Councillors took a proactive stance on addressing signage issues in the wake of a 2016 audit of advertising not complying with the 2014 Development Control Plan. At that time a complaint had been received about the safety of a particular sign, resulting in 25 local businesses being directed to remove offending signage and accusations of restraint of trade.

READ ALSO:

Following the backlash councillors took the matter in hand and – after workshops and consultation with Tenterfield Chamber of Tourism, Industry and Business – a draft amendment of changes to the DCP’s Chapter 8 – Signage and Outdoor Advertising is now offered for discussion.

Changes include an overarching requirement that the design, location and operation of advertising signage does not create a road safety hazard, and that any advertising signs be located wholly within private property and meet minimum clearance zones.

Advertising that won’t be allowed includes any sign, flag or bunting that is considered by council to be a hazard to traffic or pedestrians due to its location.

Outside of the town limits in rural zones, under the amendment signs that direct visitors to businesses or attractions within the shire will officially be permitted. Rural property owners won’t need to obtain council consent for property identification signs as long as they’re limited to one sign per property entrance.

The amendment also clarifies that guidelines for signs on business or industrial premises relate to ‘business identification’ signs that contain the name of the person or business and the nature of the business being undertaken at the premises. Such signs are not to contain any advertising for another person or business.

The business chamber’s Vince Sherry was appreciative that since the 2016 fracas council afforded his organisation the opportunity to consult with its members and make submissions on their concerns. He said these concerns pertained primarily to in-store signage  and signage outside businesses said to be a distraction to drivers.

“Businesses were treated a bit harshly,” he said.

“Council made some concessions and we’re happy with the outcome.”

Council’s senior planner Tamia Davidson was on hand at June’s council meeting to assure councillors that changes to the DCP would not be retrospective, and apply to proposed new signs only.

Further changes that councillors will consider as part of the public exhibition process include that wall-mounted flag signs made of flexible material be explicitly excluded from the restriction on any sign over the footpath mounted less than 2.6 metres above it.

Cr Bronwyn Petrie also proposes that corporate building signs (that is, corporate colour schemes considered to be an extension of advertising signage) currently in the ‘prohibited’ section instead be moved to ‘not acceptable’ if not done in accordance with an appropriate heritage colour scheme, where the heritage  conservation area or heritage items are concerned.

In addition her submission requests that the wording on the permissibility of vertical or horizontal projecting wall signs – depending on their historical-significance to the building – rely on the heritage advisor’s advice, rather than their determination.

In response to Cr Gary Verri’s concerns about the quality of signs around town (such as the typeface used), Mrs Davidson said she was working with business owners and council’s business development officer Harry Bolton towards signage of a higher standard.

A copy of the draft amendments can be found online and at council chambers, libraries (Tenterfield and Torrington), post offices (Legume, Urbenville, Wallangarra and Deepwater), community halls (Mingoola and Liston) and Drake Village Resource Centre.

Submissions should be in writing and posted to PO Box 214, Tenterfield NSW 2372 or emailed to council@tenterfield.nsw.gov.au, but they must be in by Wednesday, August 15.

“It’s not just a stroke of the pen that fixes this,” mayor Peter Petty said.

“It’s a long consultation process.”