Winkler city council has given tentative approval to a new cell tower in town, though it wasn’t without a fair bit of discussion.
BellMTS is hoping to put two new towers up in Winkler to boost signal strength in the growing community.
They’re pitching for the first to be built on city-owned land in Winkler’s Parkland recreational campus. The second will be somewhere in the south end of town, though firm details on exactly where have not yet been released.
At its April 28 meeting, council voted on a conditional use application to allow for the first 30-meter communications tower in what is currently zoned as a parks and recreation area.
Bell Telecommunications has asked to lease a 6x6m portion of land at 1045 Grandeur Ave. for the tower and a fenced compound at its base.
In its report to council, the city planning department noted this request meets all the current federal regulations and saw no major issues with the proposal.
However, two area residents stepped up to speak out against the selected site.
“I want to be clear from the start that this is not about being against technology or progress. Reliable connectivity matters to all of us,” said Jack Froese. “But it also matters where infrastructure like this is placed and how those decisions affect the people who live here.”
He raised questions about the health impacts of long-term exposure to cell tower emissions and the research being done on the matter.
“Given that uncertainty, it’s reasonable for residents to ask for a cautious approach, especially when the proposed location is so close to homes where families spend most of their time,” Froese said, asking if a commercial or industrial site would be a better fit for this tower.
“Supporting connectivity doesn’t mean accepting the most convent option for providers if it comes at expense of residents,” he noted.
Froese’s concerns were echoed by fellow resident Don Falk, who also asked council to look for a different location.
“I’d also like to appeal to council to look after the interests of its citizens versus maybe some of the technology that we have,” he said.
Speaking on behalf of Teletek Structures, which is building the tower for Bell, Jeanne Piercey noted they carefully evaluated all properties within the boundary drawn to improve cell service in that part of Winkler.
“In the area that we were provided there were no suitable options for commercial or industrial properties that would be suitable,” she said. “To achieve the goals that Bell wants to achieve in this area for capacity and also coverage, it would have to be in the location where they identified.”
Piercey noted every tower has to go through an application process and meet Health Canada’s safety standards. Should technology change in the years to come—requiring an upgrade from 5G to 6G, for example—another safety analysis would be done.
Councillor Don Friesen voiced concern, however, about Canada’s current safety standards when it comes to cell towers and whether they’re behind the times in comparison to that of other countries. He noted that he’d prefer not to see it in such a residential area, especially so near a school (Parkland Elementary).
Councillor Andrew Froese pointed out that Winkler’s cell service is already dismal through large parts of the city.
“My question is if you don’t want this tower there and they don’t put a tower in, then what?” he asked. “There’s residents in the south side of the city too, or anywhere all over the city, that don’t have cell service. We have worse cell service here than Brunkild does.”
After a fair bit of back and forth about safety concerns, cell coverage challenges, and whether or not it falls under a municipal council’s purview to second-guess federally set safety standards, council voted 6-1 in favour of the conditional use, with Friesen the dissenting vote.
Council did, however, adjust the wording of the resolution so that once Teletek holds public consultations on the matter it will come back to city council for a final decision before construction can begin.
