Attachment 1
Telecommunications Towers – Synopsis of Administrative Processes/Requirements in other Municipalities.
Municipality
Administrative Processes / Requirements
Decisions and Endorsements
General Notes
City of Airdrie
 Facilitative approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (no Development Permit required)
using the same Policy requirements as the City of
Calgary, as described below.
 Planning provides a position to Industry
Canada as to whether or not the City is
satisfied with the public consultation
process and/or requests made to mitigate
land use impact.
 Co-location is encouraged at the outset
of the process for existing towers
within 500 m of the proposed location.
 Employ design measures to mitigate
visual impact of towers visible from
residential areas.
City of Calgary
 Facilitative approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (no Development Permit required).
 City Policy states that a proposed free-standing tower
greater than 15 m in height or within 100 m of a park or
low density residential area requires public consultation
and a development submission to Planning and Building
for review.
 Notify property owners within 300 m of the proposed
tower location.
 Planning and Building provides a
decision of “Concurrence” or Non
Concurrence” to Industry Canada that
the municipality is satisfied with the
public consultation process and/or
requests made to mitigate land use
impact.
 Co-location is encouraged at the outset
of the process for existing towers
within 500 m of the proposed location.
 Some towers allowed in Road ROW.
 About 400 applications for freestanding cell towers have been
endorsed since 1997.
City of Edmonton
 Facilitative approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (no Development Permit required).
 City Policy states that a proposed free-standing tower
greater than 15 m in height or located within a distance of
six times its height to a low density residential area
requires public consultation and a development
submission to Planning and Development for review.
 Notify property owners within a distance of six times the
tower height from the proposed location, and also City
Councillors, community league presidents and other
identifiable groups.
 Planning and Development provides a
recommendation to Industry Canada to
issue or not to issue a
telecommunications license based on its
satisfaction with the public consultation
process and/or requests made to mitigate
land use impact.
 Co-location is encouraged at the outset
of the process.
 Few towers allowed in Road ROW.
 About 100 applications for freestanding cell towers have been
endorsed since 1997.
City of Montreal
 Regulatory approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (Development Permit required).
 Tower height is restricted to maximum heights for sectors
(zones), and facade setbacks which are equal to the height
divided by 2.
 Decision of the Development Officer
based on compliance with the zoning
bylaw which stipulates land use and
design guidelines that were prepared in
cooperation with the telecommunications
industry.
 Antenna may not be installed on a
heritage building or monument unless
it is completely concealed.
Report 2005PDP018 - Attachment 1 - Page 1 of 2
Attachment 1
Telecommunications Towers – Synopsis of Administrative Processes/Requirements in other Municipalities.
Municipality
Administrative Processes / Requirements
Decisions and Endorsements
General Notes
Strathcona County
 Facilitative approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (no Development Permit required).
 Land use and public consultation policies are set out in
the Municipal Development Plan.
 Height limits are specified according to land use category
(e.g. Urban Service Area)
 Planning and Development provides a
decision of support or non-support to
Industry Canada as to whether the
County is satisfied with the public
consultation process and/or requests
made to mitigate land use impact.
 Policy identifies locations for cell
phone towers and locations where they
should not be located such as heritage
resource areas.
 Policy establishes design standards.
 Exclusivity agreements to restrict colocation is discouraged.
City of Surrey
 Council approval approach used to administer the
installation of free-standing towers.
 Height limit is 12 m in all zones; a Development
Variance Permit Application is required if height is
beyond 12 m and if the tower is located within a distance
of six times its height to a low density residential area
public consultation is required.
 Planners conduct a site plan approval
process for towers over 12 m in height;
public consultation if the development is
in proximity to a residential area; and,
then prepare comments and a
recommendation that is presented to
Council for approval.
 Towers in residential areas require the
“lead carrier” to obtain reference
letters from other carries stating if they
have an interest in co-location.
 Towers in non-residential areas should
be built to accommodate a minimum
of two additional carriers.
City of Toronto
 Council approval approach used to administer the
installation of free-standing towers.
 Submissions for telecommunications equipment are
handled by a site plan approval process which involves an
internal circulation and review. No public notification is
given.
 Planners conduct a site plan approval
process, and then prepare comments and
a recommendation that is presented to
Council for approval.
 The amalgamation of the boroughs
into the City of Toronto means that
approach in the established districts is
presently inconsistent.
 Towers are rarely used because of the
availability of roof-top locations.
City of Winnipeg
 Regulatory approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (Development Permit required).
 Regulated by the Zoning Bylaw, towers and antenna are
classified as Conditional Uses requiring public notice and
are allowed in certain zones.
 Decision of the Development Officer
based on compliance with the zoning
bylaw and public input.
 Appeals are taken to the Board of
Adjustment.
 Residential locations are restricted to
roof-top installations.
 Carriers are encouraged to locate
antennas on existing infrastructure
such as hydro towers and utility poles.
City of Vancouver
 Regulatory approach used to administer the installation of
free-standing towers (Development Permit required).
Discretionary Permit requires public input.
 As a Charter City, the Director of
Planning assumes more discretion to
approve or not approve towers.
 Carriers are encouraged to locate
antennas on existing infrastructure
such as hydro towers and utility poles.
Report 2005PDP018 - Attachment 1 - Page 2 of 2