telecommunications towers get the thumbs down

report from the roundtable - 22 mar

At this week's council meeting we had to consider three applications for telecommunications towers, two from Telstra and one from Optus.

The two Telstra ones were very similar, in both cases the ridgetop locations in Healesville and Seville were a key concern in considering the applications.

Healesville

I moved the motion to refuse the application in Healesville. In speaking to the motion I talked about the importance of our scenic and iconic landscapes and the importance of our tourism industry.

Cornish Hill, the proposed location of the tower in Healesville, is in a prominent position, one of the gateway peaks which frames the township. The proposed tower would be visually prominent and an intrusion on the landscape, impacting on viewlines from many angles.

It is a repeat application, back in 2000 council refused a very similar application, nothing has changed, time has past and our tourism industry is even more important now than it was then.

At 50 metres from the nearest house, it is too close and is contrary to council's policy on telecommunications facilities.

It would be located in a Green Wedge A Zone, a zone that is important in providing a buffer and transition between more urban and rural properties. At 24 metres high, the tower would protrude 7 metres above the treeline.

Our ridgelines are not negotiable, I'd like to see applications council could support, telecommunications are important but it seems Telstra is not willing to go for less prominent locations due to the cost (something they confirmed to council at a briefing).

I'm pleased to say council unanimously supported the refusal for this tower in Healesville.

(Cr's McRae and Cox absent due to a declared conflict of interest)

Seville

The tower in Seville was very similar in circumstance, located on a prominent ridgeline, the visual amenity impacts mirrored those of tower proposed for Healesville, however this came with the addition of a 'cypress shroud' to disguise the pole.

In speaking to this motion I highlighted the fact that an almost identical application had come to council in 2009, was refused by council, a decision that was then upheld by VCAT.

The Cypress Shroud was awful proposition, on a pole with a proposed height of 25 metres, this highly engineered leafy rocket or giant pipecleaner would protrude 7 metres about the tree line and in supplied mock ups looked ridiculous.

What we need to see from Telstra is applications for smaller facilities in greater numbers to ensure that our landscapes are protected from these visual intrusions.

Our vistas and views are our stock in trade and tourists flock to our region for the Yarra Valley experience. I'm not against telecommunications but I urge Telstra to give us applications we can support.

Councillors voted unanimously to refuse this application.

(Cr Cox absent due to a declared conflict of interest)

another inappropriate telstra tower

report from the roundtable - 26 oct

At this week's meeting council had to consider an application by Telstra for a telecommunications tower on the prominent site of Milners Hill in Yarra Junction. The tower, some 32.59 metres in height would stand 12.59 metres above the tree canopy.

The proposed tower was located in a site covered by an Environmental Significance Overlay which indicates the site has both botanical and zoological significance. It was my view that land with such significance should remain undisturbed to ensure that its status is retained and it continues to provide important core habitat for the region.

The site also was subject to a Significant Landscape Overlay due to its importance in framing the landscape which so defines the Upper Yarra corridor (or the Little Yarra Valley).

There is no doubting that Milners Hill provides a stunning backdrop to the town of Yarra Junction, it is very prominent and the proposed communications tower would be too greater visual impact on the region and a blight on the landscape.

We have seen many applications come before us by Telstra for towers that have been too prominent on the ridgelines, in which council has refused and VCAT upheld. We know that impact on landscape and visual amenity impacts are skey considerations and it seems Telstra don't want to heed this.

I think if Telstra want to provide services they need to be innovative in their approach and come at the issues with new thinking.

Councillors unanimously supported the refusal of the installation of the telecommunications tower.

telstra tower trouble

report from the roundtable - 23 June

At the council meeting this week, Mr Frank Smith, President of MEEPPA, submitted to council about the installation of a Telstra Mobile tower at Pembroke Secondary College.

No one in the community has been consulted about the installation, with Telstra believing that the installation is low impact and exempt from permit permission as it is a replacement of a tower and/or co-location of services. However that is not strictly correct even though Telstra are still complying within the Code of Practice. The current tower on the school is not a mobile tower, it is an intranet connection with the senior campus of Pembroke.

Telstra are planning to "swap out the mast" with a higher tower which will see the existing 27mt lattice mast replaced by a 32mt mast with 1.6mt panel antennas affixed to it. To say this is replacement or co-location is really pushing the envelope. As mentioned earlier the existing mast is located at Pembroke Secondary College, next door is the Mt Evelyn Special School and Fernhill Kindergarten, what are considered to be sensitive locations under the Code of Practice.

Cr Heenan moved a motion to strongly recommend to Telstra they the conduct further and extensive consultation. I was happy to second the motion.

I think this is scandalous. Telstra is using a loophole exemption to get away with installing a mobile tower in a sensitive location with no community consultation at all. An intranet tower is not a mobile tower, this is not a replacement nor a co-location. Telstra has shown a complete disdain for our community and we must communicate to Telstra in the strongest possible terms that they consult with the community.

The motion was supported unanimously.

telstra comes to the party

It was great news to hear that after months of communication with the Belgrave Trader's Association, Telstra have finally decided to put funding towards some public art on their building in Belgrave.

The side wall of the Telstra building has long been an eyesore in our town. It's in a prominent position, on a well used laneway, linking Safeway with the main street shops. It's a hot spot for tagging and is a mess - but not for much longer.

This wall is a dreadful eyesore in Belgrave. Tagging often creates feelings of insecurity and unsafeness for many members of our community.
It will be great to see some public art replace this blight on our town.

Telstra has agreed to fund a project which involves local young people, the shire and the Belgrave Trader's Association. Although still in the early stages of development the project will focus on local schools in the area, being assisted by a professional artist. My congratulations to the Belgrave Trader's Association, they have directed a lot of energy towards this project and their persistent efforts have paid off.

It's a great way to show Telstra can be a good corporate citizen. Their reputation has been in question in this town with the ongoing removal of public phone booths in Belgrave but this public art project is a positive move forward and a gesture of goodwill and I'm sure it will be a great feature of the town once completed.

the public phone booth, our new endangered species

.

Before privatisation we used to get some semblance of service from the then Telecom, however since privatisation every year I have seen Telstra remove more and more public phone booths from our community.

.

We are told by Telstra that "demand has fallen due to mobile phone usage". That doesn't mean we shouldn't have public phones available for our community.

.

.

what if your battery is flat?

what if the mobile tower is inoperable?

what if your mobile phone has been stolen?

what if you don't own a mobile phone?

what if you can't afford a mobile phone?

what if you're too young to have a mobile phone?

what if you'd rather pay for a local call not a mobile call?

what if your pre-paid card has run out of credit?

sorry too bad, demand has fallen (for public phones) you have no choice anymore.

.

Upon hearing of the proposed removal of not only this phone booth but numerous booths throughout the shire, Council wrote to Telstra and stated "many people who rely on access to payphones, especially in the identified areas where mobile phone coverage may be poor for some of the mobile phone service providers. The Shire is also an area which experiences significant visits from both local and international tourists. Many of these tourists rely on public payphones, particularly international visitors.

It is also considered that whilst mobile phone usage is growing, this is not so for the very young and the elderly, and those on low incomes. Access to public payphones is needed for these members of the community.

The Shire of Yarra Ranges does not support the removal of a further seven (7) payphones (just as it did not support the removal of the initial five (5) payphones) and requests that Telstra seriously reconsider this proposal."

.

It goes without saying that Telstra didn't seriously reconsider and we see yet another phone booth disappear in Belgrave.

.

I am appauled by the lack of respect for our community, but I guess this is the result of privatisation where profit is always put before people.