Cell tower dials up a storm in Maryhill
‘Offensive’ structure a tall order for village: It will dwarf historic church and a wonderful vista, residents say
MARYHILL — For more than 140 years, St. Boniface Church has stood as the tallest structure in the little village of Maryhill. Some residents aim to keep it that way.
Opposition is mounting in the Township of Woolwich to a proposed 70metre communications tower — roughly twice as tall as Maryhill’s iconic church — which opponents argue could ruin the historic charm of their settlement.
While there are some residents who complain the town needs better cellphone reception, others say a cell tower has no place near their village and its 19th-century landmarks.
They’ve filed a petition, and are lobbying their municipality to push the builder, Shared Network Canada, to look for another location.
“It would ruin the heritage landscape of the town,” said Donna Hartman, one of the residents leading the charge to stop the tower.
“That church has been what’s drawn people to the community for years. This proposal is offensive.”
The Toronto-based company has already leased land on a vacant farm property on St. Charles Street East, just a few hundred metres from the village.
Shared Network Canada says it needs to locate the tower as close to the village as possible to “deliver top cellular and data speeds” for the residents of Maryhill, according to spokesperson Dom Claros.
What SNC declines to explain is that the typical range for a cell tower is usually somewhere between 35 to 65 kilometres — which would reach much larger populations in Kitchener
and Guelph, well beyond a few hundred potential customers in Maryhill.
“They’ve never proven a local need for that tower. I think it’s for somebody else,” said Bonnie Bryant, a Maryhill resident for 16 years.
Bryant sat on a recent University of Waterloo committee that identified Maryhill as a good candidate to be designated a cultural heritage landscape — something she and others hope could give the village some protection against the proposed tower and any industrial encroachment.
The study says sites such as the Heritage Cross (1846), Maryhill Inn (1850), the Commercial Tavern (1854) and St. Boniface School (1898) are part of a unique historic landscape, anchored by the church, that needs to be preserved.
The nearby village of West Montrose, settled around 1850, has a similar heritage designation that residents recently used to prevent a proposed gravel pit.
“What it does is really protect from a bunch of heavy industrial uses that don’t belong there,” Bryant said.
“They want to protect the whole village, and its visual landmarks. If they put that tower in where they’re proposing, you’ll come to the corner and you’ll see this giant tower before you see anything else.”
The company says it has tried to be sensitive to residents’ concerns, proposing a wireless tower with no lights that “will blend into the background of the surrounding farm field.” It points out the proposed location sits in a valley and not on a hilltop.
“Once a couple of residents raised concerns of the vista or view which may be impeded due to the tower, we updated our proposal to reflect a tower without any wires and moving the tower further into the farm field,” Claros declared in an email.
“Our updated proposed tower will be a sleek self-supported tower which will be painted sky grey and allow for the skyline to shine through in order to allow the tower to blend into the background of the surrounding farm field.”
SNC adds the proposed tower will have room for multiple cellular and internet carriers, which it says reduces the need for more towers in the area.
The Township of Woolwich, meanwhile, is reviewing residents’ concerns, and trying to weigh them against the need for a cell tower before it makes a recommendation within 180 days.
The municipality can’t stop the tower — since telecommunications infrastructure is a federal jurisdiction — but it can influence the process.
“We’re going to look at some of the key areas, what’s an acceptable distance, and whether it detracts from some of cultural and historic view points. And if we deem that it does, are there ways to mitigate that?” said John Scarfone, the township’s manager of planning.
“But you do have to balance it. We have to look at the need for it, too.”
Some residents in Maryhill say they were caught off guard by the plans for the tower.
They blame the company for organizing a poorly-attended and poorly-advertised public meeting in Bloomingdale.
Plans for a second public meeting, this time in Maryhill, are in the works.
Hartman said she’s hopeful the municipality will agree the proposed location isn’t suitable, and push the company to find alternatives.
Last week, she appeared before township councillors, presented almost 200 signatures on a petition, and urged them to block the tower.
“The wonderful vista of this quaint, historic community will be destroyed by a steel tower with lights, twice its height with no architectural merit,” she said.