By Tyler Wright
Locals are calling for plans to build a 40-metre high “eyesore” in Kallista to be scrapped after a planning permit application for a large telecommunications tower was submitted to Yarra Ranges Council in May.
The proposal for a tower at Lot 1 395 Kallista-Emerald Road, which was submitted by Downer Downer Edi on behalf of Amplitel, also notes the installation of a parabolic dish antenna at the top of the pole as part of the scope of works on the Melbourne Water site.
Resident Peter Anderson said his property, which sits near the bottom of a gully, will look out directly onto the tower if it is built.
“All the neighbours have all come together to say this is a significant structure that’s going in there, say 12 to 14 stories high, which is going to affect what we’ve got here in a beautiful spot,” Mr Anderson said.
“It’s going to significantly affect our land here, and the price of our land, the enjoyment of our land; the whole lot.
“It’s putting an eyesore in.”
The area is also under a Significant Landscape Overlay and Erosion Management Overlay.
Peter Learmont owns a property opposite the gate entry to the site, and has lived in Kallista for five years.
Mr Learmont said cyclists and motorbike riders often stop on Kallista-Emerald Road to enjoy enjoy what the area has to offer.
“There’s a lot of residents that bring their friends from suburbs and no doubt interstate, intrastate. I’ve got no doubt there’d be international visitors as well,” he said.
“It gets down to ‘what is the Dandenong Ranges? what are its assets and to what extent do we want to protect this piece of paradise?’
“So many other areas are being developed… once you develop something, you can’t go backwards.”
It comes after Knox City Council refused a planning permit application for a telecommunications facility at Lot 2 on Wellington Road in Lysterfield in October 2022, citing the significant impact on the setting of the Lysterfield Valley, which is classified by the National Trust as part of the ‘green wedge’ between the suburban areas of Rowville and Dandenong North and the urbanised Ferntree Gully-Belgrave ridge of the Dandenongs, as part of its reasoning.
Mr Anderson said the application for the proposed tower in Kallista should “at least” go to VCAT.
“If there’s a need for better communication, no worries at all. We’re not saying ‘let’s not find another solution,’ but maybe there should be more solutions discussed, rather than a 40-metre pole,” he said.
“Hopefully the council take on the ratepayers’ [concerns] and say ‘okay, let’s go, this isn’t right for the area,’ and not just listen to Melbourne Water’s interests..and they actually say ‘yeah, I want to protect the area.'”
In a statement, Melbourne Water’s manager of program delivery for information technology, Ainsley Huxley, told the Star Mail Melbourne Water has engaged Telstra to undertake a “new site feasibility study” for its Kallista facility to ensure it has the “appropriate on-site data technologies”.
“These upgrades will ensure our on-site operators can work effectively and efficiently, and we can maintain the services that we provide Yarra Valley Water and the local communities now and into the future,” Ms Huxley said.
“While no on-site work has started, we will be looking to confirm the right data approach, as recommended by Telstra, in the coming months, before going through the appropriate and required processes to engage with local council and the community prior to the commencement of the project.”
Yarra Ranges Council’s director of planning and sustainable futures, Kath McClusky said the application was out for public notification, which included a notice sign at the road frontages to the property informing passers-by of the application, as well as informing owners and occupiers in the “local vicinity to the site by direct mail”.
“No decision has been made by Council on this application, and any community members who are interested in this application are encouraged to read the advertised documents on our ePlanning website at https://eplanning.yarraranges.vic.gov.au/Pages/XC.Track/SearchApplication.aspx?id=1402251 and make submissions to inform Council of their concerns and how they may be affected by this proposal,” Ms McClusky said.
“Each application Council receives is assessed on its merits against relevant planning controls affecting the subject land and any relevant particular provisions.
“The assessment by officers follows the consultation period, and includes consideration of the community feedback prior to a decision being made. The applicant and objectors have a right to appeal the decision at VCAT if they are not satisfied with Council’s decision.”
Ms McClusky said when assessing an application, the council can not “pre-empt future applications” on a property, or the site’s “future development”.
“It must consider what is being applied for against the provisions in the planning scheme,” she said.
“When an application is required to be advertised, this is always done by direct mail to adjoining land owners and occupiers, for 14 days in accordance with legislation.
“In some cases, Council can require notification to be broader by direct mail, may require a notice to be placed at the road frontage adjacent to the site, and/or in some cases, can require a notice in the local newspaper.”
Applications are available to be viewed on the the council’s ePlanning website, Ms McClusky said, and objections can be submitted at any time from when the application is lodged, to the date it is decided.
“The extent and form of notice is determined by Council as part of processing the application.”
