EMOTIONS ran high last Monday as Seymour residents pleaded with Mitchell Shire Council to hear their concerns about the effect of a proposed new drive-through coffee shop on High Street.
The premises, owned by Mitchell Shire Councillor Ned Jeffrey, was subject to an hour-long debate in which 12 people raised objections to the planning permit, while one spoke for it.
This added to the submissions received by council, in which 38 submissions objected, while seven supported the proposal.
Council released a statement shortly after the meeting, saying the full report will be presented at its meeting on Monday, March 16.
“The application is still under consideration, and no decision has been made at this stage,” it said.
“Submissions made at the meeting will be considered as part of the formal decision-making process. This is in addition to feedback previously received when the planning permit application was publicly advertised on council’s website.
“A full report will be published when the planning permit application is presented to the council meeting on Monday 16 March for consideration.
“As the application remains under consideration, council is unable to provide further comment.”
Dr Salim Ahammed, who lives next door to the proposed coffee shop, was first to speak against the proposal.
“We have a problem with traffic around the roundabout with big trucks, 24/7. This permit will have an unpredictable number of cars coming to the same area and I am concerned about the pollution, traffic and noise,” he said.
Resident Anna Pinnock had three points of discussion for councillors to consider regarding safety.
“My first point is the application, there’s non-compliance with planning frameworks, so the application for 44 High Street conflicts with the Seymour 3660 strategic plan, designating 44 High Street as remaining in the future within the residential zone,” she said.
“The existing roundabout at this location is currently dangerous due to a single driveway servicing two sites sitting on the circulating lane of the roundabout.
“To repurpose an existing exit on the circulating lane of a roundabout for a commercial drive-through could lead to serious transport accidents.
“This roundabout carries B-double trucks, V-Line buses, school buses, heavy delivery vehicles, Victoria Police, Ambulance Victoria and CFA vehicles.”
The safety risks was a point that was also raised by fellow resident Peter Malane.
“I felt there were two core questions for councillors to consider,” he said.
“Should the contestable convenience for some consumers of a discretionary purchase and the financial benefit of the applicant override near-certain safety risks, congestion and very detrimental amenity impacts?
“Does strong, well-justified objections from local residents, supported by Victorian laws and the planning scheme, outweigh the interest of popular applicants with certain status in the community?
“I support cafés. I support drive-throughs in appropriate commercial zones. I support the office photography use approved last year, of which there were zero objections. The issue at this site is the drive-through.
“There are at least 12 existing coffee options within a five-minute walk, and there’s nothing less needed in the town in my opinion.
“This design fails basic safety principles and should not be supported. Please, councillors, and any other decision-makers, come down to the site, park up, don’t drive around and think about it, come and have a safe look and think about what’s going to happen here if this goes ahead.”
Garry Wool spoke of the impacts traffic would have on learner drivers.
“Bringing extra cars into our street does not fit really well. We get inundated with learner drivers as it is, so we’ve put up with that,” he said.
It was a point also raised by Carol Smith, who also said Cr Jeffrey has a conflict of interest.
“VicRoads – it’s been mentioned, a lot of learner drivers use that street, as VicRoads use it for driver tests. I think additional traffic into that area close to the intersection of Wallis Street would disadvantage people trying to get a driver’s licence, as there would be extra congestion at that intersection.
“I think having a food premises, they would expect to be able to have advertising on their premises, and that creates another distraction for drivers in that busy roundabout.
“I do not believe a councillor should promote their own business interest while a member of a council. I see it as a conflict of interest, and I think the councillor’s role is to serve their community ahead of their own purposes.”
James Cavill spoke for the drive-through coffee shop, defending Cr Jeffrey’s right to make an application, while also proposing some solutions.
“It’s certainly open to anyone within the municipality to make an application. What we also know about the applicant is that he is a prominent member of the community, he operates business within the community, owns land within the community and is interested in the positive progress of the community,” he said.
“Through that lens of perhaps co-operation and suggesting some progress, there are a few things that we picked up from your objections which might be put forward … which might address some concerns.
“Safety at the Butler Street exit is one thing we’ve heard about a lot. Pedestrian safety off Butler Street can be, and I can foresee a world where it would be problematic somehow, but there are two things that we can probably do to address those concerns.
“One would be lower fence heights to ensure we can have visibility through that one corner at least, and on the other side implement some convex mirrors to visibility outside.”
The consideration of a future report, submissions and questions was carried unanimously by council.
