I had a letter from a company wanting to put a telecommunications tower on my property. Just wondering if members have been approached.
The tower is to provide service to areas that have black spots and new subdivisions in the area. The tower would be 30 metres high and the area would be leased for 25 years - the land required is 10 x 10 m square.
Welcome to the community @David13.
Any proposal will be a commercial contact/lease. These can be complex and involve terms and conditions the average home owner may not be familiar with. Itās not a standard consumer agreement. Itās common with commercial agreements to seek legal advice from a suitably experienced solicitor. IE on how to proceed and for support with the contract. Commercial contract conditions are negotiable. Itās certain the proponent will have a prominent legal team behind their contract.
Itās also important to be certain the financial terms are a fair representation of the true value of the site to the proponent based on their current and future needs. The 10x10m site is far more valuable for its position than the base value of the plot and surrounds for personal use. The income stream can be very valuable to the land owner, and will influence the value of the property if one chooses to sell in the near future.
P.S.
Hopefully you have verified that the communication is genuine by contacting the business through details not included in the letter? There are only 3 Telcoās likely to be making an approach. Telstra has been the main supporter of the program, with Optus a distant second. There are also a number of specialist consultants searchable on the web offering services in support of negotiating agreements to lease land to communication providers.
2 Likes
Depending on your state & council regulations; you may need permission to allow the structure. They will also need access to service it, so an easement. They will need room to construct it and potentially rip up your land in so doing. They will need access to power and probably a stand-by generator. They should have a licence to operate.
I worked for a Council and had some experience with this in a small town, albeit some 15 years ago. The town landholders found it too expensive, difficult; and did not proceed. The towers were eventually built on State land under lease on the edge of town. The towers are becoming common, so there could be more streamlined processes and standard contracts now.
3 Likes
20 years ago Telstra lost a bid for a telecom service but āownedā rights to the only reasonable āpadā for a relay tower. They apparently offered it to the winning competitor as required under the tenets of the day, but at an amount that would have roughly equalled their profit if they had won the contract themselves.
Hardball is probably still common in the industry although sharing towers and resources has become more prevalent over time. The most excellent message is
1 Like
They proponent still needs to meet all planing and environmental approvals. On one hand a tower can provide a substantial community benefit through better access when sited in a suitable location. Some localities have fewer suitable locations.
For the property owner as you suggest there are some significant potential property impacts to consider. Iām aware of two comms towers in our area where the impact on the property owners has been minimal, and the direct benefits to the owners supposedly substantial. For some other towers the final site locations have been poor choices in respect of coverage. Nothing is assured until the final approval of many is in place.
Iām with @PhilT. Itās complex and much more than an everyday consumer discussion.
Another consideration is whether the tower might have impact on the site value if one decides to sell. I declined one very nice property because I could not get over the wonderfully designed all concrete electrical reticulation point for the entire estate that went from above to under ground at the end of the the property, no tree to hide it possible.
The agreement could mitigate it to irrelevance but there is also the aspect of personal amenity if it is in eyesight. Another consideration is if you knock them back they could put up something equally or more offensive close by.
2 Likes
Aside from legal and practical issues already addressed there is a possible complication from neighbours and other members of the community.
I know of a case where the owner of the property was undecided and fairly neutral about it but the word got out and then they were seeing protests at their front gate. The invisible rays from the tower were going to turn their nervous systems to mush and they had to be saved from making a terrible mistake.
If you live in a district where antivaccs sentiment is rife, tie-dyed garments and all-natural kale milkshakes are de rigueur there may be a risk.
2 Likes
In addition to other comments ā¦
I would go further than that: How do the legal obligations of the lease transfer to the new owner?
Normally this would be achieved by putting an easement on the title. That will cost (someone) $$.
In my opinion the only advice the OP needs is ā¦ go to a qualified lawyer and a qualified accountant for real advice. (For the latter, are there new tax implications?)
I would be wondering generally though ā¦ what is the size of the property? Is it such that a 30m tower on 10m x 10m can easily disappear, and will hardly be missed? Or is it a substantial impost?
Are there any liability issues? If the tower collapses? If a telco employee or contractor is injured while on your property? Are you invalidating your existing property insurance or is the nature of the property such that that is already covered?
Is the company making it all worthwhile? Or is this peppercorn rent?
There are other a lot of considerationsā¦ is tower land to be leased with or without an servitude/easement ā¦ will there be an encumbrance on title ā¦ how access to the structure is to obtained if not on a property boundary with road frontageā¦ do they need temporary use of surrounding land for construction ā¦ what is the intensity of interference/disruption to surrounding uses ā¦ where are power and comms supply routes/locations and how will these he managed ā¦ what happens at the end of lease (land restoration, removal of infrastructure) ā¦ how will they manage the tower land and who is responsible for it (vegetation , weed control, fencing etc) ā¦ and the list goes on.
The utility/telco company should pay for you to get independent advice to protect your own interests. This is usually a land valuer experienced in telco towers, your locality and impacts of telco towers for compensation calculations.
They may provide funding for legal advice as long as there isnāt any legal action. In the case of legal action, you may be up for all legal costs including initial advice (initial advice being from the point of engagement). If you do engage legal advice, get one you can trust, is experienced in telco towers and is willing to negotiate on you behalf to protect your interests. Avoid legal firms who seem keen to take on the telco as it will end up being only in the lawyers interests.
Do not engage your own advice/experts thinking they will reimburse these costs. They may refuse to reimburse costs if they havenāt agreed to cover such outlays when the services were engaged.
Get everything in writing. Take minutes from discussions and issue minutes to the telco for their review/record (hopefully they do this instead of you having to do it ).
Ask questions when you have them and ask for a single point of contact in the telco - a single person within the telco responsible for communicating with you.
The telco is responsible to gaining all approvals, notifications and public consultations for the structure. They are also responsible for land surveys and any other licences/permits which are needed. It isnāt your responsibility to ensure these things are done/are in place, but may be required to provide consent for applications being madeā¦or assist in their delivery. They should also pay for everything they do as it is their impost on you.
From experience in delivering infrastructure on others land, if you decide that you wish to pursue the offer, avoid being confrontational and try to negotiate satisfactory outcomes. It is easier, and will be less stressful to you through the process, if you try and work with the telco to get a outcome which in balance meets your and the telcos needs.
There is an aspect of community service in your consideration of this request.
Living on the edge of metro Melbourne in a bushfire and storm vulnerable area with mobile reception blackspots and forced onto FTTN, I am acutely aware NBN has removed reliable telecommunications. In the last 3 years we have had weeks without NBN so no telecommunications for those in blackspots.
This is a serious safety issue and an appalling oversight by government promising improvements in telecommunications.
A somewhat related and years long topic is
The core topical question is how @David13 should look after his own interests to remain āwholeā or better.
Some governments create problems despite significant advice and others try to figure out how to mitigate or fix problems they inherit while they often create their own, yet both are referenced as āgovernmentā. There is scant evidence many voters decide on single issues such as telecommunications and NBN services.
I have been in contact legal, taxation, valuation people, my local council, one neighbour.
There are taxation implications with leasing property for an income.
First pass from legal people - no compensation offered should I decide to sign a non binding agreement while they investigate suitability of my property. They wanted my bank details which is a concern given they arenāt offering compensation for their investigations and not allowing other telcos a look at my property.
The other thing the unimproved Land Values in my area have sky rocket as has the improved value which is not reflected in monetary offer. The annual lease increase isnāt based on CPI which I would want.
Also a starting lease at market value.
Council no jurisdiction over the tower as itās a Commonwealth initiative to roll out towers. Other than a DA and no damage to Council infrastructure.
I would be wanting telecommunications company to cover all costs in access to property and infrastructure associated with build. Also indemnity protecting me against any perceived or potential health or loss of income by people in the coverage area of tower.
More to follow
Until such time as there is an agreement (contract) in place why would any be handing over oneās bank details. There are other options including payment by cheque or direct to your solicitors trust account. Are you at liberty to provide further details of the business interested? How were you approached and how are they corresponding with you? How can one distinguish the approaches made from a scammer?
As suggested in prior posts, the mention of āmobile black spot coverageā, at least in experiences in our area where the program has delivered new towers, does not target areas subject to new developments. Weāve several major estate developments not too distant. Those developments have set aside tower sites as part of planning where existing tower sites are not available. Especially with 5G having a much shorter effective range (coverage) and expected as the future norm?
1 Like
Have they offered to reimburse you for any professional fees (legal, valuation etc) associated with seeking your own advice?
If they have agreed to pay reasonable costs associated with seeking professional advice, you will need to provide them with your banking details to receive any reimbursements.
1 Like
Further reason to be cautious and seek sound advice. Itās right to consider CPI. Escalation clauses are common with commercial agreements that have long tenancies. Iāve always relied on the support of a commercially experienced law firm for initial advice and prior to agreeing or even discussing a proposal.
Iāve also relied previously on the assessments of professional valuers to assist in determining what should be a fair value for the intended use. In the instance of a mobile tower, the value of the land may be many times more than the nominal valuation of the property suggests. Itās very location dependant. More so if your property has the only suitable elevated site relative to the area to be covered. There is a further consideration that should value any loss of amenity (my words, the lawyers have their own way of defining it).
No
This topic is not really a consumer issue, however, it can be a David and Goliath issue nonetheless. The Commonwealth legislates and regulates telecommunications, but land use is still subject to state and local government planning rules.
Councils review all applications for telecommunications infrastructure, which must comply with a variety of statutory requirements. E.g., easements for cabling, power grid connection, maintenance access, hazard reduction etc. My late father in law was approached by Optus to put a tower at the top of a hill on the property in the 1990s. The offer was that Optus would pay all the establishment costs and lease the required land and access for $15k p.a . The hilltop was the highest point for many kilometres around. In the end, the in-laws were worried that they would get too much negative blow-back from their neighbours due to the visual blight, and declined.
I would legal advice from a legal practice with a combination of land planning, commercial contract and income tax specialists. It might cost you some money up front, but save you from a bad deal. Iād also insist on an indemnity that holds you harmless from any third party claims relating to the tower. It might be well worth doing, or it might be more trouble than itās worth. My rule would be: If in doubt, donāt.
That was the local experience here. The nearby proposal for the NBN Fixed Wireless tower was held up for more than 18 months over a planning dispute involving two landowners. Council could not resolve. It went to the next level and remained unresolved heading towards round 2 at state level. At a critical point the key objection was suddenly withdrawn. No further comment!
I was secretly hoping the planning application would be permanently blocked. Suffice it to say local communities can offer a variety of objections to towers. Some are motivated by uncommon beliefs. Others perceive making it more difficult is one way to force the providers to deliver a more suitable outcome.
1 Like
Thatās a very diplomatic term for conspiracy theories!
