samantha in the press

Woolworths gets approval from Yarra Ranges Council to open BWS store at Seville development
Lilydale and Yarra Valley Leader        
by Therese Allaoui and Kimberley Seedy         
17 Jun 2014

Permit for new liquor store gets green light
Lilydale Leader
17 Jun 2014

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)

seville supermarket gets the go ahead

report from the roundtable - 22 feb

This week council had to consider the application and planning scheme amendment for the Seville Supermarket proposal which would see the development of a 3,150 square metre supermarket and 17 specialty shops.

The application has been before council in the past, firstly in Oct 2009 where council voted to request the Minister prepare a planning scheme amendment and again in Jul 2010, where council referred the application to a planning panel.

This time round council had to make a final decision on whether the supermarket should be given the go ahead. The Planning Panel had recommended to council that the proposal should proceed with some modifications to the planning permit.

Cr Warren moved a motion to support the planning scheme amendment and planning permit for the development of the supermarket.

Cr Heenan and myself tried to amend the motion to include a legal agreement that packaged liquor would not be sold on site. My concerns brought on by the planning panel who said "The Panel notes that the proposal does not contemplate the inclusion of a liquor outlet within the development.....The Panel observes that, given the importance of liquor sales to the viability of several of the smaller town centres, had a liquor outlet been included within the proposed development, it is possible the Panel may have come to a different conclusion."

Our move to include this condition was lost with only myself, Crs Heenan and Cliff supporting the restriction of alcohol sales.

In speaking against the motion Cr Warren moved I talked about the loss of residential zoned land close to a township and how important it was to retain residential land, which could provide very well located medium density housing close to the township.

I went on to talk about the recent flooding and that much of this land was not suitable for development (the recent flood event earlier in February saw a significant amount of this land inundated). Given the likelihood of more extreme and frequent weather events, the siting of the land so close to the Wandin Yallock Creek makes it a prime target for future inundation.

I had serious concerns about the economic impact for towns along the Warburton Highway. I am not convinced by the economic assumptions provided and I think that the addition of this supermarket will not increase the local economy but just see a substitution of spending from one area to another. It's not a growth area, there's very little population growth predicted for this region of the shire, in my view the ability to create additional economic growth is extremely limited. It is my view that the impact of this development would be felt in the townships of Wandin North, Woori Yallock, Launching Place, Yarra Junction, Millgrove, Wesburn, Warburton and on already existing businesses in Seville too.

I talked about the supermarket and specialty shops in Yarra Glen, a township with a population greater than Seville (approximately 3,000) where over 50% of the specialty shops still remain unoccupied, leading to a lack of vibrancy and amenity in that town. I think Seville will have a similar experience, for a township of only 2,077 it's hard to imagine how 17 specialty shops will be occupied and remain viable.

I was outraged that the development sought to use council land (road reserve) as a buffer to the development, it's a sign that there's too much crammed on the site when the developer can't fit a vegetation buffer on their own site.

We all know that the development will exacerbate already existing congestion problems in the town, but it came as no surprise to me that it was accepted by Vic Roads, who also had no problem with the Tecoma Supermarket.

There was an assertion that this was progress, well if big box retailers are progress I lament the future direction of the shire and our small rural towns.

I talked about our Municipal Strategic Statement, which maps out the long term direction about land use and development across the shire. The MSS is explicit in it's description of Rural Townships: "Seville, essentially dormitory residential areas with small commercial centres servicing local needs". How a 3,150 square metre big box retailer, along with 17 speciality shops, fits this direction is beyond me. It was clear that the development does not meet the strategic intent of our local planning policies.

This development will have ongoing and lasting amenity and quality of life impacts for the residents of Seville. It's a lovely rural town, the proposal is a complete overdevelopment and does not represent good orderly planning.

We councillors are the elected representatives of our community, we understand the Yarra Ranges implicity, far more than the planning panel. I urged councillors to vote against the motion, to see this development go ahead would be an absolute tragedy for our Shire.

When the vote was taken, 4 councillors voted in favour (Crs Warren, Higgins, Templer and Avery) while 4 councillors voted against (Crs Dunn, McRae, Cliff and Heenan), Cr Cox was absent from the chamber due to a declared Conflict of Interest.

Given the vote was deadlocked 4 for and 4 against the Mayor, Cr Avery, had to use his casting vote to determine the matter. In the past at the Shire of Yarra Ranges it has been custom and practice in a deadlocked vote for the Mayor to vote for the status quo, which in this case would mean no to the supermarket proposal. However Cr Avery chose to support the application for the supermarket to proceed (which he is within his right to do).

seville water play makes a splash

It was terrific to see community come out to celebrate the opening of the Shire's Seville Water Play Park today.

People from near and far came so children could play in the water park, the only one of its kind in the outer east.

The park has been designed with families and children in mind. There's a magic button which triggers 15 random jet produced water eruptions. Children were delighted by the water fountains as well as the Archimedes Screw which gives children the opportunity to speed up or slow down the water going through the canal.

A rockery at the end of the watercourse proved to be a favourite for kids on a dinosaur hunt and the echo pipes were a resounding success.

It's a wonderful facility, well worth a visit if you're looking for something different to take the kids to on a warm day to cool down. The Seville Water Play Park is located on the corner of the Warburton Highway and the Seville-Monbulk Road, Seville.

in the press – seville supermarket

Monster centre 'a threat'

Journal Newspapers

by Gilbert Gardiner

03 Aug 2010

in the press – seville supermarket

Seville supermarket plan on hold

Leader Newspapers

by Alex Munro

03 Aug 2010

in the press – seville supermarket

Shop plan check out

Mail Newspapers

by Mara Pattison-Sowden

03 Aug 2010

seville supermarket still up for consideration

report from the roundtable – 27 jul

At this week's meeting councillors had to consider if they wanted the controversial Seville Supermarket application and planning scheme amendment referred to a planning panel.

The officers report had recommended that council proceed to a panel and base its submission to the Panel indicating 'general support for the proposal'.

I could not support the recommendation. In speaking against the motion I raised the following concerns.

Firstly, it defies logic to rezone this residential land to a business zoning. This land is so closely located to the township it is far more important to see it preserved as residential land. We know from strategic work completed that it is important to continue to have residential land available close to townships.

I continue to be concerned about the economic impacts of such a development. If built this supermarket development would be the largest supermarket in the entire Shire. I am concerned that the spend at this site will be substituting spend at another location, so although it might be good for local employment, the loss of trade in other areas will flow on to a loss of employment there.

We know that traffic is already an issue in Seville, putting a development this size in a town that currently supports a population of around 2000 people, will only exacerbate the traffic problems in the town.

I have grave concerns for the amenity of the town, Seville is a small town, encouraging a development like this will have serious consequences to the quality of life currently enjoyed by residents in this lovely rural yarra valley town.

The amenity of locals living on Britton Road will be challenged with them facing a 2.4mt high fence. I noted that a landscaping buffer is planned for the road reserve on Britton Road and I called into question why council would be supplying public land for a vegetation buffer, the applicant should be putting all buffers on their own land, yet another indication that this development is oversized and there is too much on this site.

The shire's Municipal Strategic Statement (our key strategic document to detail land use and development objectives for our municipality) is clear in its intent for Seville – "identifies Seville as a Rural Township...essentially a dormitory residential area with a small commercial centre".

It is an overdevelopment of the site and an overdevelopment of the town, why would the largest supermarket in the shire be in Seville? It defies logic. Should the supermarket go ahead I have grave concerns for the long term impacts to Seville. The increased retail space will see pressure put on the urban growth boundary to expand and could irreparably change the town.

I didn't think we should wait to hear the outcomes of a panel hearing. Councillors are the elected representatives, it is our role to provide leadership and deliver the strategic outcomes for the people of the shire. There is a clear strategic statement for Seville, it is up to councillors to maintain the integrity of our planning policies.

I felt that councillors should abandon the planning scheme amendment and fulfil our responsibilities as elected representatives to uphold the strategic direction of Yarra Ranges. With that I foreshadowed an alternate motion to abandon the planning scheme amendment should the motion fail.

The motion was put to the vote, I called a division to ensure there was a public record of the vote.

For: Crs Warren, Higgins, Templer, Avery and Cox
Against: Crs Dunn, McRae, Heenan and Cliff

Once the panel has heard the matter it will come back to council for a final decision. I encourage residents of the region to be involved in the panel hearing process, it's your town, it's your lifestyle that will be impacted.

seville's supermarket spears ahead

Earlier this week I had the great pleasure of attending the Grand Opening of the refurbished and extended IGA in Seville, Entwistle’s. It has been terrific to see this supermarket flourish and the Entwistle family have shown a huge commitment to the local community by spending $4.75million on renovations.

On a journey from Brunswick, to Boronia, to Kilsyth, to Seville, supermarkets are in the blood of the Entwistle family. Pictured here from left to right are: Jason Entwistle, Cr Samantha Dunn, Jenny Entwistle and Barry Entwistle.

,

Keen to support local food production, Entwistle’s spend $2million sourcing product from local growers in the Yarra Valley. The goods are delivered to the door in Seville and don’t come via the market in Melbourne, saving on transport costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

Entwistle’s are great supporters of the local community and via community sales have contributed $180,000 to local community groups. Independent supermarkets hold 15% of the marketplace and provide valuable competition. A great family supermarket, the benefit to the local community will continue to grow with them.

seville supermarket rezoning application

Report from the roundtable – 27 Oct

At this week’s council meeting we had to consider an application for a supermarket specialty shops, petrol station, car wash and car parking in Seville. The application also proposed a rezoning of residential land to a business zone.

I could not support the application. I had grave concerns that the development would be a wholesale transformation of the township of Seville. I asked councillors if we want a retail development of 4,897 square metres in Seville? I didn’t think we would.

Seville is described in our Regional Strategy Plan as a ‘local centre’. These centres have a primary role of providing for daily convenience needs and it is prescribed that they will generally have a floorspace of less than 2,500 square metres. 4,897 square metres is well over this limit. Our Municipal Strategic Statement identifies Seville as a ‘rural township’, essentially a dormitory residential area with small commercial centres servicing local needs. This application is not a good fit with a rural township.

I also had concerns about the blank wall residents on Britton Road would have to contend with, the sheer scale of the development would fundamentally change the scale and character of the town centre and their outlook of the world.

I have concerns that on an already congested road, large volumes of traffic will be generated causing even more delays and congestion on the Warburton Highway.

I cannot agree to rezone residential land so close to a township to business for this sort of overdevelopment, the residential land, which is currently vacant, could be used to develop 11 residential blocks or something like aged care accommodation, a far more appropriate proposition for the site.

If this supermarket application goes ahead it will be the largest supermarket in the Shire of Yarra Ranges, it is a complete overdevelopment of Seville. It is too big, I have concerns about the loss of residential land and I did not think the application had merit to be put on exhibition.

This time round the council voted to seek authorisation from the Minister of Planning to prepare and exhibit a planning scheme amendment to rezone the land and accept the concurrent planning application for the supermarket, specialty shops, petrol station, car wash and car parking.

It was one other councillor and myself who opposed the motion.
(note: Cr McRae was an apology for this council meeting)

telephone tower for seville?

report from the roundtable - 28th April
Report from the roundtable is my regular report back from the meeting of council. I don't report on every subject, just those that I think might have a broader interest.

An application for the construction of a telecommunications tower was up for consideration in a very prominent location in Seville. A motion was moved to refuse the application and I was happy to second it.

The proposed positioning of the tower was in a visually prominent site along the Warburton Highway. It is an area that is frequented by tourists who enjoy magnificent unbroken views across to the Warburton Ranges on one side and the Dandenong Ranges on the other. I think that council has a responsibility to protect Yarra Ranges' natural assets and part of that is protecting our outstanding vistas and sight lines.

The siting of the pole was proposed for a hill top meaning it would be visible to passers by near and far. A 33.6 metre pole is extreme in height and the notion of painting it in a pale eucalyptus colour to disguise it is an absolute nonsense.

The installation of the pole is contrary to council's local policy on telecommunications facilities. Our policy is clear and states that poles must be sited 100 metres from a residential building (or community facility such as a primary school, etc). In this case the pole was located 88 metres from the nearest residential dwelling.

I think it is important to respect the wishes of the local community, there were 39 objectors to this application, all of them surrounding the proposed site.

I also think it is important to protect those spectacular vistas the Shire is renowned for and this proposed 33.6 metre pole would be a blight on our landscape.

I am pleased to say that the refusal was supported unanimously by councillors.