News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Traders' footpath furniture upsets Daylesford residents 

Traders' footpath furniture upsets Daylesford residents

08 Feb, 2012 12:00 AM
STREET furniture fixed permanently into the footpath of Vincent Street last week has outraged Daylesford residents but gained support from the Hepburn Shire Council and local business and traders' group.

The four rectangular tables with benchseats either side were placed outside Frangos and Frangos, next to Hepburn Shire Town Hall, over the Australia Day weekend, sparking immediate controversy among ratepayers.

One Hepburn Shire resident who wished to remain anonymous said: "Why do we think it's necessary to bring St Kilda to Daylesford? Just stay in St Kilda if that's what you want."

Another resident said disabled and frail visitors would be unable to get out of coaches in front of the facilities. "They are a good idea but a bad design."

Another concerned local asked why council was spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of ratepayers' money on plans to revitalise the street if they just allowed business owners to make their own arrangements.

Hepburn Shire acting interim CEO, Evan King, said two permits were obtained for street furniture in mid-2011; one for Koukla and one for Frangos and Frangos.

Mr King said that council regulations for fixing permanent infrastructure to the streetscape of Hepburn Shire towns were outlined in Policy 19, available on their website.

The policy, which will lapse and be due for review on February 28 this year, stated that items or goods may only be placed outside the frontage of a business operated by the applicant and sufficient space will be maintained at all times to allow pedestrian movement from the roadway onto the footpath and vice versa.

"Council has the power to exercise discretion on all local laws and in this case is satisfied that the furniture meets permit guidelines," Mr King said.

"A 0.4m clear space must be provided from the edge of the curb to the trading zone and a 1.8m clear space for pedestrians must be provided at all times from the property line.

"The width of the footpath in question is less than 3.6m which means the width between shop and trading zone only needs to be 1.5m."

President of the Daylesford and Hepburn Springs Business and Tourism Association and member of the Daylesford Streetscape Project committee, Robyne Head, said she was unaware the furniture was going onto the footpath but she looked forward to seeing them.

"The previous (streetscape furniture) opposite IGA were picnic tables which were totally inappropriate for the main street of Daylesford," she said.

"The street furniture has to co-ordinate with everything going on in the main street.

"Jimmy Frangos has really been a leader in style in the main street."

She said she was "very supportive of businesses wanting to get street furniture", but the priority was meeting the council specifications and in keeping with the character of Vincent Street.

"If they meet these priorities, then the business group would support it," she said.

When approached by The Advocate about the tables, proprietor Jim Frangos refused to comment.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
What additional rate revenue is Hepburn Shire collecting from businesses who are using public-owned space for their private gain? It should be substantial.

The size of the tables and benches in this instance are far too large for the width of the footpath and encroach on pedestrian traffic causing issues of personal safety. On busy days stand back and watch the number of pedestrians, including those with prams, who take to a busy street to circumnavigate the benches and tables.


Posted by Don B, 8/02/2012 9:28:38 AM, on The Advocate (Hepburn)
Why did these people complaining want to remain anonymous?

If they don't have the guts to identify themselves in the paper why did the paper still run their complaints?


Posted by Steven, 8/02/2012 9:57:43 AM, on The Advocate (Hepburn)
The tables arn't to bad, I can't understand why people insist on complaining about progress.
Posted by Pongy, 12/02/2012 3:49:10 PM, on The Advocate (Hepburn)
Ah yes, Daylesford & Hepburn. You can bet someones pocket has been stuffed.....again. I can understand the eyesore, oops sorry, tables being there but why permanently ? As for "progress", yeah i can see how bottle-necking a busy footpath can be called "progress"........NOT !
Posted by Apps, 24/02/2012 4:05:25 PM, on The Advocate (Hepburn)
As a local my initial reaction to passing the benches on a quiet day was that the remaining walk-way area left was quite limited. This is as an ambulant pedestrian, let alone for people who have prams, are guiding young children or elderly with them or who may elderly with a walking frame. The walkway space left doesn't allow for much movement or flow on a busy day which in Daylesford is common. Throw in today's norms where people don't tend to put those less ambulant before them and you have a recipe for disaster. Why have tables so wide? Shouldn't pedestrians come first on a footpath?
Posted by Local, 24/02/2012 9:35:25 PM, on The Advocate (Hepburn)

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
The controversial tables outside of Frangos and Frangos
The controversial tables outside of Frangos and Frangos

Most popular articles




The Advocate







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...