Response letters to Telus from four residents: ---------------------------------- Isabel Tipton ----------------------------------------- 780 Winfall Rd Victoria, BC V9C 4E4 September 27, 2010 Dear Mr. Hird; As a Metchosin resident, and current Telus subscriber, I feel compelled to protest your proposed tower on Rocky Point Road. I feel Telus has just jumped at the easiest site from their point of view and not considered community reaction and worries at all. Obviously the current tower on Neild Road does not adequately cover Metchosin, and an additional tower is needed but I do query the site. Your rules and regulations cite visual pollution as a consideration -it would be hard to find a site in Metchosin that was more obvious, and that interrupted the sight lines more. Every single person travelling Rocky Point Road will be smacked in the eyeballs by this high tower right on the roadside . Offers to consult on the colour are insulting. You also consider public access to the site- this could not be easier, it is right on the road and with the current climate of suspicion and anger would be a target for vandalism. I understand that Industry Canada requires tower proponents to engage in a 120 day public consultation process, and that the public should be informed, or given a chance to make representations about many criteria. One is inclined to laugh- some contiguous landowners got notification with 10 days to protest, some didn’t get notification at all. If the local grapevine didn’t work none of us would know anything about this proposal. I am not a contiguous owner, but will have to pass within 30M. of this every time I leave my home unless I walk the Galloping Goose trail to escape. I get my mail within 100 M of the proposed site. There is research doubting the safety of those subjected to radiation from communication towers, and better safe than sorry seems a good rationale to me. There is much of Metchosin on higher ground, not within sight of a main road. Surely you can find a better site. You seem to be trying to rush this through before Metchosin’s tower siting plan is formalized, which smacks of a devious turn of mind. This does not go over well- sincere consultation , and a determined attempt to find a mutually agreeable site would produce much less hostility . Please tell me you will revisit this plan and consult with those affected Yours truly Isabel H. Tipton ----------------------- Steven Kelly --------------------------------------- 4542 Rocky Point Road Victoria, BC V9C 4E4 September 25, 2010 Mr Hird, My name is Steven Kelly and my family and I live directly across the street from the proposed site of Telus’s new 100 foot tower on Rocky Point Road. We would like it to be known that we are vehemently opposed to this site being used and considerably upset at the lack of respect shown to those of us who live in the vicinity of the Juan de Fuca Columbus Club land, where the tower would be situated. We are Telus users and will be changing our providers as soon as possible, no matter what the outcome of this confrontation; Telus has treated us quite contemptuously and as such deserves nothing but the same in return. I do not expect that Shaw or Rogers or any other corporation will be a wonderful entity that aspires to higher ideals than Telus, but the disdain shown by Telus has necessitated that for the sake of my own personal integrity, a stand has to be made. No doubt this matters little to you and in the great scheme of things is but a speck in an ocean of your customers, but it matters to me. I have decided that tact and diplomacy is best left to those who put their faith in it; I do not, at least when dealing with corporations such as the one you have chosen to align yourself with. My stance is against the oppression and injustice that Telus is attempting to force upon is and that is so evident all over our de-regulated world. The capitalist ideals that put profit before people and that put my son’s health at possible risk without a care, are what I am at odds with. I use a cell phone; I use wireless for my laptop; it would be hypocritical of me to just yell no, you cannot put a tower up; by all means put one up; after you have consulted with the folks who live near it; after you have convinced everyone that other sites are not more suited; after you have shown due diligence and respect for all who may be affected by the construction of such a tower and after you have proven that there are no lasting health effects from them. Tell all the people who live in the vicinity of this one and who have compromised immune systems and who are most at risk; tell the little kid who lives a few hundred feet from this towers proposed site and who is going through cancer treatments whilst this debate rages that you are not jeopardizing her recovery, or are you going to do your P.R job and railroad and bluster and blow smoke up all our asses? I assume the latter is what you are most suited to, as conscience and moral fibre seems to be lacking in the world you inhabit. My ego is such that I expect nothing more than continued disdain from you and very little of what I have said to have affected you in any way, but I care not; like I said I will leave the less emotional correspondence to others and be true to myself in any discourse I have with you and your employers. Steven Kelly ------------------- Bev Bacon ----------------------------------------- Dear Mayor and Council, Please use your authority to block the erection of a Telus Tower in a residential neighbourhood so close to our village core. It would be ugly and potentially a health concern. Here's an idea: What about Blinkhorn Mountain? I think the bit at the top is private property that we might like to have access to. Tell Telus they would have to arrange to buy that property from the owner and give us access by way of a trail to a good viewpoint. Just a thought. Bev Bacon Dear Mr. Hird, I am writing to voice my opposition to the locating of a Telus Tower on the proposed site on Rocky Point Rd. in Metchosin, B.C.. This site is entirely inappropriate as it is in a residential neighbourhood close to our village core. Since the tower would be on flat ground close to the road it would be an eyesore for all who go by. I am among the neighbours who feel that the Tower would present an unacceptable health risk to residents. I invite you to work with the community in finding a preferable location. I have one site in mind that may have potential. Feel free to contact me if you are interested in hearing more. Please do not underestimate the vigor of protest that can be generated in our community of 5,000 citizens. We live in Metchosin because we are very clear about what we don't want encroaching in our space and what we do want to preserve. We are organized and commited to protecting the rural essence of our land and our way of being. I hope you will try to make friends here. So far you have made a serious blunder but you can start over and do it right. Sincerely, Bev Bacon ------------------- Sally Garcelon --------------------------------------- September 26,2010 Re: Telus proposal to construct a Radiocommunications Tower at 4537 Rocky Point Road, Metchosin, BC Dear Mr. Hird: As a Metchosin resident for thirty one years I was stunned to see the way you have treated this community with your recent proposal. Instead of engaging in consultation with those of us who live in this neighbourhood a few letters, to a handful of people, marked "To Resident" arrived, and that appears to be your form of communication or lack thereof. No consultation, and an attempt to slip this under the wire with as little dialogue as possible, a "done deal". Great for your company and its bottom line, but not at all great for those of us who live here. The Knights of Columbus, property held by the "Juan de Fuca Columbus Club" is obviously happy to receive the monthly lease money Telus will provide in turn for use of their property as your site. What rural neighbourhood with residents all around would want to live in proximity to this yet to be proved "healthy" cell phone tower? It is not that we are trying to turn back the clock and imagining that this technology is not front and center in society at large. But why site a tower where in all possibility the residents in the area will be affected with adverse health outcomes in the future? I am certain that you are aware of the many studies out there, and we do not wish to be your guinea pigs. So, please move the site to a place more appropriate, where so many families and the center of our community will not have to live in the middle of your tower? I am certain that other sites could be found. Many people with whom I have spoken receive good service with Rogers, and their tower is in a much less invasive site than this one you are proposing. We all know that the 29.9m is the precursor to a going even higher, which will likely occur. And, it would not surprise us, if there were more infrastructure in future. Did you set this number of 29.9 to be under the wire for required community consultation/interaction? Also, as you were already aware, our municipal government was in the process of drafting and passing a protocol for this community. Unfortunately, it was not passed before your move was made. However, it is a clear indication of the will of this community which has now been enacted by our municipal representatives. In conclusion, it is my opinion that this site is totally unacceptable. Could you not find another site? It may cost you more to develop it, but the human cost here is worthy of your consideration. It's hard to put a value on health, but without it, we all suffer. Alternatively, could providers not share existing sites or antennae? We are very unhappy in this community with your bold move to foist this upon us. The Knights of Columbus group are non -residents, so they have very little to loose personally other than their reputation in return for the lease money they would receive. It is interesting in the literature that I have read about our local chapter at Our Lady of the Rosary, which describes their activities as follows: "The Knights of Columbus, Langford Council #8394, is an organized group of Catholic gentlemen, committed to enhancing our faith in God, supporting and assisting our Parish Priest, youth, families, our community and our sick and distressed." One of my particular concerns is the health outcomes of your juxtaposition to residential neighbourhoods . I have spent my entire life working with children in libraries: teaching them research skills and methods to evaluate materials, in addition to the pleasures of reading widely. Even my youngest students understand that the jury is out on the amount and degree of effects that come with our wireless world technology. Tobacco was OK for generations, and, as it turns out, it wasn't that healthy a choice. Cell phones are here to stay. I've no problem with that. However, how we use them, how much exposure young people have, how prolonged continuous use may affect us, is a concern for us all. I am writing to you because I am very much hoping that we can communicate and site the infrastructure where the least potential for harm is incurred. If it were your families in our situation, what would your reaction be? For I'm sure that you are all people who care deeply for your loved ones, who have their welfare first and foremost in your hearts. And with that thought, PLEASE, reconsider your approach and join our Municipal Government and its citizens in finding a better solution. Thank you for your attention to my concerns. Yours truly, Sally Garcelon