Council gives green light for Seymour cinema

Seymour will be home to a cinema-based entertainment facility after Mitchell Shire Council granted a permit for the new development, subject to conditions aiming to satisfy objectors.

Councillors Rhonda Sanderson, Nathan Clark, Bob Cornish, Rob Eldridge and Davide Lowe voted to grant the permit at the July 17 council meeting, but Mayor Fiona Stevens and Cr Louise Bannister voted against. Crs Annie Goble and Bill Chisholm were absent.

The multilevel facility will be developed at 13 Tallarook Street and 8 Alexander Street, Seymour with a carpark to be developed at 122 Eliza Street, Seymour.

Residents from neighbouring properties raised concerns about the facility including noise, privacy, parking, property value and flooding at council’s community questions and hearing meeting on June 5.

Council did not consider loss in property value when considering the permit, but did makes changes to the permit to mitigate the other concerns.

Cr Sanderson said as with any development, there would be pros and cons.

“Neighbours have raised a number of concerns. Any of the objectors’ concerns have been addressed by placing conditions on the proposal, for example, hours of operation are reduced and screening will be provided to prevent overlooking,” she said

“As you’re aware, planning matters are not always easy. Few of these significant type planning applications are black and white – balance and compromise are the key.

“The overarching principle that guides these decisions is the community benefit and this proposal provides net community benefit.

“I think if they [the objectors] went to VCAT they would lose. I think everything has been covered off pretty well.”

Cr Sanderson said the community wanted a movie theatre to return to Seymour.

“In rural communities there are limited social non-sporting activities available,” she said.

She said benefits of the proposed facility included adding to the ‘vitality, vibrancy and attractiveness’ of the town and creating 17 jobs.
Cr Bannister said the decision was difficult and she was in favour of the development at a different location.

“I’d like to make it clear that I’m all for this type of facility located in Seymour. It’d be a fantastic facility for the town and surrounding areas,” she said.

“However, I cannot in good conscious support the development due to the location and the impact it will have on surrounding residential houses during this process.

“Although the zoning may allow for this type of facility, I resolve that the very purpose of council is to consider applications on their individual circumstances, so that is what I have done.

She said the proposal was inconsistent with area objectives and strategies by failing to have a building design contributing positively to the local context and surrounding development.

Cr Bannister said the proposed use would be detrimental to the amenity of the neighbouring residential properties in terms of visual impact by high boundary walls, noise from public spaces orientated towards residential spaces and the sight of people arriving and leaving the venue.

She also said the proposed carparking was not adequate to the likely demand and number of employees.

“I was very conflicted with my decision because we speak to ensuring that decisions affect the greater good but we start getting into a debate of philosophy here,” she said.

“We need to find solutions that enable us as a whole community to be happy in those decisions.

“I actually agree with pretty much everything councillor Sanderson has said that it would be perfect for Seymour. I just don’t agree with the location and the detrimental effects it would have on the residents in that location.

“I don’t feel we have fully addressed the concerns of those surrounding neighbours.”

Cr Sanderson said the permit had been examined ‘fairly well in depth’ and the added conditions were ‘fairly strong’.

“Obviously it’s not up to council to tell a business where it can build its enterprise,” she said.