1 Mr Whitford sought amendment to the applicant for the Planning Permit to IOM Pty Ltd. There being no objection, I accordingly amended the application.

2 The subject site is known as Lots 9 and 10 on PS4414744R. It is located on the northern end of Victor Crescent, Narre Warren which is part of a homemaker centre within the Fountain Gate- Narre Warren Activity Centre. The subject site is developed over two titles and used for Restricted Retail (Easy Living Furniture).

3 The building is orientated to Victor Crescent with customer parking within the front setback. It is setback from the rear boundary to accommodate loading facilities. The building is 6-8 metres in height with a curved roof line.

4 The rear boundary abuts the Monash Freeway (Hallam By-Pass). More particularly, the site abuts the Bicycle path adjacent to the freeway and is separated from the freeway itself by an embankment of about 1.5 metres in height.

5 The rear of the Victor Crescent properties is visible from the Freeway, but at present does not "stand out". Signage is restricted to parapet signs facing the Monash Freeway. Within the activity centre there is a wide variety of signage consistent with its commercial zoning.

6 The proposal is to locate a major floodlit promotional pole sign at the rear of the Victor Crescent property which will present two floodlit face panels to each direction of the Freeway. Each panel will measure 18.9 metres by 4.57 metres (86m2), which Mr Whitford advised was the largest "standard" size for such promotional signs.

7 The signs would be supported by a 10 metre high pole and have a "skirt" below which has been designed to mirror the curve of the building roof. The skirt screens the underside and fixtures of the sign. Floodlighting would be provided through six 0.4 metre wide halide lights attached to each sign face.

8 Advertising copy would vary from time to time consistent with the role of the sign as a promotional tool.

9 The subject site is zoned Business 2 under the provisions of the Casey Planning Scheme.

10 Advertising sign requirements are at Clause 52.05 where the Business 2 Zone is in Category 2, Office and industrial. Clause 52.05-2 sets out general decision guidelines including:

•

The effect of the sign on the amenity of the area including the need to avoid visual disorder or clutter of signs.

•

The effect of the sign on the built environment or the landscape, with particular thought to its effect on any objects of scenic, historic, architectural, scientific or cultural interest.

•

The advertising pattern and theme in the area and the number of signs of the same type.

•

The effect of the sign on existing signs.

•

The size and likely impact of the sign having regard to the size of the premises on which it is to be displayed and the scale of surrounding buildings.

•

The effect of the sign on the appearance and efficiency of a road, railway, waterway or other public way, having particular regard to the sign's colour, brightness and location.

•

The views of the Roads Corporation if the sign is an animated, floodlit, internally-illuminated, panel, reflective or sky sign to be displayed within 60 metres of, or to project over, a freeway, state highway, metropolitan bridge or other road declared under the Transport Act 1983.

11 As the sign is defined as a "major promotion sign", the provisions of Clause 52.05-5 relating to this form of signage apply:

•

To achieve high quality visual standards for the siting of major promotion signs.

•

To ensure that the signs are not detrimental to the appearance of their surroundings or the safe and efficient operation of the route through the application of consistent planning controls.

Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:

•

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

•

The effect of the sign on road safety. A sign is a safety hazard if the sign:

•

Obstructs a driver's line of sight at an intersection, curve or point of egress from adjacent property. Obstructs a driver's view of a traffic sign or signal, or is likely to create a confusing or dominating background which might reduce the clarity or effectiveness of a traffic sign or signal.

•

Could dazzle or distract drivers due to its size, design or colouring, or it being illuminated, animated or flashing.

•

Is at a location where particular driver concentration is required.

•

Is likely to be mistaken for a traffic signal, for example because it contains red, green or yellow lighting or has red circles, octagons, crosses or triangles, or large reflective or illuminated arrows.

•

Requires close study from a moving or stationary vehicle in a location where the vehicle would be unprotected from passing traffic.

•

Invites drivers to turn where there is fast moving traffic or the sign is so close to the turning point that there is not time to signal and turn safely.

•

Is within 100 metres of a rural railway crossing.

•

Has insufficient clearance from vehicles on the carriageway.

•

The effect of the proposed sign on:

•

Significant streetscapes, buildings and skylines.

•

The visual appearance of a significant view corridor, viewline, gateway location or landmark site identified in a framework plan or local policy.

•

Residential areas and heritage places.

•

Open space and waterways.

When determining the effect of a proposed sign, the following locational principles must be taken into account:

•

Major promotion signs are encouraged in commercial and industrial locations in a manner which complements or enhances the character of the area.

•

Major promotion signs are discouraged along forest and tourist roads, scenic routes or landscaped sections of freeways.

•

Major promotion signs are discouraged within open space reserves or corridors and around waterways.

•

Major promotion signs are discouraged where they will form a dominant visual element from residential areas, within a heritage place or where they will obstruct significant viewlines.

•

In areas with a strong built form character, major promotion signs are encouraged only where they are not a dominant element in the streetscape and except for transparent feature signs (such as neon signs), are discouraged from being erected on the roof of a building.

12 The site is also affected by a Development Plan Overlay Schedule 8. The Fountain Gate- Narre Warren CBD Development Plan (6 July 2004) is the approved development plan under the Overlay.

13 The Monash Freeway is within a Road Zone Category 1. There is no objection by VicRoads to the proposal.

14 A number of other Clauses of the Planning Scheme are also relevant to the consideration of this Application. They include:

•

State Planning Policy Framework - Clauses 17, 18.01 and 19.03.

•

New uses or development of land near an existing or proposed transport route should be planned or regulated to avoid detriment to and where possible enhance the service, safety and amenity desirable for that transport route in the short and long terms.

•

The design of transport routes and nearby areas should be planned and regulated to achieve visual standards appropriate to the importance of the route with particular reference to landscaping, the control of outdoor advertising and where appropriate, the provision of buffer zones and resting places.

•

Local Planning Policy Framework - Clause 21 (Municipal Strategic Statement), Clause 22.15 Good Design Policy and Clause 22.16 Advertising Signs

•

General provisions - Clause 65 (general decision guidelines).

15 Clause 22.15 Good Design Policy. The objectives of this policy include:

•

To recognise the importance of good design in the development of key public spaces.

•

To ensure that development in key public spaces occurs in a manner that is responsive to local cultural, historic, environmental and climatic factors.

•

To create a built environment that is functional, safe, aesthetically pleasing and that the community can identify with.

•

To create a built environment that instils business confidence and that is conducive to new investment.

16 Clause 22.16 Advertising signs has the following objectives:

•

To ensure that businesses in Casey have adequate opportunities to identify their location, name and nature of business.

•

To ensure that the display of advertising signs does not detract from the visual amenity of the surrounding area.

•

To maintain a degree of uniformity and equity in the extent of advertising permitted.

•

To ensure that signs are in keeping with the scale and character of the host building.

•

To provide and maintain a degree of public safety for persons using any public way.

•

Signs are attractive, well presented and do not promote visual clutter, particularly along main roads or in activity centres.

•

Signs are architecturally integrated with, and compliment the style and character of the host building, abutting buildings and the overall landscape or streetscape.

•

Fewer signs displaying simple, clear messages that are easy to read be encouraged.

•

The size and type of advertising signs clearly identifies the use without detracting from the amenity of the area or adjoining land uses.

•

The use of creative signs that may also act as public art be encouraged in appropriate locations.

•

Advertising be designed and located in a manner that conserves heritage places, protecting and enhancing what is valued about the building or place.

•

Business operators who choose to establish on sites remote from general public access or vision not expect to compensate for this by compromising the objectives and guidelines outlined in this policy in order to attract attention to the premises.

•

Signs associated with non-residential uses have regard to the scale of the development to which it relates and the character of the development in the vicinity of the site.

•

A-frame signs and other temporary signs (including bunting) be discouraged.

•

Illuminated signs be permitted only if light spillage is not a problem and the character and amenity of the surrounding area is not detrimentally affected.

•

Signs in Berwick Village protect and enhance the visual amenity of the "English Village" style and character of the streetscape.

•

Signs in rural areas be in character with the existing and likely future amenity of the rural locality and limited to advertising property names, tourism orientated businesses and limited directional signs.

17 The Advertising Signs Policy at Clause 22.16 includes a reference document the Advertising Signs Policy. This policy includes at Section 5.10 the following in relation to Promotion Signs;

The municipality is largely free of promotion signs often seen along road reserves, sides of buildings etc., in other parts of Melbourne. They are generally out of character and not compatible with the nature and scale of surrounding development and streetscape. Such signs should continue to be discouraged.

18 At the Hearing, I received submissions from all parties. I inspected the subject site and locality following the Hearing. Having considered the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks, the purpose of the Zone, the decision guidelines of the relevant Clauses of the Scheme and the submissions of the parties, I have determined to disallow the Application for Review and affirm the decision of the Responsible Authority. Set out below is a summary of my reasons. I do not recite all of the written and oral material presented, although I do refer to some of the main points.

19 The key issues in this case are set out in the grounds of refusal as follows:

1. A sign of the size and height proposed would dominate its surroundings and be detrimental to the amenity of the area.

2. The sign is inappropriate in that it does not refer to the primary use for which the site is used.

3. The proposed sign does not accord with the locational principles contained in Clause 52.05-5 of the Casey Planning Scheme.

4. The sign is contrary to Clause 22.16 Advertising Signs Policy in the Casey Planning Scheme.

5. The sign is contrary to the adopted Fountain Gate- Narre Warren Development Plan and would not contribute positively to the image of the Fountain Gate- Narre Warren Activity Centre.

20 Ms Hoffman submitted that the site would be prominent at the edge of the activity centre and along the main road where Council is seeking to build a positive image.

21 Mr. Whitford on behalf of the Applicant submitted that as the site was prominent along the freeway and located in a commercial area, that the location was ideal for the purposes of a promotion sign.

22 At the outset, I consider that Major Promotional Signs are a legitimate land use and explicitly provided for within the planning scheme. The fact that the sign does not refer to the primary use of the site on which it is located is not a concern with this application.

23 However, major promotional signs need to be located and designed in such a manner as to address the matters set out within the scheme.

24 The advent of the Hallam Bypass within the past few years represents a significant change to the area and to the Fountain Gate-Narre Warren Activity Centre. There is no signage strategy explicitly addressing the Freeway and its environs. This is perhaps lamentable as the Freeway is the key "viewing corridor" for the proposed signs as outlined by Mr. Whitford. The siting of a sign without this overview can only be assessed in the context of the broader planning policies.

25 In addition to the locational criteria of Clause 52.05 (quoted above), there is a wealth of local planning policy pertaining to the proposal. The Municipal Strategic Statement identifies the land as part of the "built up area". The Fountain Gate- Narre Warren Activity Centre is identified as a prominent area which is highly visible to visitors and residents. Since the advent of the extension to the Freeway, this rear of the centre is more visible.

26 As stated by Senior Members Baird and O'Leary in Hutchinson 3G Australia & ors v Casey CC and Ors [2002] VCAT 247 (5 April 2005), local policy seeks

"the good design of public places", including along main road corridors and privately owned land which is visible from public areas such as roads and footpaths.

I agree that the local planning policy framework of the Casey Planning Scheme has a focus on building a positive image of the municipality.

27 Clause 22.15 encourages development along main travel corridors incorporate design elements that add visual interest to the front/rear of the building. However, it also seeks to ensure that the Roofs of non-residential buildings be carefully designed to avoid the display of roof mounted machinery, advertising signs and other visually disruptive elements against the sky line.

28 This latter point is supported by the Development Plan's urban design guidelines which state that:

Where properties abut the Monash Freeway, Princes Highway and the Narre Warren North Road, where the main entrance or front of the buildings are directed away from these road frontages, signage will be limited to one business identification sign that is attached to but does not protrude above the building. Corporate colours and promotional signage along fascia, parapet walls and roofing will not be supported. (Tribunal's emphasis)

The Development Plan encourages only one major "iconic signage element" to the Monash Freeway (Hallam Bypass) which Ms. Hoffman advised was to provide for the Fountain Gate Shopping Centre Westfield development and is to be located to the south of the subject site.

29 The sum of local policy and the Development Plan is that signs which sit above the roof top are discouraged along the Monash Freeway and throughout the municipality.

30 While, I consider that there may be a place for well designed promotional signage as part of that visual experience along the freeway and that this location within a commercial precinct is perhaps appropriate (as encouraged by Clause 52.05), any sign needs to be designed in a manner which addresses the Local Policy Framework and is:

•

Complementary to the recent improved initiatives of design and amenity within the Freeway itself;

•

Complementary to the immediate built form/ building; and

•

Complementary to the activity centre and environs.

I am not persuaded that the proposed sign achieves the above.

31 The Monash Freeway extension itself has been designed to modern standards and with attention to both landscape and urban design creating a visually interesting experience for the motorist. I consider the scale and form of the proposed sign is "industry standard" and does not respond to the main road through the use of design initiatives which reflect the freeway environs. Both Clause 22.15, 22.16 and the Development Plan encourage the use of design initiatives in appropriate locations, for example the use of creative signs that may also act as public art (Clause 22.16).

32 The sign does not in my opinion; sit comfortably above the existing building (which in itself is a large structure). The sign does have a relationship to the building through the design of the "skirt" but this is insufficient in my opinion to provide any real design advantage to the sign.

33 The sign and would be significantly larger than the existing temporary Westfield signs on the Freeway and would be very visible not just from within the freeway but also from within the surrounding elevated residential areas. I consider that the sign would have a significant amenity impact on both the Freeway environs and when viewed from the surrounding areas.

34 The sign would be less visible from the immediate environs within activity centre itself due to its location to the rear of the building, but would be visible from further away within the centre and again be larger than the existing Fountain Gate entrance signage. The sign does not address the overall urban design guidelines of the Development Plan.

35 The size and height of this sign would in my opinion create a poor precedent for pressures for signage along the Monash Freeway (Wyndson Pty Ltd v City of Casey 2000/006787 21 August 2000 paragraph 28).

36 For the reasons that I have set out above, the decision of the Responsible Authority is affirmed and no permit is granted.