Port Hope council heard from Tracy Patterson during a delegation at its July 9 meeting. She is opposed to a cell tower proposed for Oak Hill Road.
Members of the public and several Port Hope councillors were critical of a consultant at a regular council meeting on July 9 over a proposed cell tower near Campbellcroft.
Two delegations and several politicians expressed concerns about a cell tower proposed for 1564 Oak Hill Road.
Chris Leggett and Collin Lavery from Spectra Point attended the meeting to summarize the proposal for council. The Eastern Ontario Regional Network and Rogers Communications are working with the consultants to improve wireless communication in rural Port Hope. This initiative aims to improve access to broadband and cellular services in Eastern Ontario.
The current proposal includes a 60-metre towner to be built. The initial tower proposal was a 90-metre tower.
Public consultations took place in February and April. Area residents expressed deep concerns about the original proposal. The consultant told council it also received many emails and other communications opposed to the location. Opponents argue the tower will negatively impact the environment. It is within the Oak Ridges Moraine, a provincially protected area of 1,900 sq. km. between Caledon and Rice Lake. Besides the legislative constraints placed on the moraine, residents argue it will impact wildlife and the environment, including migratory birds.
Councillor Claire Holloway Wadhwani also expressed her dissatisfaction with the consultant’s process. She pointed out that the consultant’s presentation before council differed from the one on the agenda.
She also reflected on the feedback she has received from the public. She pointed out her concerns about the public consultations held earlier in the spring.
“One of the concerns that I heard very consistently was a sense of confusion, frustration, you know, from members of the community who are engaging around this issue,” she said. “(Residents) take this very seriously and have been doing their research and showing up and trying to participate. But the process has felt confused.”
She said it was unsatisfactory because people could not see slides or other documentation properly, and the materials presented needed to be more consistent.
“And I know these are just small details. And I may sound like I’m nitpicking. But when it is an issue that is of concern to a lot of people who live in this community, and we see a process where things seem a little bit shoddy in terms of how information is being presented and shared, it just doesn’t breed a lot of confidence,” she said.
Councillor Vicki Mink also asked several pointed questions about the proposal.
Following Spectra Point’s presentation, Tracy Patterson, who said she has 20 years of experience as a water resource manager, appeared as a delegation.
She urged the council not to support the proposal, citing its offering only one location rather than several alternatives. Patterson also criticized the lack of compliance with various legislative requirements related to the moraine, emphasizing its negative effects on the water table, fish, and birds. She said there needed to be more rationale for the site selected.
She compared her experiences as a water resources manager to the consultant’s process so far.
“I’ve been involved in multiple environmental assessments and consultation processes, and they are organized. We receive input. We explain the entire process,” Patterson told council. “We take them through the site selection process and garner feedback in that process. And we incorporate that feedback into our final decision. None of that was done.”
A second delegation from a resident’s group called the Ganaraska Oak Ridges Guardians came next. Judith Blakely and Steven Brownell spoke on behalf of the group, echoing many of the concerns already raised.
Both delegations urged council not to support the tower.
Port Hope council received all three presentations for information. Town staff will consolidate the information and a report from the consultant to be presented at the next council meeting in August.
It will be up to the consultant to decide whether or not to return and continue the process.