News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Passions still high on saga of shop sign 

Passions still high on saga of shop sign

26 Jun, 2008 09:31 AM
An adult shop in East Dubbo will not be allowed signs visible from the road, after Dubbo City councillors fell in line with a ruling from the Land and Environment Court.

In 2006 the court ruled Passions adult shop should be able to open less than 200 metres away from the nearby Dubbo Presbyterian church. But it limited Passions’ signage.

Council staff recommended allowing a new sign facing north be agreed to.

But at Monday night’s council meeting councillors felt that was against the court ruling which said there should be no obvious sign or indication of Passions’ use, either from the road or a nearby church.

Instead they will allow Passions an extra sign on its front window, and one on the façade wall - both facing west and therefore not the road.

It is a rare win for the Presbyterian church which has argued against the presence of the sex shop near its building.

According to church personnel Passions has in the past 12 to 18 months flouted the ruling allowing it only one sign by erecting other signs. When council requested Passions remove the signs, it did so but asked they be made legal.

The church’s Rev Wayne Connor told the council meeting it was clear from the Land and Environment Court ruling - which he distributed to councillors - that Passions was only allowed to originally open if its presence was “discreet”.

“It should not be apparent from the street,” he told councillors.

“The limited signage should give no indication of the nature of the use of the premises.”

The church and some Dubbo councillors are also frustrated by the presence of Passions’

logo-painted van parked in the street.

But councillors have noted they can do nothing about it.

Council was worried about allowing Passions extra signage, since it went against the

Land and Environment Court ruling.

Cr Richard Mutton, whose amendment allowing Passions one extra sign was adopted, said he was “disturbed” council could ignore the court ruling.

“This is a restricted business and signage needs to be discreet,” he said, noting that the illegal signs were in “defiance” of the court’s ruling.

Council also requested a review of provisions relating to restricted premises, to ensure more “definitive” provisions are applied when assessing any further restricted businesses such as adult shops.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


No comments yet. Be the first to comment below.

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

1) Apple iPhone 4 32GB44 plans 12%
2) Apple iPhone 4 16GB44 plans 6%
3) HTC Desire4 plans 2%
4) Apple iPhone 3GS 8GB33 plans 2%
5) Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini Pro37 plans 1%

Mobile Phones | Broadband Plans

Get the best deal at Fairfax Digital - Rural Press

Buy Local


Daily Liberal







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Navigate

Classifieds

More Ways to Read

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2010. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...