• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Virginia Waters
    October 23, 2012 - 15:48

    Tom Hann is wrong in his assertion that Industry Canada has the final say in approving the construction of telecommunications towers. The department can request the province approve a grant of crown land, it can buy privately owned lands, or it can expropriate private lands for that purpose. But its approval of such facilities is subject, in many cases, to the consent of municipal and/or provincial authorities. Even Industry Canada can't decide to plunk down a 15 metre tower in the middle of a subdivision simply because it wants to. And if they could, I would suggest they put it next to Tom Hann's house. ............ This absurd notion that we all have to become slaves to the whims of large corporations and government needs to be challenged by more people, more often. That idea flies in the face of people like Hann and posters like James, who tells us all we have to join the 21st century - no matter what visual or auditory pollution that imposes. It's an absolute must so Suzy doesn't drop that important call to her hairdresser while she's driving along Merrymeeting Road. .... What James doesn't acknowledge is that, when there just isn't suitable space in the preferred area for a tower, there are all kinds of technical solutions and work-arounds. The problem with those solutions is that they're not all dirt cheap like putting the tower in someone's back yard. Can't wait for next fall, so I can help un-elect some councillors like Hann and the mayor to boot.

    • Christopher Chafe
      October 24, 2012 - 07:35

      However Bell Canada CAN INFACT go to Industry Canada and file a complaint and then go through the arbitration process. Thus giving Industry Canada the FINAL SAY. Perhaps Virginia Waters, you should leave out the NDP'isms if you want to muster up support for your cause. But on a side note there is a awesome piece of land behind my property going to waste, they can put a tower there, because where I live the cell coverage sucks!

  • John
    October 23, 2012 - 11:10

    What "hazards" are they concerned about? The tower falling on someone? I assume that they are concerned about perceived health risks. Actually, the tower does not emit enough power to do any harm to humans. The bigger risk is your phone which, in the absence of suitable towers, emits higher power and becomes the real risk. The solution to reducing health risks with cell phones is to build MORE towers to ensure the phones are operating at the lowest power settings, which they do automatically when there is good signal quality.

    • fog
      October 23, 2012 - 14:12

      I find that fascinating, do you have a source for that info?

  • Art John
    October 23, 2012 - 10:50

    "Tom Hann said the development committee has recommended to reject Bell Mobility Inc.’s proposal to install a telecommunications tower...." That is the same as me voting to support a law banning global warming. Sounds good, but has no basis in reality. Council has no power to have any effect on this decision. Politicans finding a parade to jump in front of!! LOL

  • James
    October 23, 2012 - 10:14

    People need to realize the technical side of how cell towers work. You cant just place them anywhere. You have to account for propagation errors, the line to sight of nearby buildings, transmit and receive power. Why block something that will improve cell reception. The article mentions that children would be playing near this tower what if the children are playing, become seriously injured and there is no cell coverage to contract medical services. People need to get off the heritage bandwagon and join the rest of the 21st century.

  • Saucy Face
    October 23, 2012 - 09:16

    I don't live in the Merrymeeting Rd area but I have to say council did the right thing. I cannot imagine how ridiculously out of place a 15 metre high anythng would look like in that area, I wonder how Heritage Shannie voted on this ...

  • Saucy Face
    October 23, 2012 - 09:13

    I don't live in the Merrymeeting Rd area but I have to say council did the right thing. I cannot imagine how ridiculously out of place a 15 metre high anythng would look like in that area, I wonder how Heritage Shannie voted on this ...

  • Duggan
    October 23, 2012 - 08:24

    Good decision. People come first, not the corporate elites in Toronto or the Fort William building in St. John's.

    • T.Sanford
      October 23, 2012 - 09:05

      Presumably more coverage is needed? If so, in some parts of the world church towers provide a convenient location for cell tower equipment. It also provides some revenue to the churches in the form of rent. Any church towers in the desired area?

    • Chris Chafe
      October 23, 2012 - 09:50

      T.Sanford: There is no presuming we need better coverage......it is widely known that St. John's and the entire province as a whole has mediocre cell coverage at best. As for your comment about church towers.........you can bet dollars to doughnuts that they will still complain about that. There is just no pleasing the crowd that lives in this city.

  • fog
    October 23, 2012 - 08:16

    There are spots in the city where I get absolute terrible coverage, sometimes even no service. And yet, people like this are trying to block better service, terrible. Yeah, its not "my neighborhood", but I would be fine with a tower in my neighborhood, its just silliness these people are getting on with.