Monday 26 November, 2007
Mr Mark Marsden
Chair, Review of VPP Advertising Sign Provisions Advisory Committee
Planning Panels Victoria
Level 1, 8 Nicholson Street
EAST MELBOURNE VIC 3002
Dear Mr Marsden,
Thank you for providing the Outdoor Media Association (OMA) and our industry
representatives the opportunity to participate in the review process for the advertising
components of the Victorian Planning Provisions.
As a follow up to the last workshop on 16 November 2007, I considered it appropriate to
reiterate some of the key industry issues and perspectives which were raised with the
Committee, and make some suggestions for amendment to 52.05. Specifically this relates
to the following areas:







Evaluating the time limits for permits which apply to promotional signage;
Clarifying the signs to which the September 2008 expiry date relates;
Accommodating the industry’s efforts to provide bus and tram shelters;
Clarifying the role of local and state planning policy in regulating our industry;
Defining and putting in place rules for electronic advertising;
Making provisions for outdoor advertising in mixed use zones; and
Including some commentary about outdoor advertising in the SPPF.
Please note that this letter is intended only to offer some clarification and suggestions about
some of the key issues which were raised at the workshop, and is separate from the OMA’s
previous and more comprehensive submission and background information. It is not
intended to replace or supercede any the previous correspondence from our industry to the
Committee.
It would be appreciated if you could circulate the attached to the members of the Signs
Committee for consideration in the lead up to its making recommendations to Government
by 14 December 2008.
Please feel free to contact me if you require any additional information.
Philip McCall
Senior Policy Officer
Outdoor Media Association
1.
Time limits on permits for promotional signage
There is a sense of inequity by some Victorian members of the outdoor advertising industry
due to the time limits imposed on promotional signage but no other types of permit. The
point was raised at the last stakeholder meeting that no other industry in Victoria is told
that they are permitted to commence business in an allowable area subject to a review
within a prescribed time period, the end result which could include the business no longer
being allowed to operate and being told to remove their infrastructure. Also raised was the
issue that a previous similar review of the VPPs undertaken by the Department of
Infrastructure in 1996 recommended the removal of time limits in some cases. The specific
recommendation was as follows:
That time limits for major promotional signs be required in areas subject to significant change so that signs
can be reviewed within a six year minimum periods. Circumstances where this applies are as follows:




Major redevelopment area of site where the character of the area could expected (sic) to change
within a reasonably short time frame through active intervention (eg 5 years);
Signs on derelict of poor structure/building;
Vacant sites where development may also be anticipated in the future;
Areas, such as shopping centres, where proactive marketing and management campaigns are actively
seeking to change the character of an area or create a distinct identity.1
The OMA has expressed on several occasions the general industry view that we can
continue to work within the current time limit framework (default limit of 15 years,
minimum of 10 years and maximum of 25 years), however are opposed to shortening the
time limits for promotional signs. Further we are concerned that the time limits themselves
have not been tested, as the first signs subject to these rules were only to be reviewed in
September 1997 (now September 1998). The only major indication on how applications
would be assessed for renewal has so far come from Melbourne City Council in their Draft
“Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C110 Advertising Signs Policy Review”, the
relevant excerpt being as follows:
“Under Clause 52.05-5 of the Planning Scheme ‘a permit granted between 19 September 1993 and 18
September 1997 may continue to be displayed until 18 September 2007.’ Council is anticipating sixteen
planning applications to review existing major promotion signs in the period leading up to September
2007. The revised Clause 22.07 will be important in assessing whether the locations of these signs are
appropriate”2
The draft scheme then identified only five parts of Melbourne city areas where promotional
signage would be a permissible land use. The Council has not provided the OMA with details
of the sixteen advertising structures they had identified as having a permit with a pending
expiry, and consequently whether those sites were in areas which would be deemed
permissible in the future.
The capital funds expended on outdoor advertising infrastructure are often significant, and it
can take many years for OMA members to get a return on their investment. As a general
principle, the longer the time limit on the license, the more scope there is for investing in
1
Source: Proposed Statement of recommendation to the Minister for Planning and Local Government in response
to the report of the advertising controls along major routes review, cover letter, page 2.
2
Source: Draft Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C110 Advertising Signs Policy Review, page 3
high-quality advertising infrastructure. The OMA would welcome any effort that the
Committee could make to protect our current and future investments, particularly with
regard to making allowances for promotion signs in cases where the surrounding land use
has not, or would not conceivably change.
As such, the OMA would appreciate the Committee’s consideration of whether or not time
limits for promotional signage are appropriate or required in all circumstances or in all
areas, and possibly establishing a framework for assessing this in line with the last
committee recommendations about time limits. Possible content for 52.05-5 in the Victorian
Planning Provisions could be as follows:
Option A
52.05-5 Major Promotion Sign
Permit requirement
Time limits for major promotional signs are required in areas subject to significant change
so that signs can be reviewed to establish if they remain appropriate to the nature and
character of the area. Circumstances where this applies are as follows:




Major redevelopment area of site where the character of the area could be
expected to change within a reasonably short time frame through active
intervention (eg 5 years);
Signs on derelict of poor structure/building;
Vacant sites where development may also be anticipated in the future;
Areas, such as shopping centres, where proactive marketing and management
campaigns are actively seeking to change the character of an area or create a
distinct identity.
Where a permit is required, the permit much specify an expiry date which is not less than
10 years or more than 25 years from the date of issue of the permit.
If the Committee does decide to proceed with a uniform requirement for permits on
promotional signage, the OMA would welcome the inclusion in 52.05-5 of any presumption
of renewal which could be introduced for signs whose permits are soon to expire. This would
also address one of the issues which were raised by the Law Institute of Victoria (LIV) in
their submission to the Advertising Signs Review Issues and Options Paper:
Mandatory time expiry requirements
If signs are to have mandatory time expiry requirements in the planning scheme or conditions in planning
permits, the LIV submits that consideration should be given to including provisions in the planning
scheme to ensure that a permit can be applied for and issued for continuance of the sign for a further
period, or enable amendment of the permit to allow its continuance for further period.3
This could be facilitated as follows:
Option B
52.05-5 Major Promotion Sign
Permit requirement
A permit for a major promotion sign must include conditions that specify:

An expiry date, which is not less than 10 years or more than 25 years from the date
of issue of the permit.

A statement from the consent authority that upon expiry, ‘the promotion sign permit
will be renewed for a period not less than ten years if the character or nature (ie
zoning) of the area have not changed significantly since the permit was originally
granted.
2. September 2008 expiry date for some major promotion sign
permits
As discussed in the workshop, the OMA would welcome the Committee using the current
review to clarify the period to which the September 2008 expiry date for major promotional
permits exists. The current text of clause 52.05-5 says that “a permit granted between 19
September 1993 and 18 September 1997 may continue to be displayed until 18 September
2007”4. This is not consistent with the original content of amendment S83 to the Planning
and Environment Act 1987, which states that an expiry date applies to a “permit granted
between 19 September 1995 and 18 September 1997”5. The effect of this is that signs
which were granted permits between 19 September 1993 and 19 September 1995 currently
have permits due to expire in September 2008, when this is not the original intent of the
amendment. The industry estimates the value of each of these signs to be in the order of
$100,000 each. It is requested that the committee consider amending the VPP’s to correct
this inaccuracy, possibly as follows:
3
Source: Law Institute of Victoria, submission to review of advertising sign provisions – Issues and Options Paper,
17 October 2007. Available at:
https://www.liv.asn.au/members/sections/submissions/20071017_106/Review%20of%20Advertising%20Sign%20
Provisions_20071017.pdf
4
Source: VPP’s, 52.05-5, page 4
Source: Planning and Environment Act 1987, Amendment S83, explanatory report, page 1 (copy provided to
Committee at 16 November 2007 workshop)
5
52.05-5 Major Promotion Sign
Permit requirement
A major promotion sign displayed in accordance with a permit granted between 19
September 1995, and 18 September 1997, may continue to be displayed until 18
September 2008.
3.
Accommodation of street furniture
Yarra Trams has previously identified that their top area of complaint is a lack of shelters at
tram stops – highlighting the need for our industry to continue to deliver this type of
infrastructure. Plans such as “Melbourne 2030” identify a benchmark to have a shelter at
one in every four tram/bus stops and the outdoor advertising industry would welcome the
opportunity to further participate to help meet this target. Our industry would be well placed
to help provide more bus and tram shelters, with preliminary data from Access Economics
showing that 73% of advertising sites in Victoria are related to street furniture – more than
3700 bus or tram shelters provided throughout 31 council areas. Our current infrastructure
investment in Victoria is worth in the order of $77 million.6
As discussed at the last workshop, the result of the differing application requirements for
street furniture in Victoria means that it can take as little as four weeks or over one year to
get approval to get an advertising-funded bus or tram shelter “in the ground”, depending on
which council is the responsible authority. Further, in some cases where third party
consultation is required, the public is only informed of the advertising sign on a bus or tram
shelter rather than the structure which it is attached to, and funds. Changes which the
outdoor advertising industry would like to see in this area, not only to provide us with
additional advertising opportunities, but also to offer a much-needed amenity for councils,
communities and commuters, include:

Accommodating the opportunity for scrolling advertising panels, as seen in some
areas on the rail network, which can potentially minimise the total number of advertising
assets required as part of a street furniture contract and can therefore represent a
mutually agreeable arrangement for both advertising companies and councils.

Providing accommodation for electronic (static or non-static) advertising on
advertising-funded public infrastructure. Not limiting these provisions to billboardsized advertising infrastructure would again offer the possible advantage of reducing the
amount of advertising required to make the provision of public infrastructure viable.

Removing permit requirements for advertising signs which are integrated into, and
fund, street furniture and are not located in sensitive areas such as heritage zones.
6
Source: Access Economics. Draft National Economic Study of the Outdoor Media Industry, October 2007.

Where permits are required, making applications for advertising which is
integrated into (and funds) street furniture exempt from third party
involvement. There have been numerous instances where third parties have objected
to advertising panels in street furniture due to their not being aware that it includes a
bus or tram shelter.

Establishing a clear, state-wide planning permit application process for street
furniture, to be implemented consistently across all Victorian council areas. At present,
the application process varies from council to council making the process unnecessarily
unpredictable.

Removing the blanket prohibition of advertising on street furniture in certain
areas including major boulevards, inner city roads adjacent to residential
roads, and some heritage overlays, so that proposals to construct advertising-funded
bus and tram shelters in these areas can be assessed by the relevant consent authorities
on each of the site’s merits. Due to the current prohibitions, many shelters in highly
frequented areas cannot be replaced due to blanket no-advertising policies.
It is requested that the committee consider amending the VPP’s to further accommodate
street furniture and streamline the application process. Some of the changes which could
help achieve this include:
52.05-3 Signs not requiring a permit
A permit is not required to display the following signs:

A sign which is integrated into, and funds a bus or tram shelter and which is not in a
heritage or residential zone (not including a mixed use zone).
52.05-4 Existing signs
A lawfully displayed advertisement may be renewed or replaced. However, a permit is
required:

To renew or replace the advertisement of an animated or internally-illuminated sign
which does not form part of, and provide funds for, a bus or tram shelter.
In cases where permits are required for street furniture, the industry would also like to the
VPP’s specify a standard application process, again with the aim of encouraging consistency
between council areas.
4.
State versus local regulation
The OMA would like to see role of state and local governments refined, generally preferring
that promotional signage (as distinct from other types of signage) is regulated within the
framework of agreed, state-wide decision and design guidelines rather than under the guise
of local policies. It is member’s experience that many council ‘outdoor advertising’ policies:

Largely relate to business identification and other types of signage which are not
the focus of our industry;

Vary considerably between council areas and make general statements about
advertising, rather than going into the detail necessary to set standards; and

Have a tendency to discourage all signage, including promotional signage, rather
than proactively identify preferred urban design or public infrastructure outcomes. Ie
Melbourne City Council’s policy says that all sky signs are discouraged, as opposed to
specifying that sky signs are not supported in x area for x x x reasons.
The outdoor media industry would prefer local promotional signage rules to be developed
only where there are specific local circumstances that warrant them, providing the industry
with a more consistent framework to work within, and removing some of the bias which
exists from certain councils and councilors against the industry despite the fact that 87% of
the public are positive or neutral to outdoor advertising7.
5.
Defining electronic billboards
The OMA recognises that in some circumstances, electronic billboards may be deemed more
suitable in some areas than others, and are therefore supportive of the move toward their
separate definition and (potential) regulation.
Accommodating emerging developments, including defining and establishing rules for static
electronic message boards and animated electronic message boards, would be useful in
‘future proofing’ the VPPs. It is important that any definition of electronic outdoor media
accounts for and accommodates the following:

Electronic outdoor advertising of a range of sizes. There is not as much size
standardization in electronic advertising as with other outdoor formats, and it may be
appropriate that that different rules apply to electronic advertisements of different sizes
and in different locations. This is particularly the case with electronic advertising which
could form part of street furniture as opposed to billboard formats

Discrepancy between electronic advertising which displays animated and static
messages.
The OMA would suggests the following definitions may be appropriate for inclusion in the
new section 52.05 of the Victorian Planning Provisions:
7
Source: AC Nielsen – Public Opinion on Outdoor Advertising, June 2007
Non-Static Electronic Message Displays
Non-Static Electronic Message Displays are a sign capable of displaying words,
symbols, figures, images, animation, vision and moving pictures that can be
electronically or mechanically changed by remote or automatic means.
Static Electronic Message Displays
Static Electronic Message Displays are a sign capable of displaying words, symbols,
figures or images that can be electronically or mechanically changed by remote or
automatic means. These displays shall contain static messages only, and shall not
have movement, of any part of the sign structure, design, or pictorial segment of
the sign, including the movement of any illumination or the flashing, scintillating or
varying of light intensity.
6.
Outdoor advertising in mixed use zones
It is the view of the outdoor advertising industry that while major promotional signage is
not appropriate in residential areas, consent authorities should be able to assess the
appropriateness of advertising in mixed use zones on a case-by-case basis rather than
relying on a blanket prohibition. We would like to see this facilitated through including
mixed use zones in category two (low limitation, permit required) of 52.05-7 or changing
the conditions of 52.05-8. The effect of this would be that applications for advertising in
these areas can be assessed on their merits by the relevant consent authority.
The industry view is that allowing councils to include promotional signs in a different
category in a schedule which allows it in mixed use zones not work.



It would be extra work for councils;
There are numerous councils which, based on previous public statements and the
content of their existing local policies, would be unlikely to make concessions for our
industry on principal; and
It would create more inconsistencies between council planning rules concerning our
industry.
The representatives from Melbourne City Council at the November 16 workshop stated that
their opinion that there are appropriate business / residential areas within the Melbourne
Council area where outdoor advertising could have a presence. However this is the same
council which attempted to pass Planning Scheme Amendment C110 Advertising Signs
Policy Review, which would have severely limited locations that promotional signage could
be in city areas (let alone mixed use areas). The industry believes that the only way to get a
fair and consistent outcome on this issue is to resolve it at the source – the Victorian
Planning Provisions. This would be:

Consistent with the rules in other states including NSW (where ‘major promotional’
signage is allowed in mixed residential / business or similar zones) and QLD (where
council planning schemes generally allow proposals for advertising in mixed use zones to
be assessed on a case-by-case basis).

Fair given that high and large buildings and a multitude of different land uses are
already permissible in mixed use zones and it would make sense, given the physical and
land use mix, to allow consent authorities to consider our applications.
The OMA therefore requests the following amendment to advertising provisions in the VPP’s:
52.05-8 High amenity areas - section 2 (Permit required)



Removal of the condition that a promotion sign must not exceed 2 square metres
Removal of the condition that a high-wall sign must be a business logo / street number
Inclusion of a major promotion sign
7.
Including commentary in the State Planning Policy Framework
The OMA would prefer to see a separate clause in section 19 that can be loaded relevant
commentary to promotional signage (as distinct from other types of signage) and the issues
which surround it. It is the industry view that this material should be read in conjunction
with material in 19.03, but separate to it, and emphasises:



The pre-eminence of the State VPP as a source of regulation for outdoor advertising
and signage;
The role that outdoor advertising can and should play in Victoria; and
The common understanding of outdoor signage rather than focusing on negative
aspects of our industry.
Based on commentary in the Issues and Options paper, the OMA suggests something in line
with the following would be appropriate to 19.02 (which currently has no content) or a new
19.05:
19.02 / 19.05
Outdoor advertising
Promotional signage has an important role in informing and directing the community as well
as promoting products, goods and services. When designed and sited well, signage can add
vitality and make a positive and dynamic contribution to its setting. The Victorian Planning
Provisions are the primary source of regulation for outdoor signage in Victoria, and aim to
encourage signage which is appropriate for, or adds to, the visual interest or amenity of its
surrounds.
**** end of letter ****