Thursday, August 28, 2014

maccas update - 28 aug 2014

Regular planning register watchers will have noticed this application for a planning permit amendment – YR-2011/647/A at 1529 Burwood Hwy, Tecoma (McDonalds site) for “Buildings and works associated with a convenience restaurant including acoustic boundary fence, creation and removal of easements, variation to the existing easements, erection of associated signage including internally illuminated signage and removal of vegetation”.    

The nature of the amendment is a request for ‘secondary consent’ for additional signage on the site.

Secondary consent is a mechanism that has no public submission process attached to it, there is also no ability for a Councillor to use ‘call in’ powers for the matter to be decided before full council.

Secondary consent is a way for a Responsible Authority (council) to consent to change plans when the change being considered is not ‘transformational’, (ie: reducing impact such as lowering a building height, increasing setbacks, changing building materials, roof colour, etc).

It utilises the mechanism of a permit condition, in this case condition 2 which says “The layout of the site and the size of the buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority”.

In it’s decision for the permit the VCAT tribunal members made these comments in relation to signage (from para 91):

91   Notwithstanding the above general support for the proposed signage, we concur with the residents that the number of signs should be reduced. There is some duplication of the larger signs and we think the number of signs exceeds the signage generally provided for other commercial premises in Tecoma. We think the following signage should be deleted as it largely duplicates other signs and would add to the extent of night illumination. The signs that we will require to be deleted are:

·   S13 – flagpoles and banners (should be replaced by landscaping).

·   S9D – 2.3metre by 0.7 metre directional sign (could be replaced by smaller non illuminated directional sign).

·   Delete either 9A or 9B (2.3 metres by 0.7 metre) at entry to the access aisle to Burwood Highway as these signs duplicate.

·   Replace Sign S2B on the west elevation with S4B.

·   Delete S4B from the blade on the west elevation.

92   We consider the dimensions and content of sign S4A to be appropriate, however, we consider its colour to be overly prominent. We consider a more muted colour should be employed.  Given the height, size and illumination of the large north facing ‘McDonald’s’ sign, we concur with the residents that it would generate a strong illumination into the adjoining residential areas, and we will direct that the illumination be turned off between 10.00pm and 7.00am.

93   With these modifications we consider the proposed signage would comply with the decision guidelines of the Scheme, make a positive contribution to the streetscape and not adversely impact the site’s neighbours.

As the application was only lodged this week it has not as yet been considered by our planning officers. Although there is no public submission process as part of a Secondary Consent application given it is a live planning permit amendment application plans are available for public viewing. I have organised for plans to be available at our Upwey office as of next week (1 Sep).
I’ll keep you posted with more details as they come to hand.

Labels: , , ,


At 4:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rubbish left on the ground in the general vicinity should be enough additional signage. Hopefully the planning officers knock this request back.


Post a Comment

<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker