless communication structures

Telecommunication facilities such as this are regulated by Industry Canada and are considered to be a Federal undertaking However Industry Canada does require Rogers to consult with the respective Land Use Authority in this case the City of Oshawa where the installation is proposed

122 4

City of Oshawa Public Consultation Process

Although Industry Canada has the final authority over radio-communications towers and fadlities under the Radiocommunications Act Industry Canada requires carriers to consult with land-use authorities The City of Oshawa has established a Telecommunications Policy and Rogers will be following this policy when conducting the public consultation process

Proponents must follow the documented public consultation process as established by the City of Oshawa Proponents must ensure that the local public the land-use authority and Industry Canada are notified of the proposed antenna system as indicated in the documented public consultation process adopted by the City of Oshawa As a minimum proponents must provide a notification package to the local public (including nearby residences community gathering areas public institutions schools etc) neighbouring land-use authorities businesses and property owners etc located within a radius of 120 metres measured from the tower base or four times the tower height It is the municipalitys responsibility to ensure that the notification provides at least 20 days for written public comment

Federal Requirements

In addition to the requirements for consultation with municipal authorities and the public Rogers must also fulfill other important obligations including the following

Canadian Environmental A~sessment Act



Engineering Practices


Health Canadas Safety Code 6 Compliance

Health Canada is responsible for research and investigation to determine and promulgate the health protection limits for Exposure to the RF electromagnetic energy Accordingly Health Canada has developed a guideline entitled Limits of Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field in the Frequency Range from 3kHz to 300 GHz- Safety Code 6 The exposure limits specified in Safety Code 6 were established from the results of hundreds of studies over the past several decades where the effects of RF energy on biological organisms were examined Canadas exposure limits are among the most stringent guidelines that are based on established effects

Wireless communication including technical aspects related to broadcasting is under responsibility of the Ministry of Industry (Industry Canada) which has the power to establish standards rules policies and procedures Industry Canada under this authority has adopted Safety Code 6 for the protection of the general public As such Industry Canada requires all proponents and operators to ensure that their installations and apparatus comply with the Safety Code 6 at all times

123 ROGERS - 5 0

Rogers Communications Inc attests that the radio antenna system described in this notification package will at all times comply with Health Canadas Safety Code 6 limits as may be amended from time to middottime for the protection of the general public including any combined effects of additional carrier co-locations and nearby installations within the local radio environment

More information in the area of RF exposure and health is available at the following web site Safety Code 6 httpwww hc-scgc caewh-semtlpubsradiationradio _guide-lignes _direct-eng php

Transport Canadas Aeronautical Obstruction Marking Requirements


For additional detailed information please consult Transport Canada at httpwww tcgccaengcivilaviationregservcarspart6-standards-standard621-512 htm

Industry Canadas Spectrum Management

Please be advised that the approval of this site and its design is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Government of Canada through Industry Canada

Rogers Communications Inc is participating in this circulation in accordance with Industry Canadas guidelines CPC-2-0-03

For more information on Industry Canadas public consultation guidelines including CPC-2-0-03 contact httpstrategisicgccaantenna or the local Industry Canada office at spectrumtorontoicgcca

Toronto District Office Room 909 9th Floor 55 St Clair Avenue East Toronto ON M4T 1M2 Phone (416) 973-8215 Phone (416) 954-3553

General information relating to antenna systems is available on Industry Canadas Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website (httpwwwicgccaepicsitesmt-gstnsfenhome)

Contact Information - Rogers Communications Inc and Public Comment Submission

Rogers Communications Inc is committed to effective public consultation The public is invited to provide comments to Rogers and the City about this proposal by mail email phone or fax Please send your comments to the addresses below by the close of business day on March 22 2013

124 0ROGERS 6

Proponent Contact Information - Rogers Communications Inc

Standard Land Company Inc Agents for Rogers Communications Inc Suite 600 366 Bay Street Toronto ON M5H 482 Attention Omar Lababidi Municipal Affairs Specialist Phone ( 416) 598-1116 Extension 512 Fax (416) 598-1139 Email commentsONTstandardlandcom

Contact Information - City of Oshawa

Robert Bedic Planner City of Oshawa 50 Centre Street South Oshawa ON L 1 H 3Z7 Phone (905) 436-3311 Extension 2401 Email rbedicoshawaca

Closing Date for Submission of Written Public Comments

Industry Canadas rules contain requirements for timely response to your questions comments or concerns We will acknowledge receipt of your communication within 14 days and will provide a formal response to the Municipality and those members of the public who communicated to Rogers within 60 days The members of the public who communicated with Rogers will then have 21 days to review and reply to Rogers a final response

At the conclusion of the consultation process Rogers will prepare a summary of comments received from the community and the replies provided by Rogers As a form of comment Rogers will be requesting concurrence from the City of Oshawa

Conclusion

Access to reliable wireless communications services is of great importance to residents and travelers safety and well-being in todays society Wireless technology has fast become the preferred method of conducting business and personal communications among a large part of the population

Rogers feels that the proposed site is well located to provide and improve wireless voice and data services in the targeted area The proposed site is also situated and designed to have minimal impact on surrounding land uses

Rogers looks forward to working with the City of Oshawa and the community in providing better wireless services

125 0ROGERsmiddotmiddot middot~ I

7

Public Comment Record

Rogers Proposed Wireless Communications Installation Rogers Site C4784

Site Address 420 King Street West Oshawa ON L 1J 2K8 Legal L T 4 SHEET 14 C PL 370 EAST WHITBY L T 5 SHEET 14 C PL 370

EAST WHITBY PT L T 6 SHEET 14 C PL 370 EAST WHITBY PT L T 4 PL 263 EAST WHITBY PT L T 5 PL 263 EAST WHITBY PT L T 6 PL 263 EAST

WHITBY AS IN 0424777 OSHAWA

Name

Address

Telephone E-mail

Comments To be considered part of this consultation comments must be received by close of

business day on March 22 2013 Please forward your comments to

Robert Bedic Planner 8 Planning Services Development Service Department

City of Oshawa 50 Centre Street South Oshawa ON L 1 H 3Z7

Fax (905) 436-5699 Phone (905) 436-3311 Extension 2401 E-mail rbedicoshawaca

and

Standard Land Company Inc co Omar Lababidi

Suite 600 366 Bay Street Toronto ON M5H 482 Fax (416) 598-1139 Phone (416) 598-1116 Extension 512

E-mail commentsONTstandardlandcom

126 0ROGERS 8

Continue on reverse if required Comments received shall form part of Industry Canadas Public Consultation Process under the Spectrum Management and Telecommunications Client Procedures Circular CPC-2-0-03 Issue 4 and will be made public as part of a report issued to the City of Oshawa and Industry Canada

127 0ROGERsmiddotmiddot 9

Item No DS lt-) lt~ ~7 Attachment No 3

Council Policy for New Telecommunication Facilities

1 PURPOSE

To establish policies and procedures for the installation of new telecommunication antennas towers and related structures which emphasize the following

bull Selecting locations for telecommunication facilities which ultimately minimize the number of such facilities and their visual impact

bull Allowing input from the public and bull Providing a clear process for the installation of new telecommunications facilities

Industry Canada the approval authority for regulating telecommunications facilities ensures that municipalities are consulted prior to the construction of towers and antenna structures The role of the City is to provide comments with respect to land use compatibility and community input Industry Canada advises that the City has no constitutional authority to regulate or prohibit telecommunications facilities

2 SOURCE

City Council approval on June 11 2007 as amended on June 2 2008

3 POLICY

31 Definitions

Antenna shall mean a device for transmitting and receiVIng electromagnetic waves wireless communication signals or other communication signals

Alternative tower structures shall mean man-made support structures that camouflage or conceal the presence of antennas or towers such as flagpoles clock towers church steeples street lights artificial trees and other everyday features

Co-location shall mean the placement of one or more antenna on the same telecommunication tower or alterative tower structures

Equipment Shelter shall mean a structure containing equipment necessary to transmit and receive signals

Telecommunications Facilities shall mean telecommunication tower andor antenna and an equipment shelter

Telecommunications Towers shall mean structures designed and constructed to support one or more antennas including lattice towers monopoles and guyed towers

32 Site Selection for New Telecommunication Towers

(a) The installation of new telecommunications towers is discouraged unless all other options within the telecommunication company search area have been explored and are considered inappropriate The preferred methods of achieving additional

128

capacity are

(i) Co-location on existing towers (ii) Location on hydro transmission towers (iii) Location of towers within or adjacent to hydro transmission corridors (iv) Use of alternative tower structures and (v) Clustering adjacent to existing telecommunication towers

(b) A telecommunication tower shall be located in a manner which minimizes its visual impact When locating a new telecommunication tower the following shall considered

(i) Avoidance of natural features significant vegetation hazard lands (eg floodplains steep slopes) and environmentally sensitive areas

(ii) Locations shall be sensitive to residential areas historic sites environmentally sensitive areas and hazard lands

(iii) Alternative tower structures are encouraged within the Major Urban Area and Hamlet boundaries as identified in the Oshawa Official Plan

iv) An appropriate setback shall be maintained from road right-of-ways

(v) Avoiding areas of topographical prominence where possible to minimize longshort range viewscapes and

(vi) Locations and heights that are in compliance with Transport Canadas requirements relative to the Oshawa Municipal Airport

33 Site Design and Layout

(a) New Telecommunication Towers

The following shall be considered in the site design and layout of new telecommunications towers

(i) Planting of trees and shrubs around the perimeter fencing to mitigate the visual impact of the tower and equipment shelter

(ii) Small identification sign(s) of the telecommunication company may be permitted on the equipment shelter or perimeter fencing subject to the issuance of a sign permit as necessary and

(iii) Where alternative tower structures are not feasible telecommunication towers and equipment shelters should blend in with the context (eg colour etc) of its surroundings The architecture of an equipment shelter should reflect the area within which it is located (eg pitched roof or brick if in a residential area)

Page2 shy

b) Installations on Roof Tops or Existing Structures

When locating a telecommunication antenna or equipment shelter on rooftops or existing structures telecommunication companies shall endeavour to minimize the visual impacts of such uses by considering the following

(i) Wall mounted antenna on the side of a building are discouraged below the roof but may be permitted subject to appropriate design Wall mounted antenna on penthouses and stairwells above the roof are preferred

(ii) Utilizing alternative tower structures

(iii) New antennas should have a maximum height of 6 metres above the highest point of the building or existing structure and it should be setback a minimum of 3 metres from the roof edge on a building

(iv) Equipment shelters on roof tops should be setback from the roof edge as appropriate with appropriate consideration of the structural design of the roof

(v) The colour and architectural style of the antenna and equipment shelter shall blend in with the building or structure

(vi) If an equipment shelter is aboveground and related to a roof-top antenna then the architecture of the equipment shelter must reflect appropriate urban design considerations related to the area within which it is located (eg pitched roof brick if in a residential area) and

vii) Locations and heights that are in compliance with Transport Canadas requirements relative to the Oshawa Municipal Airport

34 Other

(a The City will encourage buildings greater than 6 storeys to be pre-designed to accommodate antenna and equipment shelters

(b) Telecommunication companies shall be encouraged to remove facilities after their lease has expired

4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation

Prior to the installation of telecommunications facilities telecommunication companies are encouraged to -consult with the Citys Planning Services Branch in the Development Services Department to discuss the site search area site selection including land use compatibility sensitive visual areas and vistas existing and proposed land uses and other potential impacts Consultation with the Chief Building Official may also be required

Telecommunications companies are requested to consult with the City on proposals that

Page3

130

involve above ground equipment shelters even though they may be exempt according to Industry Canadas procedures to ensure the shelters are appropriately located designed (eg architecture) and landscaped given the site context (eg in a residential area)

42 Submission Requirements

For the purposes of administration and processing telecommunication companies will be required to complete an application for site plan approval The application shall be submitted to the Planning Services Branch in the Development Services Department with the appropriate fee Such applications are not processed under the Planning Act


All proposals for new telecommunication towers where consultation with the City is required by Industry Canada will generally include the following information

(i) Written justification from the telecommunication company as to the need for the telecommunication tower and that the proposed location for the new tower is the preferred alternative Non-tower co-location and alternative tower structures shall be addressed in the justification

(ii) A site plan showing such items as the subject property including the existing property lines and the leased area (if applicable) existing and proposed buildings fences buffering building elevations access parking and the type and height of the proposed tower structure Additional plans such as a landscape plan a site servicinggrading plan and erosion and sediment control plan may also be required later in the review process

(iii) Pictures of the location and the proposed tower and associated facilities superimposed on the picture from four directions north south east and west and

iv) A plan showing the horizontal distance between the tower installation and the nearest residential zone andor residential dwelling

(b) Installations on Roof Top or Existing Structures

All proposals for telecommunication antenna or equipment shelters on roof tops or existing structures where consultation with the City is required by Industry Canada will generally include the following information

(i) A statement from the telecommunication company on the need for any increase in proposed tower height if the increased height is greater than 25 of the originally approved height

(ii) A plan showing the location and setbacks for the proposed antenna and associated facilities on the roof top or existing structure

(iii) A plan showing such items as building elevations and the location type and

Page4

131

height of the proposed antenna A site plan showing such items as the subject property the leased area existing and proposed buildings fences buffers access and parking is required for any aboveground equipment shelter Additional plans such as a landscape plan a site servicinggrading plan and erosion and sedimentation control plan may also be required at a later date for any aboveground equipment shelteruses related to the antenna

(iv) Any relevant information as may be required by the Chief Building Official at a later date during the review process and

(v) Upon review of the site plan the Development Services Department may require the telecommunication company to submit pictures of the building or structure with the proposed antenna and equipment shelter superimposed on the picture from four directions north south east and west

(c) Alterations to Existing Facilities

Where a modification to an existing site is proposed which may include but not be limited to an increase in the height of the tower additional equipment shelters or entrances an amendment to an approved Site Plan may be required

43 Public Consultation Process

(a) Exemptions from Public Consultation

Public consultation is not required in the following situations

(i) For installations of roof-top antenna roof-top equipment shelters and wall mounted antenna that do not project more than 2 metres from the face of the building provided they are designed and are in a location on the roof acceptable to the Development Services Department and

(ii) Co-location of an antenna on an existing telecommunication tower or hydro tower

City Council may also exempt other proposals from public consultation as appropriate For example City Council may consider exempting proposals from the public process where towers are proposed adjacent to 250 kv or 500 kv hydro towers or adjacent to other telecommunication towers or where equipment shelters related to a roof top antenna are located on sites which are occupied by nonshyresidential uses or that abut non-residential uses

Notwithstanding any provisions of this policy to the contrary the Citys policy does not apply to the following types of installations based on Industry Canadas exemption criteria

(i) Maintenance of existing radio apparatus including the antenna system transmission line mast tower or other antenna-supporting structure

Page 5 middot

132

(ii) Addition or modification of an antenna system (including improving the structural integrity of its integral mast to facilitate sharing) the transmission line antenna-supporting structure or other radio apparatus to existing infrastructure a building water tower etc provided the addition or modification does not result in an overall height increase above the existing structure of 25 of the original structures height

(iii) Maintenance of an antenna systems painting or lighting in order to comply with Transport Canadas requirements

iv) Installation for a limited duration (typically not more than 3 months) of an antenna system that is used for a special event or one that is used to support local provincial territorial or national emergency operations during the emergency and is removed within 3 months after the emergency or special event and

v) New antenna systems including masts towers or other antenna-supporting structure with a height of less than 15 metres above ground level

(b) Required Public Consultation

(i) Subject to the exemptions set out above a public meeting is required for any new tower or any new aboveground equipment shelter

(ii) The Development Services Department shall give written notice by regular mail of the public meeting to the owners and tenants of the lands within the circulation area around the subject property to all Members of City Council and to adjacent municipalities if the new tower is within 500 metres of the municipal boundary The notice shall be sent at least 20 days before the public meeting date A newspaper advertisement notifying the public of any tower proposed to be 30 metres or more in height is required as part of the public consultation process The newspaper advertisement will be paid for by the telecommunication company

The circulation area for the notice is as follows

bull Within the Major Urban Area boundary- 120 metres or 4 times the height of the tower which ever is greater measured from the base of the tower or equipment shelter

bull In all other areas - 250 metres measured from the base of the tower or equipment shelter

The notice shall include at a minimum the following information

bull The location of the proposed site bull Date time and location of Public Meeting bull The name and telephone number of a contact person employed by the

telecommunication company as well as a municipal contact person and

Page6

133

bull The -Ward number

An information package provided by the telecommunication company will be included with the mailed notice

(iii) The Public Meeting shall be held by the Development Services Committee

At the Public Meeting the telecommunication company shall be responsible for displaying all the necessary drawings and pictures and making a presentation Subsequent to the Public Meeting the telecommunication company shall provide to the Development Services Department a letter indicating how the telecommunication company will address the concerns raised at the public meeting

44 Approvals

(a) Letter of Recommendation with a Public Meeting

(i) After the public meeting the Development Services Department will prepare a report for the consideration by the Development Services Committee The telecommunication company and any person that attended the public meeting and left their names will be invited to the Development Services Committee meeting to make any comments on the staff report as appropriate The Development Services Committee will then make a recommendation to Council The telecommunication company or any person can request to speak to Council if they do not agree with the Development Services Committee recommendation Council will then take a position on the proposal

(ii) The Development Services Department will issue to the telecommunication company (with a copy to Industry Canada) a Letter of Recommendation (Yes No Yes with conditions) stating that the company has consulted with the City and advising of Councils position on the proposal Such letter will be provided within two weeks from the date of Councils decision or in the case where a Letter of Undertaking is required when a Letter of Undertaking has been completed to the Citys satisfaction

(b) Letter of Recommendation without a Public Meeting

(i) City Council delegates the responsibility to provide the Citys position on any proposal that does not require a public meeting to the Commissioner of Development Services

(ii) The Development Services Department will issue to the telecommunication company (with a copy to Industry Canada) a Letter of Recommendation (Yes No Yes with conditions stating that the company has consulted with the City and advising of the Citys position on the proposal Such letter will be provided within two weeks of site plan approval including the execution of a Letter of Undertaking if required

Page 7 middot

134

middot (c) Letter of Undertaking

(i) A Letter of Undertaking is required only in situations where

bull A new telecommunication tower is proposed bull A new aboveground equipment shelter is proposed and bull An upgrade to an existing facility is required by the City to improve the aesthetics

or address grading issues

(ii) When the Development Services Department is satisfied with the site location layout and design the telecommunication company shall provide a Letter of Undertaking in the Citys prescribed format The Letter of Undertaking may address such matters as

bull Site design landscaping grading and servicing and building elevations bull Approval for any new driveway entrances bull Signage bull Security deposits for site improvements bull The removal of all structures upon expiration of the lease bull A commitment to accommodate other telecommunication companies on site

where feasible and bull Other conditions as required

(d) Proposals on City Land

(i) Any proposal from a telecommunication company to acquire or lease land from the City for a telecommunication facility shall be placed on the Development Services Committee agenda

(ii) If the proposal has merit then it should be referred to the Council for approval in principle to acquire or lease City land

(iii) In the event Council approves in principle the sale or lease of City land the process for considering the merits of the proposed tower or proposed aboveground equipment shelter shall be coordinated by Planning Services including the scheduling of a public meeting in accordance with this policy

(iv) Once Council takes a formal position on a proposal on City land after any required public meeting then Economic Development (Real Estate Services) will report on the proposed terms of the lease and

(v) The process for any proposal that does not require a public meeting shall be coordinated by Economic Development (Real Estate Services)

Note Minor changes to or deviations from this policy and procedure may be made by the Commissioner of Development Services Any significant changes must be approved by City Council

Page8

135

Item No DS-13-187 Attachment No 4

Development Services Committee Minutes March 25 2013

The meeting recessed at 217 pm and reconvened in the Council Chamber at 630 pm for a public meeting held pursuant to the Citys Telecommunication Policy concerning a telecommunication tower and related equipment at 420 King Street West with the following in attendance Councillors Aker Chapman England Pidwerbecki Sanders and Mayor Henry Also in attendance were the Commissioner Development Services the Director Planning Services the Manager Development and Urban Design R Bedic Planner B and the Committee Co-ordinator

The Chair outlined the purpose and format of the public meeting

APPLICATION 1 420 KING STREET WEST

PRESENTATION

DS-13-78 Presentation by Rogers Communications Inc

As no members of the public were in attendance and at the concurrence of the Committee Tatyana Mora Rogers Communications Inc did not present an overview of the proposed new telecommunication tower and related equipment at 420 King Street West

DELEGATIONS

No members of the public were in attendance

CORRESPONDENCE

DS-13-64 Tamara Morahan Executive Producer StudioO - Submitting Comments in Support of the Proposed New Telecommunication Tower and Related Equipment at 420 King Street West by Rogers Communications Inc

Moved by Councillor Pidwerbecki

That Correspondence DS-13-64 dated March 7 2013 from Tamara Morahan Executive Producer StudioO submitting comments in support of the proposed new telecommunication tower and related equipment at 420 King Street West by Rogers Communications Inc be referred to staff CARRIED

136


ADDITIONAL AGENDA-RELATED ITEMS


That Correspondence DS-13-76 dated March 22 2013 from Jay Burstein Property Corp Limited co Dines Plaza submitting comments in opposition to the proposed telecommunication tower and related equipment at 420 King Street West by Rogers Communications Inc be added to the agenda CARRIED ON 23 VOTE OF MEMBERS PRESENT

DS-13-76 Jay Burstein Property Corp Limited co Dines Plaza Submitting Comments in Opposition to Report DS-13-57 Proposed New Telecommunication Tower and Related Equipment 420 King Street West Rogers Communications Inc


That Correspondence DS-13-76 dated March 22 2013 from Jay Burstein Property Corp Limited co Dines Plaza submitting comments in opposition to Report DS-13-57 Proposed New Telecommunication Tower and Related Equipment at 420 King Street West submitted by Rogers Communications Inc be referred to staff CARRIED

REPORT

DS-13-57 Proposed New Telecommunication Tower and Related Equipment 420 King Street West Rogers Communications Inc


That the proposed telecommunication tower and related equipment by Rogers Communications Inc at 420 King Street West as set out in Report DS-13-57 dated March 20 2013 be referred back to the Development Services Department for further review and the preparation of a subsequent report and recommendation This referral does not constitute or imply any form or degree of approval CARRIED

Moved by Councillor Chapman

That the meeting adjourn CARRIED

137


20 RECOMMENDATION

That the Development Services Committee recommend to Council

1 That pursuant to Report DS-13-187 dated June 12 2013 Development Services staff be authorized to advise Industry Canada that the City has no objection to the proposal by Rogers Communication Inc to install a telecommunication tower and related equipment at 420 King Street West (File No SPA-2013-02) subject to

(a) Rogers addressing such matters as siting and tower design to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services

(b) Rogers ensuring that the design of the tower can accommodate co-location of other telecommunication service providers and agreeing that it will accept co-location users on the tower

(c) Industry Canada undertaking a peer review of Rogers tower proposal to confirm that the search area for the tower is accurate and the location is required for safety and operational purposes and

(d) Industry Canada providing the City with its peer review comments

2 That a copy of Report DS-13-187 dated June 12 2013 and related Council resolution be forwarded to Rogers Communication Inc and Industry Canada

30 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Not Applicable

40 INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES

41 Public Comments

)gt The minutes of the March 25 2013 public meeting form Attachment No 4 to this report

)gt The City received one letter from the representative of the OwnerProperty Manager of the Dines Plaza at 400 King Street West in opposition to the proposed telecommunication tower The key concerns are

bull The height of the tower since it is out of proportion with the surrounding neighbourhood

bull The location of the tower is in an area considered as a Gateway to Downtown Oshawa

bull Potential health impacts and bull Decreased property values in the area

)gt The City also received one letter of support from the Executive Director of Studio 0

99





43 Auditor General


50 ANALYSIS

51 General



512 Industry Canada






100















1 0 1













102








RBc Attachments

103

Attachment No 1





N





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137





43 Auditor General


50 ANALYSIS

51 General



512 Industry Canada






100















1 0 1













102








RBc Attachments

103

Attachment No 1





N





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137















1 0 1













102








RBc Attachments

103

Attachment No 1





N





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137













102








RBc Attachments

103

Attachment No 1





N





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137








RBc Attachments

103

Attachment No 1





N





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137

Attachment No 1





N





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137





February 14 2013





Dear Mr Bedic





1 Introduction




105







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137







106










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137










3 Proposed Site




107 3














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137














108 4



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137



a) Safety Code 6










8 Conclusion



109 5







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137







Sincerely



110 6



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137



1 1 1 7

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137

APPENDIX2

SURVEY PLAN

11 2 8




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137




I SCALE amp NOTES






I

I ~

fI ~)(1495)





middot j ~ I

~middot I




1





I ~

I ~ ~

i-middot ~




~__ ___





-~

~


f 1 1i Vl

iW ~ ~middot

KING S1REET WE S T




shy

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137

- ---

--





SCALE 11 00

u 0

0 g] 0

2 0

0 r

BUILDING

WIN DO


DOOR

i i i I

i i


-f ASPHALf

OP OF SlOPE


s024 --i 1 J ~~ ~ ~

VIEW LOOKING WEST



OWN BY W LA FORME


r005_ 7 JOB No 12-1193----shy





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137





SCALE 1100



115

or or






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137






11 6 9






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137






11 7 10

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137

APPENDIX4


11 8 11






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137






Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137

Purpose







120 2













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137













Photo Simulation



121 0ROGERS~ 3








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137








122 4














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137














123 ROGERS - 5 0














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137














124 0ROGERS 6








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137








Conclusion





7






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137






Name

Address

Telephone E-mail






and




126 0ROGERS 8





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137





1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137



1 PURPOSE





2 SOURCE


3 POLICY

31 Definitions









128

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137

capacity are















Page2 shy










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137










34 Other



4 PROCEDURE

41 Pre-consultation



Page3

130















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137















Page4

131














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137














Page 5 middot

132














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137














Page6

133





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137





44 Approvals







Page 7 middot

134















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137















Page8

135






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137






PRESENTATION



DELEGATIONS


CORRESPONDENCE




136








REPORT






137








REPORT






137

Date post:	11-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

~Oshawa· Reportapp.oshawa.ca/.../2013/06-17/DS-13-187-Telecommunication-Tower-420-King.pdfthat the...

Documents