Alcona cell tower site shot down

Alcona cell tower site shot down

Town will attempt to help Bell Mobility find another location

By Chris Simon

Bell Mobility will be asked to look at alternative sites for a telecommunications tower in Alcona.

Innisfil council rejected a staff recommendation, which called for the construction of a 40-metre tall tri-pole cell tower to be constructed just inside the western boundary of Innisfil Beach Park, during a meeting Wednesday night. While there's still the potential for the tower to be built at the park, council and staff will strongly be pushing for other sites, including the Lakeshore Wastewater Treatment Plant. 

"We're getting an awful lot of objection over this," said councillor Rod Boynton. "I understand the need for cell coverage, but this town has looked at the future function of Innisfil Beach Road and Innisfil Beach Park. We've sunk a ton of money into that. I don't think this belongs there. I don't think Bell should have a sign on our main street. It's the wrong place. If this means we don't have perfect coverage, I can live with that. There's other options; we do not need to bring in a white knight to save us. We have a community we're trying to design for residents, not corporations."

Admittedly, the plant site, which is located along St. John's Road near the 6th Line, is probably less than ideal. But neighbouring residents are clearly opposed to the erection of the tower on public parkland, he said.

Opponents of the project handed a 563-signature petition to council at the beginning of the meeting. They worry about the potential health implications from the radiation emitted by the tower, the aesthetics of the proposal, and the reduction in park space.
"There's a serious debate around this issue; it's a battle being fought in many cities across the country," said Brian Durkin, who lives about one kilometre from the proposed IBP site. "No one's been able to prove the radiation is safe. It comes down to who you believe and trust. The World Health Organization has a list of potential carcinogens, and cell phone radiation is already on the list. Current safety standards are inadequate. I understand wireless devices are necessary, and the convenience they provide is important. But at some point, you have to say 'enough is enough'."

Durkin's wife, Shelley Wright, has been diagnosed with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, a condition that can cause headaches, 'pins and needles' sensations, and a sharp 'zapping' feeling in the posterior part of the brain. It is caused by exposure to microwave frequencies caused by WiFi, cellular phones, wireless headphones and other similar devices. If the project had proceeded as planned, the family likely would have been forced to move.

"Bell makes cell towers look like a big, juicy red apple," she said. "Don't take a bite. It's dirty money; it's wrong to subject entire communities to this form of radiation."
The tower would have been used to provide cellular phone, smartphone (Blackberry and iPhone) and wireless Internet coverage to an estimated 1,000 to 3,000 customers. 

Under the terms of the proposal, town staff also asked for an opportunity to negotiate the placement of municipal branding graphics on the tower, along with some emergency radio infrastructure. The town also wanted tree removal be avoided, and called on Bell to provide funding for municipal equipment and facilities. 

A lease agreement would be expected to generate thousands of dollars in revenue for the town.

"The design is dramatically different than others you see at other tower sites," said councillor Doug Lougheed. "It's probably about as attractive as you can get. I don't want to debate the health issue, but at some point, you have to trust. We take medications that are approved by federal departments, that have gone through research. This is within the existing tree line; the fire hall is in that area, so I don't think it's infringing on the park."

Councillor Lynn Dollin urged caution while dealing with Bell. Since cell towers are federally regulated, Bell could approach a nearby private property owner to erect a tower, and council would be left without sway.  

"In this case, we have control, but only because we own the property," said councillor Lynn Dollin. "If Bell chose to talk to a property that's privately owned, we would have the option to object, but we don't get to make the decision."

http://www.innisfilscope.com/news/2012-09-05/Front_Page/Alcona_cell_tower_site_shot_down.html