Bennetts Lane signage fight heads to VCAT as council defers decision

A planning dispute over signage at an iconic Bennetts Lane site in the CBD has now spilled into VCAT, with the City of Melbourne deferring formal consideration of the application while discussions continue between council officers and the applicant.

The matter, relating to 134-144 Little Lonsdale St, came before the Future Melbourne Committee on May 5, where councillors were originally due to consider a management recommendation that the application be refused.

Instead, Deputy Lord Mayor Roshena Campbell moved a procedural motion to defer the item, citing the ongoing VCAT proceedings and the need to allow more time for negotiations.

The motion was seconded by Lord Mayor Nick Reece and passed unanimously.

The application seeks approval for 13 business identification signs across the site’s three frontages to Little Lonsdale St, Bennetts Lane and Davisons Place. The applicant is Perri Projects Pty Ltd, with fjcstudio listed as architect. The estimated cost of the signage works is $50,000.

According to the council’s planning report, the application has become contentious not simply because of the number of signs proposed, but because of their location, design and relationship to the surrounding streets.

Management had recommended refusal on the basis that, taken as a whole, the proposal did not provide an acceptable response to the Melbourne Planning Scheme. The key concerns raised in the report include road encroachment and the use of signage that could be confused with, or mistaken for, road names.

That latter point is particularly sensitive at Bennetts Lane, one of Melbourne’s best-known laneways and a site with strong historic and cultural associations, especially through its long connection to the city’s jazz scene.

Council officers also noted that some of the signage references “Bennetts Lane” even where those signs are not actually located within Bennetts Lane itself.

The report says this is contrary to the City of Melbourne’s Activities Local Law, which seeks to ensure clear and accurate road naming and street numbering to support emergency services, wayfinding and municipal management.

Another issue flagged by officers is the use of the address “17 Bennetts Lane”, which the report says does not accurately reflect the lawful or correct addressing of the site.

The planning report also notes that the site has already been the subject of enforcement action arising from the erection of signage without a planning permit, and that a number of those unlawfully erected signs remain in place.

Importantly, the report noted that the application was already before VCAT because the landowner lodged an appeal over the council’s failure to determine the permit within the prescribed 60-day timeframe.

That means the matter has effectively moved beyond an ordinary planning application and into a more complex negotiation between the parties, with the council’s deferral suggesting there may still be room to resolve some of the concerns before the tribunal process advances further. •