2019-09-10 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA   10 SEPTEMBER 2019




                                                        Page 55 of 76

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                            10 SEPTEMBER 2019

                                                                                 Visual Impact Assessment
                                                                                        PEA 1802 of 2019

        3     Potential Visual Impacts
       18    There are several critical observations to make about the visual context, the proposed sign and the
             potential visual impacts that are generated:
                i.   The proposed sign has a particularly limited visual catchment, and the visual catchment has a
                    low sensitivity to signage of this type. These factors indicate that any impacts that would be
                    generated by the sign would have limited significance to the wider area. Notably, the visual
                    catchment of the sign will be even further reduced when the vacant site to the north of the
                     subject site is developed.
               ii.  The visual setting is a low quality visual environment that is diverse and that is substantially
                     characterised by signage. Setting aside Council’s signface area limits [of 4sqm) the proposed
                    sign looks entirely appropriate in this visual setting and would be consistent with expectations
                    for this type of environment. As it exists, the proposed sign fits within this environment and
                    does not cause any change to the character or amenity of that environment.
               iii. One of the few appealing features of the visual environment is the bushland to the south and
                    east of the Innovation Park, which provides a green backdrop to some views from the local
                     area. The proposed sign does not detract from this feature of the visual environment.
               lv.  The proposed building is a relatively modest, almost inconspicuous element of the visual
                    environment and, rather than amplifying the proposed signage (as occurs with some buildings
                    in the local area), it will provide a muted and uncluttered backdrop for the sign.
               v.   The proposed sign does not represent a significant exceedance in terms of dimensions or
                    overall area compared to the approved signs. Specifically, the proposed sign is just 1.6 wider,
                    and 0.57 higher than the approved signs. Furthermore, the proposed sign represents a
                    consolidation of signage on the proposed building - instead of the two approved sign, with a
                    combined area of 8sqm, the proposed sign is a single sign with a similar combined area. Such
                    an approach reduces the potential for visual clutter within the site, and reflects a less obtrusive
                    Signage outcome. This is confirmed in Figure 12 - Figure 15 below which show the proposed
                    sign (Figure 12 and Figure 14) compared to the two approved signs (Figure 13 and Figure 15).
                    Related to this point, it is relevant to note that the area of the proposed sign is noticeably less
                    than the total overall signage allowance for the site of 10sqm contemplated in the Advertising
                    Devices Code*.
               vi.  The proposed sign will have a similar perceived size to the approved sign on the western
                    facade, when viewed from the internal road adjacent the site. The perceived size of an object
                    depends primarily on the visual angle subtended by the object on the viewer's retina. The
                    visual angle is mainly affected by the actual size of the object and the distance of the object
                    from the viewer. The building sits approximately 10-12 metres from the pavement of the
                    internal access road. A sign on the western facade of the building would be approximately 10.2
                     metres from the road. By comparison, the proposed sign would be at least 15.2 metres from
                    the road (some 50% further than an approved sign). Considering only the height of the
                    proposed and approved signs, the visual angle of the proposed sign (with a height of 157m ata
                    distance of 15.2m) will have practically the same visual angle as the approved sign on the
                    western facade (with a height of 1m at a distance of 10.2m) (refer Figure 16 below).
              vii.   Being located on the northern facade of the building, the proposed sign will have less of an
                     impact on the streetscape of the internal road (than the two approved signs do). It will be
                    more identifiable from Rene Street (where street trees obscure views towards the site), but
                    would not be more impactful on the Rene Street streetscape.

        2 O6e) and $6.1 of the Advertising Devices Code.
                                                                                              13 of 17

                                                                                                     Page 55 of 76