Data request

The city needs more information and another public meeting before it decides whether to reject a proposed wireless tower city council voted early Tuesday morning.

On Aug. 15, council deferred its decision to send a letter of non-concurrence, its only recourse against a proposed 50 metre Bell Mobility tower near John Street Road, until Monday night

Bell’s Matthew Milligan said the tower is part of his company’s plan to expand coverage from Sault Ste. Marie to Kenora. As more people use data rather than voice on their wireless devices, more capacity is needed. He said putting up more towers in the area would be consistent with the city’s plan to help small business and expand wireless infrastructure.

But while Bell is directed to try and find locations to collocate for its towers, such as apartment buildings in major urban centres, the area near John Street Road doesn’t have the necessary buildings in place. That’s why Bell needs to build a tower instead.

"Once you go further outside of the area closer to the downtown area…there are not a lot of collocation options," Milligan said.

Several councillors suggested other options or locations but Milligan said the location was needed.

"There’s some play," Milligan said. "There’s a not a lot of play though."

While residents in the area are concerned with lights from the tower, Milligan said they won’t know whether the tower needs lights until its applications go into the federal government. But Bell can’t do that without a letter of concurrence or nonoccurrence from the city.

Council chose to wait to send a letter to Industry Canada until Bell holds a second public meeting, which Milligan told Coun. Trevor Giertuga hasn’t been set yet.

Mayor Keith Hobbs wanted council to vote to send a letter right away, an idea that was narrowly shot down.

"I heard it all tonight I think we’re just wasting our time if we do that (wait for the second meeting" Hobbs said.

Coun. Andrew Foulds, along with Coun. Iain Angus, said that the city should have as much information as possible before making a decision. And since there is no time line associated with the tower, it wasn’t time sensitive.

"I would feel much more comfortable having a formal report here" Foulds said.

Administration also wanted more information from the company. City development manager Mark Smith said Bell needs to provide more information to defend its position on the location of the tower.

"I’m surprised that Bell can’t speak for their application quite frankly," Smith said.

Residents also expressed their concerns saying the company was not very forthcoming with information at its first meeting Aug. 3 and has been even less so since then. Atillio Garro said when he requested the exact location of the tower, Bell sent him a GPS location for a spot near the Arctic Circle. Garro represents a group of area residents who requested city council send a letter of non-concurrence.

"We’ve proven residents in that area are unhappy with the location of that tower," Garro said.

Coun, Aldo Ruberto said that towers like the one being proposed don’t belong in neighbourhoods. But Milligan said towers are everywhere and they’ll keep popping up as demand for wireless technology grows.

"What I’m hearing is that residents don’t want a tower anywhere," Milligan said. ""That is not how you build a modern wireless network."
The decision ultimately lies with the federal government. Smith said the federal government might not factor a letter of non-concurrence into its decision.
"I’m hearing that they (federal government) might not put any weight on it (the letter) anyway," Hobbs said.
"Correct," Smith said.