Close Menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Sport
  • Entertainment
  • Local Lives & Landmarks
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • About Us
  • Subscribe
  • Read Our Newspapers Online
    • Read the Latest Western Port News
    • Read the Latest Mornington News
    • Read the Latest Southern Peninsula News
    • Read the Latest Frankston Times
    • Read the Latest Chelsea Mordialloc Mentone News
  • Competition
  • Home New
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Friday, June 12
Facebook X (Twitter)
MPNEWSMPNEWS
  • Home
  • News
  • Sport
  • Entertainment
  • Local Lives & Landmarks
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • About Us
  • Subscribe
Breaking News
MPNEWSMPNEWS
Home»News»McCrae telco tower refused over visual impact
News

McCrae telco tower refused over visual impact

By Brendan ReesJune 26, 2025No Comments3 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Reddit Threads Email Copy Link
A TELECOMMUNICATION facility at 725 Point Nepean Rd, McCrae has been deemed unsuitable for further upgrades including 5G services. Picture: Yanni
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

MORNINGTON Peninsula Shire councillors have firmly rejected a proposal to erect a 27.4-metre telecommunications tower adjacent to the Mornington Peninsula Freeway in McCrae, after deeming it “unacceptable” for its location and visual impact.

The proposal, sited at the freeway entry road near Lonsdale St, attracted 51 objections, with residents citing concerns of visual impacts including view lines of Port Phillip Bay, neighbourhood character, poor proposed location, the lack of need for the facility, and proximity to residents and the overall height. According to a council report, the tower would have been “well-placed in a central location” to provide an upgrade in 4G and 5G Optus and Vodafone telecommunications coverage and services to the immediate area.

But Cr Max Patton successfully moved a motion at the council’s 17 June meeting to refuse a planning permit, directly opposing a recommendation of the council’s planning officers, who had supported approval of the tower.

Patton argued the development, which would sit within a “distinctive area landscape,” failed to improve lower impact alternatives, as well as protect the enhanced rural character, landscaped values, visual amenity and shared view lines. He also noted there was no independent engineering advice about co-locating at a nearby site nor deploying small cell infill (small, low powered radio transmitters) to “achieve the same service outcome”.

“At 27 metres, the pole is about 15 metres above the canopy, it would interrupt view lines promoted in the council’s own tourism material and strategic documents,” he said. Should the applicant come back with revised plans, Patton said he’d “like to see a landscape plan and a commitment to community consultation on colour treatment and any final design to ensure it’s consistent with community expectations”.

Cr Kate Roper also believed the proposal was inappropriate, saying, “I think if the party can come to the table and make it a bit more palatable to the people that live around that area while still providing that service that we really need, that would be a good solution”.

According to the applicant’s submission, the planned tower was needed to replace an existing facility located on top of a signage structure at 725 Point Nepean Rd, McCrae. “The existing structure cannot be further expanded or accommodate additional equipment and also has a very low antenna height (approximately 11 metres),” it said. “This makes the existing site unsuitable for further upgrades, to include 5G services. The proposed facility will ensure existing coverage is replaced and expanded and new services provided within the surrounding area to experience a substantial improvement to network services.”

Council officers had backed the proposal, stating “the facility will be visible in the landscape from certain angles and perspectives” and “will not unreasonably inhibit shared view lines and its visual impacts are acceptable given its necessity (including the necessity of its height and location) to improve the telecommunications network”.

All councillors voted to refuse a planning permit for the tower, except for mayor Cr Anthony Marsh and deputy mayor Paul Pingiaro.

The application was also viewed by the Department of Transport and Planning (the determining referral authority), which did not object to issuing a permit.

Cr David Gill said while he was in favour of telecom towers, he described the current proposal as “overdone”, and “I don’t think there’s been enough investigation into where else it could have been and that’s not unusual”.

First published in the Mornington News – 24 June 2025

McCrae telecommunications tower

Related Posts

Staff praise hospital building improvements

June 12, 2026

New defibrillator installed in Mt Eliza

June 11, 2026

Pelican Park secures electrification grant

June 11, 2026

Former first responder to paddle Murray River for PTSD awareness

June 11, 2026
Add A Comment

Comments are closed.

Peninsula Essence Magazine – Click to Read
Peninsula Kids Magazine – Click to Read
Letters to the Editor
Property of the Week

8 Birdwood Avenue, Mornington.

Property Of The Week May 19, 2026
Council Watch

Ratepayers foot the bill for public waste costs

April 20, 2026

Shire reforecasts budget after $8.2m shortfall

April 9, 2026
100 Years Ago This Week

New Municipal Hall opened in Frankston

June 12, 2026
Menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Sport
  • Entertainment
  • Local Lives & Landmarks
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • About Us
  • Subscribe
About

Established in 2006, Mornington Peninsula News Group (MPNG) is a locally owned and operated, independent media company.

MPNG publishes five weekly community newspapers: the Western Port News, Mornington News, Southern Peninsula News, Frankston Times and Chelsea Mordialloc Mentone News.

MPNG also publishes two glossy magazines: Peninsula Essence and Peninsula Kids.

Facebook X (Twitter)
© 2026 Mornington Peninsula News Group.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.