This comes after many area residents and businesses signed a petition asking for a public meeting to express their concerns.
The petition was signed by nearly every business owner of the village.
The proposed 90-metre tower would have been sited with a clear view from the main street and in the middle of its westerly view. It also would have required red and white flashing lights and steady burning continuous red lights.
At the meeting, councilor Keith Buck asked Rogers representative Eric Belchamber (who appeared virtually) if Rogers would be willing to work with the municipality and the community to find a more suitable location.
“Would you be prepared today to commit to engaging with this municipality and its stakeholders to locate and identify an alternate available site?” asked Buck.
“No, Mr Buck. We would not”
Tom Newman, who had presented the petition at an earlier council meeting, spoke about the importance of preserving Maynooth’s visual integrity, citing the municipal and county commissioned “Revitalization Report”, which recommended that for Maynooth to prosper, it should build upon village history and protect its surrounding natural landscape, as well as promote Maynooth as the southern gateway to Algonquin Park.
Every year thousands of visitors travel to Maynooth for its rural charm and proximity to the Park.
“This view is our jewel, it is our livelihood, it is our common heritage and no individual or corporation has the right to disrespect it.” Newman said in a letter to Rogers. “This tower location would in fact be a blow to all of those who have worked so diligently on the well-being and growth of our community.”
The owner of Maynooth’s historic Arlington Hotel, Ro Munich, wrote a letter to Rogers expressing his concern about the tower’s 24 /7 lights that would shine into the windows of guests who had come to experience the rural surroundings.
In response, Belchamber suggested that Munich could address this issue by closing his curtains.
In the final public comment period Newman spoke again, emphasizing that Rogers had failed to properly consult the public.
“Section 4 (of the ISED tower siting protocol) specifically states that proponents must always contact the applicable land use authorities to determine the local consultation requirements and to discuss the local preferences regarding antenna system siting and/or design” quoted Newman.
“This whole issue did not need to occur if Mr. Belchamber had talked to this land use authority and asked them: Do you think that this is a suitable location to put a tower, right in the direct view of the Main Street of this village?”
At the final public comment period, Maynooth resident Jennifer Katz also spoke, thanking council members for listening to their constituents and for standing up to corporate intimidation, acknowledging it can be daunting.
“I want to express gratitude for the efforts of the municipal councilors” said Katz, “they’re carrying a burden. I want them to know that they’re not alone, this community supports you”
The proposed cell tower would have been located at 84 Peterson Road in Maynooth.
