Bell Tower is democracy in action

May 29, 2013 · 0 Comments

(Re: Reader has a novel solution to Bell Tower, May 14, 2013)

I read with interest the above commentary. Mr. Marshall states that he was surprised about the “sudden outcry” and residents “have had plenty of warning and consultation.”
Nothing could be farther from the truth!
We who have been personally involved and are in the know regarding the process undertaken to erect this tower would like to share with you that the rules and the process for consultation and engaging our community were broken and flawed; not to mention that in the proposal submitted by Bell to Township of King and their approval of the same has little or no factual information to substantiate the need for a tower with the exception of a comparison of 2 – 3”X 5.5” graphic images in which the second image states the following: “the proposed installation will satisfy network engineering requirements and will improve coverage and capacity in the service target area”.
There is mention of “potential for dropped calls and the slowing of data” but no information to support the same. The argument in the application was that “there are no existing structures in the vicinity of sufficient height to satisfy network engineering requirements therefore, a new installation is required.” Yet Bell had another application at St. John’s Sideroad west of Bathurst, so you have to ask- what is this all about?
The consultant for Bell requested a waiver on the need for public consultation from Industry Canada initially and was a “no show” for the open house with no notice given of the cancellation June 12, 2012.
According to Industry Canada standards and the Township of King rules 27 Aurora households were to be notified in writing and according to Town of Aurora 52.
According to the Mayor of King “approximately 10 Aurora households were notified” by the consultant for Bell.
I could go on about the flaws and discrepancies but want to take this opportunity to say and I for one am not concerned about the esthetics. My issue is with the potential health impacts of living near this mega-tower which is due to host several other carriers, and I am in healthcare!
We doubt that the transmission machinery in this tower is pointed only at the cows and the open fields of King Township but rather into our homes, down our streets, towards the core of the Town of Aurora. The emissions from these types of things can carry for long distances according to scientific literature. Many jurisdictions in our province alone do not allow them near or in close proximity to residential areas, families with small children, and have refused to approve applications in these locations. So why should we?
It is also interesting that in the lease contracts for the land there is a clause to state the Bell is not responsible for any health impacts or concerns as a result of the tower but the person who leased them the land is.
The lot where the tower sits is 39 acres, with approx. 1010 feet of frontage on Bathurst and the tower is located 79 feet from the road, what’s up with that you ask? We need your help to fight for the rights of everyday people and to help toe the line on big business thinking they can do whatever they want!
We have the Town on our side and lots of “ammunition” for a worthy cause.
The next Town of Aurora Council meeting is on May 28, 2013 at 7 p.m. According to Bell’s lead for this project the response from our community has been “unprecedented.”
Informally we have heard that Bell has offered to paint the tower and put up some landscaping….which by the way has been a part of what has been an initial offering in some of their other proposals. How about moving the tower to the backyard of one their executives?

Anitta Robertson
Aurora