Tower anxiety

Lynda Zadan collects signatures for a petition objecting to a 45-metre tower near Roblin Lake on Saturday.

Residents reject plan for broadband Internet tower near Roblin Lake

Aproposed tower intended to improve, and in some instances introduce, broadband Internet access to about 1,000 households around Ameliasburgh met stiff resistance from about 30 residents at a public meeting there last week.

Representatives from Internet service provider Xplornet and the Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN), a creation of the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus funded in part by the federal government, attempted— mostly in vain—to explain why they were proposing to erect a new 45-metre tower on farmland on the south side of Roblin Lake.

Paula Preston from EORN explained that, as part of her organization’s mandate to extend high speed Internet access to as much of rural Eastern Ontario as possible, she had asked Xplornet to come up with a plan to reach households with “fixed wireless” access around Ameliasburgh. (Other locations are being developed around the County concurrently.) She noted the high ground around the village afforded a large reach to potential subscribers, as well as a clear view to a network access point located in Trenton.

Many residents said they welcomed improved Internet access but didn’t want a new tower constructed to provide it—at least not where proposed—on the Gibson farm at the end of Gibson Lane, not far from Al Purdy’s A-frame cottage.

A 200-foot Bell tower already looms over the village at the west end of Roblin Lake. Nick Parker of Xplornet explained his firm had tried, but was unable to come to a workable financial arrangement to use the existing tower. This explanation satisfied very few.

“This is all about money?” asked one angry resident. Others wanted to see a list of alternative sites of “vertical real estate” Xplornet had considered.

Parker explained that aside from the existing Bell tower and another site at the intersection of Whitney Road and Gibson Lane, no other site had been investigated.

He explained that once they find a willing host in a prime location, his firm doesn’t accumulate other potential sites.

His answer only served to frustrate many of the gathered residents. Some local councillors too.

Preston told the group it wasn’t her intention to push this tower upon a community that didn’t want it. But she also noted that another location might not work as well, and if the economics didn’t work, the service might not be provided.

A suggestion came from the floor that the organization look into locating the tower at the corner of Whitney and Salem Roads. But the suggestion was barely uttered before another resident stood up to politely, but firmly, state that that property would not be available to host a tower. The comment served to underline the likelihood that no matter which site was chosen the tower would meet some objection.

Nevertheless Preston said that if council refused to go along with the proposed site, EORN and Xplornet would endeavour to find another workable location for the tower.

Ameliasburgh Councillor Nick Nowitski scolded the EORN and Xplornet officials for presenting a poor argument.

“You presented no alternatives,” said Nowitski. “You should have had a handful of options and reasons why they were all rejected in favour of the Gibson Lane site.”

Then with tongue in cheek he suggested that they could have considered locating their gear on the spire of the former church in which the group was meeting.

“You could have disguised it as a cross,” offered Nowitski.

Not all present on Thursday night objected to the tower location. Some came to learn how soon they might benefit from the service and competition. But the tone of the meeting offered little encouragement to speak in support.

The project is now in limbo until council decides its fate—likely early in May.