‘Dumbfounded’ by antenna
Sean Freeman is worried an earthquake or a strong gust of wind will cause a 450-kilogram radio antenna to crush his house.
But the owner of the antenna says it is consented, and Freeman should be more worried about his house landing on him in a quake.
Freeman, who moved to St Albans in Christchurch four years ago from Auckland, said initially he accepted the 5-metre antenna pole that shot up from his neighbour’s yard, as a Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) report showed it was consented.
But when a second caged antenna that could extend to about 19m was erected within 5m of his property three weeks ago, he was ‘‘dumbfounded’’.
‘‘[My neighbour] said there’s actually another 4-metre tee going across it as well, with six small antennas coming off that and I was like, ‘you’re joking that’s not going to be staying up there, no way’.’’
Freeman, who has a 2-year-old and a newborn son, said while he was concerned about the effect the ‘‘eyesore’’ would have on his property value, he was more concerned about potential health risks.
‘‘The actual structure, it’s a clothesline pad and [the antenna] is actually overhanging by about halfa-metre . . . it’s just four bolts holding it up . . . if it falls over, it’s going to knock out our house.’’
His 2-year-old son’s room was just metres from the metal structure. He was worried a strong wind would send it toppling over, and did not know if it would emit ‘‘radiation or some sort of frequency’’ that would affect the family’s appliances or health.
The day after the new antenna was erected Freeman contacted the council but was yet to hear back.
His neighbour, Mike Stubberfield, said the antenna was consented for in 1991, when a much larger antenna stood there.
The amateur radio enthusiast of 62 years said it was taken down after the structure buckled during the 2011 quakes. He erected the new tower this month after finding it in the yard of another enthusiast.
The metal triangular-section tower, which weighs about 450kg and can extend to about 19m, complies with the original resource consent, Stubberfield said.
The structure, which is bolted onto a metal frame, sits on a concrete foundation and allows it to ‘‘flex’’, but also keeps it structurally sound, he said.
Stubberfield disputed the idea it would decrease the valuation of neighbouring properties.
‘‘Historically, throughout New Zealand, [with] amateur radio masts the only property they have any [valuation] effect on is the one in which it is situated.’’
Stubberfield said the radio tower would emit some electromagnetic radiation but well below harmful levels. ‘‘I live underneath it and I’m 77 and it hasn’t posed much of a health risk to me. If that’s going to fall over in an earthquake, they won’t be worried about that landing on them, they’ll be worried about their house landing on them.’’
He plans to add tilt winches and a 4m-long antenna to the structure. ‘‘Why can’t people be allowed to indulge their hobbies?’’ he asked. ‘‘Why didn’t they object when the city plan was open for submissions?’’
A Christchurch City Council spokesman said the council’s compliance team was investigating the antenna after receiving a complaint on October 13.
According to the council’s district plan, the top of any utility structure has to be less than 20m above ground level. Any antenna other than a simple wire dipole cannot exceed 0.08m in diameter and 14.9m in length. No part of the antenna, utility structure or guy wires can overhang the property boundary.
If it was in a residential zone, it must also meet the minimum setback and daylight recession plane standards in the plan.
While the spokesman could not comment on whether the antenna complied with regulations, he said if any previous consents were given then as long as the antenna continued to meet the rules, the resource consent would not lapse.
The council has received three complaints regarding the antenna, including Freeman’s. The other two were in November 2009 and January 2010.