Minutes of the Tourist Attraction Signposting Assessment Committee and the Hunter Region Subcommittee
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TASAC Minutes 18 June 2014 Minutes of the Tourist Attraction Signposting Assessment Committee and the Hunter Region Subcommittee Wednesday 18 June 2014 at the North Room, Singleton Visitor Information & Enterprise Centre, Townhead Park, New England Highway, Singleton Members David Douglas Regional Coordinator TASAC and Drive, Destination NSW Phil Oliver Road User Guidance, Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) Maria Zannetides TASAC Secretariat Hunter Region Subcommittee Ken Saxby RMS Hunter Region Also present Jess Dunston Economic Development Operations Coordinator, Singleton Council Jane Holdsworth Economic Development Manager, Cessnock Council Zoe Cooke Senior Landscape Architect, Moir Landscape Architecture Andrew Margan Hunter Valley Wine & Tourism Association Ben Stoimenoff RMS Hunter Region Apologies Salena Avard Economic Development Manager, Singleton Council Gus Maher General Manager, Hunter Valley Wine & Tourism Association AGENDA ITEMS 1. DELEGATIONS / PRESENTATIONS & REGIONAL SIGNPOSTING ISSUES 1.1 Hunter Valley Wine Country Draft Signage Strategy and Cessnock LGA Draft Signage Strategy Zoe Cooke outlined the work that Moir Landscape Architecture is undertaking in relation to signage strategies for Hunter Valley Wine Country and Cessnock LGA. Her presentations and feedback from TASAC members are summarised below. Hunter Valley Wine Country Draft Signage Strategy The Hunter Valley Wine Country Signage Strategy is being carried out a joint project for both Cessnock and Singleton LGAs. The main objectives of the signage strategy are to improve wayfinding signage around the Wine Country region and promote ease of access to the many tourism destinations within it. Existing signs in the area which were introduced by the Councils more than 20 years ago are old and dated. Existing fingerboard signs are very text heavy and difficult to read from a moving vehicle. Final 30 June 2014 1 of 9 TASAC Minutes 18 June 2014 The strategy addresses expressway signs, vineyards directional signs and advance signs and proposes a “signage family” that comprises the following five sign types that are intended to work in combination with RMS tourist signs: o Information bays o Precinct signs o Intersection signs o Reassurance signs o Destination markers Draft designs for each sign type were presented. A suite of pictograms is being developed to be adopted and used consistently on all signs, printed material and electronic media. Councils and the wine industry will work together to identify the tourism precincts within the region. There may be five to eight of these and colour coding will be developed to differentiate them on signs and promotional material. TASAC feedback: i. Existing fingerboard signs for wineries and other businesses in Wine Country are too small and too numerous to be able to be safely read by motorists. ii. Signposting does not replace the need for industry to market and promote tourism destinations. iii. RMS does not generally support the provision of signposting for alternative routes. iv. Only the white on blue Roman “i” can be used for information bays because the yellow on blue italic “i” is trademarked and may only be used to denote accredited visitor information centres. v. The colours developed for the tourism precincts should avoid using the brown colour used on tourist signposting. vi. Pictograms cannot be used on signs on State roads. vii. Research indicates that motorists are only able to absorb a maximum of five symbols on signs. The sample designs in the draft strategy for signs with pictograms include too many pictograms that are of too small a size to be safely read, understood and acted upon. viii. TASAC does not support the use of signage or symbols to denote businesses that require prior booking, have limited opening hours/days or are outside defined tourist attraction categories. For example shops, sporting facilities, restaurants, cafes and function or events centres. Accommodation establishments are not eligible for tourist signs that are managed by TASAC. However, in rural areas, as a road safety service to motorists, RMS manages a process where symbols may installed for accommodation establishments that meet specified criteria. Final 30 June 2014 2 of 9 TASAC Minutes 18 June 2014 ix. An accredited road safety auditor should be engaged to consider the location of all proposed signs to be located in roadways and information bays in terms of their impact on road safety. x. It was suggested that a locality be selected and photomontages developed to illustrate how the strategy could be implemented. xi. The use of the symbol for Galleries on TASAC signs was discontinued some years ago. xii. Australian Standards be used for the design of street (black on white) and locality names (white on green) on intersection signs. Compliance with the standards will also ensure that the signs are large enough to be safely read. xiii. Guidelines should be developed regarding the design and use of destination markers on private property. xiv. During the discussion Andrew Margan inquired about the possibility of welcome signage for Hunter Valley Wine Country on the Hunter Expressway. In response it was noted that it would be most appropriate for visitors to be welcomed to Wine Country by the information bays proposed in the signage strategy. Consideration could also be given to the need for road signage to be introduced to welcome signs nearby and in advance of the information bays to direct visitors to them bay but this type of road signage could not be located on the expressway. xv. Andrew also inquired about the possibility of signage on the Hunter Expressway for the various precincts within Wine County. He was advised that TASAC’s signage policy for wine tourism regions does not provide for separate signage for precincts within a region. However, the matter could be considered as part of the next review of the Tourist Signposting Manual. xvi. In response to comments that signposting to vineyards on the Hunter Expressway could be improved, RMS indicated that it will be reviewing the signposting on the expressway, including tourist signposting. Cessnock LGA Draft Signage Strategy Zoe presented her firm’s draft signage strategy for Cessnock LGA and the following points were noted: The strategy provides guidance on the planning, design and installation of signage in Cessnock LGA to improve wayfinding and enhance its image and branding. The following nine sign types have been developed and designs for each were discussed: o Gateway entry signs o Suburb entry signs o Street signs o Community facility entry signs o Community facility information signs o Town centre information signs Final 30 June 2014 3 of 9 TASAC Minutes 18 June 2014 o Town centre pedestrian fingerboards o Walkway/cycleway signs o Emergency services location markers TASAC feedback i. Welcome signs for LGAs are not able to be located on motorways. ii. Careful consideration needs to be given to ensure that locations for welcome signs are appropriate from a road safety perspective. iii. The Tourist Signposting Manual outlines the policies for welcome signs for LGAs and towns. It is not necessary to apply to TASAC for these signs but it is important that councils consult with RMS about the design and location for such signs. There is considerable flexibility in the design for these signs so long as they do not attempt to guide traffic or imitate any other sign type, they are safely positioned in the road reserve. iv. LGA welcome signs must include the name of the actual local council area in the welcome sign design. As “Cessnock” is both the name of an LGA and town, it was suggested that the text on the LGA welcome signs include “Welcome to Cessnock Local Government Area”. The last three words could be on a separate line and in a smaller font than the other words. v. Australian Standards should be used for the design of street name signs to ensure their legibility and the appropriate use of symbols or pictograms on them. vi. The use of emergency services location markers is not supported and the use of rural addressing system was suggested as an appropriate alternative. Action: Ken to provide Zoe with more information on Putty Road satellite phones. 1.3 Members’ report on site inspections David and Phil noted a non-standard tourist sign (which gives opening hours) for the Australian Army Infantry Museum on the New England Highway near Range Road. Action: Secretariat to request the operator to submit a signposting application to allow the signage to be reviewed. 2. NEW TOURIST SIGNPOSTING APPLICATIONS N / A 3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF 21 MAY 2014 The minutes of TASAC’s meeting of Wednesday 21 May 2014 with the Sydney Region Subcommittee in Katoomba were confirmed. The Committee members and Secretariat advised that they had completed all the actions attributed to them from the meeting. Final 30 June 2014 4 of 9 TASAC Minutes 18 June 2014 4. MATTERS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 4.1 Short Sheep Winery, Mudgee A site inspection report in support of an application for tourist signposting for Short Sheep Winery was received from Christine Mas-Fitzell of Mudgee Region Tourism Inc. on 26 May. A letter informing the applicant of the attraction’s eligibility for tourist signposting was issued the same day and advice of the decision was also provided to RMS Western Region. A subsequent request from the operator to include the term “Micro” on the signposting was not supported. Decision: TASAC noted that Short Sheep Winery is eligible for tourist signposting in the Wineries category. 4.2 McCrossin’s Mill Museum, Uralla A site inspection report in support of an application for tourist signposting for McCrossin’s Mill Museum was received from Patrick Dogan of Uralla Shire Council on 3 June. Patrick also provided a photo of a new sign at the museum’s entry which confirms that it is open daily from 10 am to 5 pm.