Ill health effects and dropping property values to area homes could all be the result of a cell tower proposed for the Copper Ridge area – or could they?

On Monday evening, city council was presented with arguments on both sides of the cell tower debate in council chambers before it passed first and second readings on the lease for the land off Falcon Drive. That's where the nearly 29-metre tower would be located.

Copper Ridge resident Tracey Twa was the first to speak up. She reiterated many of her arguments made to council a week earlier.

She said there are possible adverse – or at the very least unknown – health effects from cell towers, and a cell tower would constitute a form of "visual pollution.”

As well, she added, there's evidence to show a negative impact on property values; next to a school site, she wondered if residents would be comfortable having their kids go to school there.

Twa also referenced the online petition she's started at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/copper-ridge-residents-opposed-to-bell-cell-tower/signatures opposing the tower.

So far, 35 people have added their names and/or comments to the petition, though in some cases the same name appears twice and others are listed as anonymous.

Again, council heard arguments about possible health impacts, aesthetics and the parks and recreation designation of the land.

As it was noted in a report to council last week, while the land is designated as parks and recreation, "public infrastructure”, including cell towers, is permitted in any zone, including parks and recreation.

Twa noted her hope that the city will step back, consult with area residents and that the city and Bell Canada would find a more suitable location away from residential areas for its cell tower.

Twa was the only person to speak out against the tower last night. A quick show of hands from those in the gallery of council chambers showed there were upwards of 10 people supporting her opposition.

It wasn't long after Twa's presentation that former city councillor Jeanine Myhre called foul on the arguments against the tower.

Also a resident of the neighbourhood, Myhre made it clear in the first words of her presentation that she has "no problems” with the cell tower as it's proposed, noting that the arguments on potential health issues is "almost fearmongering.”

She understands that the most powerful cell tower in the territory operates at about 40 watts compared to radio station CKRW, which delivers 1,000 watts from its tower.

Sitting next to Myhre addressing council at the same time was Jason Hoover.

The pair argued that many seem to be using the health impacts as a reason not to provide the lease when the real issue they have with it is the aesthetics.

Hoover argued that studies on the impact of cell towers have never found conclusive evidence on the health effects of cell towers.

While he cited one that makes a "slight link” between heavier use of cell phones and cancer, he stressed the connection is with the cell phones. As a slight link, the cancer rates could be related to a number of other factors, Hoover said.

He pointed out there are many environmental factors residents face every day that are worse than a cell tower: vehicle exhaust fumes, cigarette smoke and so on.

"It's just one of those things that doesn't make a lot of sense,” Hoover said of the health arguments against the cell tower. "It's really just bull-s---.”

Someone using a microwave oven on a regular basis is exposed to far more radiation than a cell tower that's at least 100 metres away from the nearest home, Hoover told council members.

"There's far more dangerous things,” he said.

Along with hearing from residents arguing on both sides of the tower debate, council also heard from Bell Canada.

Brock Enderton, the company's manager of real estate and government relations, also addressed council.

Reading from a prepared statement, Enderton stressed health officials, including the territory's own medical health officer, have stated there are no major concerns with cell towers. The amount of power from this falls 250 times below standards set by Health Canada, Enderton said.

He also noted evidence is split on whether a cell tower has positive or negative effects on property values.

Mounting use of cell phones – including the proliferation of smart phones and data use – is putting more strain on the system, he explained, and thus more towers are needed.

A new tower was recently erected in Riverdale.

In a separate matter last night, council passed a resolution to advise Bell it's satisfied the company has done the required consultation and can move ahead on another tower on private property on MacDonald Road in Porter Creek.

Bell is not technically required to do consultation for the Copper Ridge site as there are no homes within three times the proposed tower's height (as is required by Industry Canada) or within 100 metres (as is required by the city for public notification), Enderton said.

However, given the concerns raised by Copper Ridge residents, Bell will host a public meeting to provide information the proposal.

It's set for 7 p.m. on July 31 at the Mount McIntyre Recreation Centre.

Prior to voting in favour of first and second readings for the 10-year lease for the 250 square metres of land where the tower would be located, council members ensured third reading of the bylaw would not come forward until after the session is held.

Coun. John Streicker was the only councillor to vote against second reading of the bylaw (after voting with the rest of council in favour of first reading).

He said he would like to see second reading come forward after the Bell session is held.