Cellphone tower wipes $160k from property value, resident says

A Wānaka woman says $160,000 was wiped off the value of her property after a cellphone tower was erected on her doorstep without notice. But the company behind the telecommunications infrastructure says its location balanced community needs and amenity — and neighbours had been spoken to. Aleisha Hildred said when she bought a home on a 4000sq m section in Northlake, in January, 2021, she was investing in her future. “I put everything I had into it — debt up to my eyeballs — but I foresaw it would be worth it and hopefully set me up for life,” Ms Hildred said. Ms Hildred subdivided the property, with plans to sell both the home and the subdivided section, but in December, days before a deadline sale of the subdivided section, an 18-metre cellphone tower was erected in the road reserve adjacent to the section, causing a buyer to pull out. [Missing Credit]Aleisha Hildred is dwarfed by an 18-metre cellphone tower installed outside her former property just days before a deadline sale. Photo: Ruairi O'Shea Ms Hildred said she believed the deadline sale would have seen the section, which has a capital value of $900,000, sell for around $860,000. Instead, in July, seven months after the installation of the cellphone tower, the section was sold for $700,000. Ms Hildred was yet to realise the full financial loss brought about by the tower, with the remainder of her property still for sale. But she warned the same could happen to anyone and property owners would not know until it was too late. The first Ms Hildred knew of the tower was when a neighbour told her. “There were workers on the side of the road and he must have pulled over to ask them what they were doing … that’s how I found out about it,” Ms Hildred said. “I couldn’t believe that somebody could just do that. “I’ve gone through all the processes and avenues, and I’ve asked everyone that I can think of in government and there’s no recourse, and no way to recover costs. “I think people should be concerned that somebody can devalue your assets out of nowhere.” A Queenstown Lakes District Council spokesman said the Resource Management Act stated “controlled activities” — such as the cellphone tower at Northburn Rd — could not be notified. Ms Hildred said the lack of notification of the consent application prevented dialogue, which could have led to a less harmful outcome, while still facilitating the tower. “Even if they moved it 10m, it would have made a huge difference to my life,” Ms Hildred said. Asked why this location was chosen and whether moving it 10m was an option, a 2degrees spokesman said neighbours were spoken to and the site was preferred due to its elevation. “As part of a new site build, we engage neighbours prior to consenting and build, and follow all necessary steps as required by local and national legislation and regulation. “2degrees has selected this site which it has assessed will provide a highly effective service to the largest possible catchment area from the smallest possible structure, outside of direct line of sight from nearby living areas. “If we moved it 10m, because the ground drops away, it would require a corresponding increase in height, and the diameter of the pole structure would have to increase to provide this height … the community would have a much larger structure in this scenario.” Once the tower was installed, Ms Hildred was asked by 2degrees to suggest other sites where the tower could have been placed, before identifying a space north of the Northlake development further from any individual’s home. “A site built at the northern end of this area would be so large that it would have major and widespread community impact, so does not achieve the balance we are required to meet,” the 2degrees spokesman said. Approached for comment on Ms Hildred’s experience, Waitaki MP Miles Anderson said “this does seem unfair to the property owner that a third party can have such an impact on their property’s value”. “I contacted 2degrees about this matter and their response was that placement of the tower was permitted by the council. “I would like to see councils notifying property owners for such significant installations so at least consideration of less intrusive placement could be heard,” Mr Anderson said. Ms Hildred said she believed she deserved financial compensation. 2degrees did not answer Allied Media questions about whether the business accepted responsibility for negatively affecting the value of Ms Hildred’s property, or whether it had made any attempt to compensate Ms Hildred. Mr Anderson said in a bid to remediate individuals in Ms Hildred’s position in future, “new consenting legislation to replace the RMA is progressing through parliament and will include provisions for regulatory relief for property owners and to strengthen the rights of property owners.” ruairi.oshea@alliedmedia.co.nz

Cellphone tower wipes $160k from property value, resident says

Election 2026 interview: NZ First’s Andy Foster

Bar staff forced to pay drunken molester after vigilante street scuffle

Dunedin cafe owner says roadworks left her $110k out of pocket

Dunedin mum with months to live wants to make lasting memories for her daughter

Nats’ South Island plan attempt to ‘leave us off the map’