Captive Vision Pty Limited v North Sydney Council - [2019] NSWLEC 1425

No judgment structure available for this case.

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Captive Vision Pty Limited v North Sydney Council [2019] NSWLEC 1425
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 4 September 2019
Date of orders: 10 September 2019
Decision date: 10 September 2019
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Dixon SC
Decision:
The Court orders:
(1)   Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the Lighting Impact Assessment by Electrolight Australia Pty Ltd dated 26 February 2019;
(2)   The appeal is upheld;
(3)   Development consent is granted to Development Application No. 193/2018 for the removal of an existing static illuminated advertising wall sign and the erection of a new digital advertising wall sign on the eastern elevation of 287 Military Road, Cremorne NSW, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”;
(4)   No orders as to costs.

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013
Roads Act 1993
State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage
Texts Cited: AS4282-1997 for the Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting
Department of Planning and Environment, Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017
North Sydney Development Control Plan 2013
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Captive Vision Pty Limited (Applicant)
North Sydney Council (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
N Brunton (Solicitor) (Applicant)
K Law (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Norton Rose Fulbright (Applicant)
Matthews Folbigg Lawyers (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2018/393238
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

COMMISSIONER: The appeal arises following North Sydney Council’s refusal of a development application DA 193/2018 seeking development approval to convert an existing illuminated advertising sign into a digital sign. The existing sign is attached to the eastern elevation of the Cremorne Hotel located at 287 Military Road, Cremorne (the Site).
The appeal is made pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) by Captive Vision Pty Limited.
In accordance with the Court’s usual practice, the matter was referred to a Court arranged conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 4 September 2019. I presided over the conciliation conference.
Prior to the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court granting leave for the Applicant to rely on the Lighting Impact Assessment by Electrolight Australia Pty Ltd dated 26 February 2019, upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the development application subject to conditions.
Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the development application. There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties identified the jurisdictional prerequisites of relevance in these proceedings and explained how these jurisdictional prerequisites have been satisfied in this case. They include a cl 4.6 written request to vary the 20m maximum height standard in the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 (NSLEP 2013).
Before I deal with the jurisdictional matters including the cl 4.6 written request, it is useful to set out the following agreed facts.

Agreed Facts

The existing advertising signage and supporting structure was approved by Council on 7 June 2010 under DA Consent 70/10. The existing sign has a portrait orientation and a depth of 300mm. It does not obscure any architectural details or window fenestration. The top of the existing sign is at RL 105.9 metres, which is 2.85 metres below the parapet height of the host building (which is at RL 108.75).
The proposal is to remove the vinyl skin of the existing advertising sign and replace it with a digital screen in exactly the same location as the existing sign. The proposed digital screen will be the same size as the existing sign, being 4m wide x 8.1m high. The total display area is 32.4m². The proposed wall signage structure will remain on the eastern elevation of the building fully contained within the profile of the building and will be flush wall mounted.
The proposed sign will operate from 7am until 11pm daily which is the same time frame as the existing illuminated sign. Although, it will incorporate a public benefit component which provides 10% of screen time to be allocated free of charge to North Sydney Council (Council) for community related messaging.
The Site is situated in the Cremorne Town Centre as described in the North Sydney Development Control Plan 2013 (NSDCP 2013) and located within the B4 Mixed Use zone under the NSLEP 2013. Land to the east is within the Mosman Local Government Area. The zoning of land to the east is zoned B2 Business.
Signage is a permissible land use with consent in the B4 Zone under the NSLEP 2013. Signage of all categorisations (business, building and advertising) is an existing visual element in the Town Centre streetscape.
The Site is not a heritage item and is not located within a heritage conservation area. It has a frontage to Military Road. Military Road is a classified road under the Roads Act 1993 and a major thoroughfare through the commercial districts of Neutral Bay, Cremorne and Mosman.
Military Road is a major six lane thoroughfare and the land adjacent to the road comprises the principal commercial and retail precincts in the suburbs of Neutral Bay, Cremorne and Mosman.
Under the NSLEP 2013, the Site has a maximum height limit of 20 metres. The existing building on the site exceeds this height limit. The proposed signage structure is at 21.39m above ground level; there is a 1.39 m variation with the existing 20m height control. The extent of the variation of the signage structure to the height control is 6.9%. Noting that the building on which the signage structure is located and mounted exceeds the 20m height in cl 4.3 of the NSLEP 2013 and has a height of 24.4 m above the ground level measured as I said to 108.75.
The ground level is at RL 84.51.

Clause 4.6 request

Clause 4.6 of the NSLEP 2013 enables an exception to the height standard subject to a written request from the applicant justifying the contravention.
The Applicant relies on the written request prepared by Urbanconcepts dated July 2018.
Relevantly, cl 4.6 provides:

(1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:
(a) to provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development,
(b) to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances.

(2) Development consent may, subject to this clause, be granted for development even though the development would contravene a development standard imposed by this or any other environmental planning instrument. However, this clause does not apply to a development standard that is expressly excluded from the operation of this clause.
(3) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:
(a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and
(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

(4) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:
(a) the consent authority is satisfied that:
(i) the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and
(ii) the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

(b) the concurrence of the Secretary has been obtained.

(5) In deciding whether to grant concurrence, the Secretary must consider:
(a) whether contravention of the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and
(b) the public benefit of maintaining the development standard, and
(c) any other matters required to be taken into consideration by the Secretary before granting concurrence.

…

The development standard sought to be varied in cl 4.3 of the NLEP 2013 which is to be read with the LEP Height of Buildings Map provides:

(1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:
(a) to promote development that conforms to and reflects natural landforms, by stepping development on sloping land to follow the natural gradient,
(b) to promote the retention and, if appropriate, sharing of existing views,
(c) to maintain solar access to existing dwellings, public reserves and streets, and to promote solar access for future development,
(d) to maintain privacy for residents of existing dwellings and to promote privacy for residents of new buildings,
(e) to ensure compatibility between development, particularly at zone boundaries,
(f) to encourage an appropriate scale and density of development that is in accordance with, and promotes the character of, an area.

(2) The height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map.
…

Clause 4.6(3) (a) and (b) – Is the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case? Additionally, are there sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard?

The written request at page 5 seeks to justify the contravention of the standard by demonstrating that compliance is unreasonable and unnecessary in this case for a number of reasons, including:

Firstly, that irrespective of this application for a flush wall sign structure in breach of the height control the building on which it is to be attached does not achieve the height control of 20m. It has a height of 24.24m above ground level and exceeds the current control by 4.24m.

Next, the written request states that the proposal substantially complies with the provisions specified under State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64) for wall mount advertising signs. The provisions require the wall advertising to:

be fully contained within the profile of the host buildings;

not protrude above the parapet or eaves;

not extend over a window or other opening; not obscure significant architectural features.

not protrude more than 300mm from the wall. It is noted that the digital screen will be mounted 400mm off the eastern wall. There is a 100mm increase in depth for occupational health and safety reasons as the screen must be offset from the wall to enable air to circulate around the rear of the screen; and

not exceed more than 10% of the building’s above ground elevation.

The placement of the proposed advertising signage on the existing wall at a height of 21.39m will not contribute to the overall bulk and scale of the building, or change the building separation or setback distances between the host building and adjoining developments.

The placement of the advertising sign at a height of 21.39m will not result in overshadowing, loss of ventilation, loss of privacy or view loss.

The digital screen will be incorporated into the existing advertising sign which was approved in 2010. In granting consent, the Council approved a variation of the 20m height limit at that time.

The category of sign – “general display” – does not change with this DA. It maintains the internal illumination but adopts the latest digital technology which will facilitate the changing of the advertising content by enabling this to occur by way of computer instead of through the manual changing do vinyl skins.

The visual impact of the proposal has been independently assessed by Dr Richard Lamb and Associates and the Visual impact assessment (annexed to the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)) in the following terms:

“…the potential visual catchment is largely constrained to the public domain and relatively distant views from small part of the private domain. The proposed sign on the eastern elevation of the Cremorne Hotel will be exposed to the same visual catchment in this direction as exists for the existing sign. The proposed signage would have a relatively high and necessary visual exposure given that it would be readily seen from part of a busy main road.
… the simplicity of the sign and the character of the immediate existing and future setting of the proposal means that the signage will not lead to proliferation of signage or to adverse visual impacts to the experience of motorists or nearby residents. General advertising signs and contemporary LED digital signage conversions of various forms types and location are characteristic of this part of the Military Road Corridor and not out of place in the commercial residential setting.
…The proposal will have a neutral effect on the present character of the views and existing views visual context and in our opinion the application can be supported on visual impact grounds.”

The traffic safety impacts of the proposal have been independently assessed by Bitzios Consulting. The assessment is detailed at Annexure C of the EIS and concludes that the proposal is acceptable in terms of traffic impacts on road safety and complies with the relevant NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) regulations for the control of advertising structures and the relevant provisions of SEPP 64 and the Department of Planning and Environment’s Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017.
The illumination impact of the proposal has been independently assessed by Electrolight. The assessment detailed at Appendix D of the EIS concludes that the proposal is fully compliant with the illumination provision for Zone 3 prescribed under SEPP 64 and the level of illumination also complies with the AS4282-1997 for the Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting. Therefore, the proposed use of digital LED screen does not result in any adverse light spill or glare.
The above listed written reasons are also submitted as demonstrating that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard in cl 4.3 of the NSLEP 2013.

Clause 4.6(4)(a)(i) and (ii)

I am satisfied that the Applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3) and that compliance with the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of this case based on the reasons outlined above. I have reached this conclusion because I accept that the sign generates no greater amenity or visual impact than the existing signage. The evidence is that it has a neutral impact. The height breach is minimal in terms of exceedence numerically (some 1.39 m or 6.9 %) and fully contained with the existing building. Importantly, the proposed sign is also compliant with all relevant SEPP 64 requirements and RMS traffic safety standards and Guidelines. The digital signage will be incorporated in the existing advertising structure and continue to display general advertising but with the added benefit of some community advertising. The adverting sign meets the relevant objectives of the standard. For the reasons outlined (taken from pages 5 and 6 of the written request), I am satisfied that in this case there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the variation of the standard in this case.
I am also satisfied that the development is in the public interest as it meets the objectives of the height standard for the reasons outlined in Table 1 of the Applicant’s written request at pages 6 and 7.

OBJECTIVE OF HEIGHT STANDARD

(a) To promote development that conforms to and reflects natural landforms, by stepping development on sloping land to follow the natural gradient.

The placement of the proposed advertising signage on the existing wall at a height of 21.39 metres will not contribute to the overall bulk or scale of the building, or change the building separation or setback distances between the host building and adjoining developments. The signage structure is fully contained with the boundaries of the strata lot that was created for the signage display. The signage structure only occupies 8.36% of the eastern wall elevation and does not obscure any architectural features or fenestrations.

(b) To promote the retention and, if appropriate, sharing of existing views.

Richard Lamb and Associates has examined the visual impact of the proposal and has formed the opinion ‘that the digitisation of the sign will not have any adverse impacts on the visual amenity of residents in nearby apartments. Apartments that have views towards the existing and proposed signage are restricted as a result of the angle of the Hotel building, the screening effects of intervening vegetation and buildings, and the alignment of Military Road’.

The Visual Impact report forms part of the Statement of Environmental Effects and is detailed in Appendix E of that report.

(c) To maintain solar access to existing dwellings, public reserves and streets, and to promote solar access for future development.

The signage structure has a depth of 400mm and is flush wall mounted. The proposal raises no issues associated with overshadowing or solar access.

(d) To maintain privacy for residents of existing dwellings and to promote privacy for residents of new buildings.

The signage structure raises no issues associated with acoustic or visual privacy. It is not a habitable structure and once digitised all advertising copy will be changed off site by computer.

(e) To ensure compatibility between development, particularly at zone boundaries.

The proposed digital sign will be exposed to the same visual catchment that exists for the existing sign. While the sign has a relatively high and necessary visual exposure given that it is readily seen from part of a busy main road the simplicity of the signage and the character of the immediate existing and future setting of the proposal means that the sign will not lead to proliferation of signage or to adverse visual impacts to the experience of motorists or nearby residents. Refer to the Visual Impact Report that forms Appendix E in the Statement of Environmental Effects detailed in that report.

(f) To encourage an appropriate scale and density of development that is in accordance with, and promotes the character of, an area.

The Clause 4.3 height control of 20 metres is not achieved by the existing building which occupies the site. This building has a height 24.24 metres above ground level and exceeds the Clause 4.3 control by 4.24 metres. The positioning of the signage structure within the profile of the eastern elevation is an appropriate design outcome. Lowering the height of the sign to 20 metres to comply with the numerical standard will not achieve a ‘better’ design outcome or a greater compatibility with the intent of the objectives of Clause 4.3 as these objectives are already fulfilled by the proposal.

I am also satisfied that the development meets the objectives of the B4 zone for the reasons outlined in Table 2 at pages 8 and 9 of the written request.

ZONE OBJECTIVE

To provide a mixture of compatible land uses.

The SEPP 64 Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017 recognise that transport corridors that traverse through enterprise, mixed use, commercial, industrial or business zones are appropriate locations for advertising structures. The subject sign is located in the Military Road Transport Corridor and in the centre of the Cremorne Commercial Centre. The subject site has proven to be a highly effective and sort after location for advertising and as such it warrants the significant investment that is required to upgrade the structure to digital technology. The digitisation of the existing advertising sign is not inconsistent with this objective of the B4 zone.

To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

The subject site was originally selected as being a suitable site for general advertising given the extensive exposure it affords to traffic and pedestrians utilising Military Road. As stated in the point above, SEPP 64 recognises the suitability of transport corridors for general advertising displays.

Independent and robust investigations have determined that the digital conversion is consistent with the traffic safety provisions detailed in Schedule 1 of SEPP 64 and SEPP 64 Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017.

Refer to the Bitzios Consulting traffic Safety Report detailed in Appendix C of the Statement of Environmental Effects that accompanies the Development Application.

To create interesting and vibrant mixed use centres with safe, high quality urban environments with residential amenity.

The SEPP 64 Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017 encourage advertising structures to be placed within the context of other built structures and to be located so as not to protrude above a skyline. Independent analysis has been undertaken by a range of consultants and forms part of the development application document and confirms that the upgrade to digital technology will not give rise to any adverse environmental impacts that would jeopardise the existing quality of the urban environment or interfere with residential amenity.

To maintain existing commercial space and allow for residential development in mixed use building with non-residential uses concentrated on the lower levels and residential uses predominantly on the higher levels.

The application involves the digitisation of an existing advertising structure. The proposal will not reduce or alter the quantum of commercial floor space within the centre. Independent investigations into illumination and visual impact have determined that the proposal will not adversely impact the amenity of surrounding residential properties.

Clause 5

Furthermore, I am satisfied that the contravention of the height standard does not raise any matter of State or regional significance and that the public interest in maintaining the standard does not warrant refusal of this request for a variation.

Accordingly, for the above reasons, I am satisfied that a variation of the standard in cl 4.3 of the NSLEP 2013 should be approved.
I have read the Council’s submission filed with the s34 agreement headed Statement of Reasons to accompany s34 agreement and I am satisfied that in accordance with cl 17 of SEPP 64, the Applicant has provided an impact statement addressing the assessment criteria in Schedule 1 of the SEPP 64 and that the Council is satisfied in terms of impacts of the proposal. The application has been advertised in accordance with s 79A (now Schedule 1 of the EPA Act) and a copy of the application have been given to the RMS.
As the sign is within 250m of a classified road, I am satisfied about the matters raised by cll 17 and 18 of the SEPP 64 and I have read and understood the RMS’s concurrence as stated in its letter of concurrence at Tab 13 of the Council Bundle.
The RMS conditions have been incorporated as Condition A4 with the other conditions of consent found at Annexure A of the Agreement.

Conclusion

Based on the above, I am satisfied that there are no jurisdictional issues preventing the Court from making the orders sought in the Agreement in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act.
As the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.
The Court orders:

Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the Lighting Impact Assessment by Electrolight Australia Pty Ltd dated 26 February 2019;

The appeal is upheld;

Development consent is granted to Development Application No. 193/2018 for the removal of an existing static illuminated advertising wall sign and the erection of a new digital advertising wall sign on the eastern elevation of 287 Military Road, Cremorne NSW, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”;

No orders as to costs.

………………………………

S Dixon

Senior Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (66.4 KB, pdf)

**********

Amendments

02 October 2019 - Correction made to typographical error in heading - Conclusion

Decision last updated: 02 October 2019

Actions

Download as PDF Download as Word Document

Citations

Captive Vision Pty Limited v North Sydney Council [2019] NSWLEC 1425

Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

5

Medium Neutral Citation:	Captive Vision Pty Limited v North Sydney Council [2019] NSWLEC 1425
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 4 September 2019
Date of orders:	10 September 2019
Decision date:	10 September 2019
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Dixon SC
Decision:	The Court orders: (1) Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the Lighting Impact Assessment by Electrolight Australia Pty Ltd dated 26 February 2019; (2) The appeal is upheld; (3) Development consent is granted to Development Application No. 193/2018 for the removal of an existing static illuminated advertising wall sign and the erection of a new digital advertising wall sign on the eastern elevation of 287 Military Road, Cremorne NSW, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”; (4) No orders as to costs.
Catchwords:	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 Roads Act 1993 State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage
Texts Cited:	AS4282-1997 for the Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting Department of Planning and Environment, Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017 North Sydney Development Control Plan 2013
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Captive Vision Pty Limited (Applicant) North Sydney Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: N Brunton (Solicitor) (Applicant) K Law (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Norton Rose Fulbright (Applicant) Matthews Folbigg Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2018/393238
Publication restriction:	No

OBJECTIVE OF HEIGHT STANDARD
(a) To promote development that conforms to and reflects natural landforms, by stepping development on sloping land to follow the natural gradient.	The placement of the proposed advertising signage on the existing wall at a height of 21.39 metres will not contribute to the overall bulk or scale of the building, or change the building separation or setback distances between the host building and adjoining developments. The signage structure is fully contained with the boundaries of the strata lot that was created for the signage display. The signage structure only occupies 8.36% of the eastern wall elevation and does not obscure any architectural features or fenestrations.
(b) To promote the retention and, if appropriate, sharing of existing views.	Richard Lamb and Associates has examined the visual impact of the proposal and has formed the opinion ‘that the digitisation of the sign will not have any adverse impacts on the visual amenity of residents in nearby apartments. Apartments that have views towards the existing and proposed signage are restricted as a result of the angle of the Hotel building, the screening effects of intervening vegetation and buildings, and the alignment of Military Road’. The Visual Impact report forms part of the Statement of Environmental Effects and is detailed in Appendix E of that report.
(c) To maintain solar access to existing dwellings, public reserves and streets, and to promote solar access for future development.	The signage structure has a depth of 400mm and is flush wall mounted. The proposal raises no issues associated with overshadowing or solar access.
(d) To maintain privacy for residents of existing dwellings and to promote privacy for residents of new buildings.	The signage structure raises no issues associated with acoustic or visual privacy. It is not a habitable structure and once digitised all advertising copy will be changed off site by computer.
(e) To ensure compatibility between development, particularly at zone boundaries.	The proposed digital sign will be exposed to the same visual catchment that exists for the existing sign. While the sign has a relatively high and necessary visual exposure given that it is readily seen from part of a busy main road the simplicity of the signage and the character of the immediate existing and future setting of the proposal means that the sign will not lead to proliferation of signage or to adverse visual impacts to the experience of motorists or nearby residents. Refer to the Visual Impact Report that forms Appendix E in the Statement of Environmental Effects detailed in that report.
(f) To encourage an appropriate scale and density of development that is in accordance with, and promotes the character of, an area.	The Clause 4.3 height control of 20 metres is not achieved by the existing building which occupies the site. This building has a height 24.24 metres above ground level and exceeds the Clause 4.3 control by 4.24 metres. The positioning of the signage structure within the profile of the eastern elevation is an appropriate design outcome. Lowering the height of the sign to 20 metres to comply with the numerical standard will not achieve a ‘better’ design outcome or a greater compatibility with the intent of the objectives of Clause 4.3 as these objectives are already fulfilled by the proposal.

ZONE OBJECTIVE
To provide a mixture of compatible land uses.	The SEPP 64 Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017 recognise that transport corridors that traverse through enterprise, mixed use, commercial, industrial or business zones are appropriate locations for advertising structures. The subject sign is located in the Military Road Transport Corridor and in the centre of the Cremorne Commercial Centre. The subject site has proven to be a highly effective and sort after location for advertising and as such it warrants the significant investment that is required to upgrade the structure to digital technology. The digitisation of the existing advertising sign is not inconsistent with this objective of the B4 zone.
To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.	The subject site was originally selected as being a suitable site for general advertising given the extensive exposure it affords to traffic and pedestrians utilising Military Road. As stated in the point above, SEPP 64 recognises the suitability of transport corridors for general advertising displays. Independent and robust investigations have determined that the digital conversion is consistent with the traffic safety provisions detailed in Schedule 1 of SEPP 64 and SEPP 64 Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017. Refer to the Bitzios Consulting traffic Safety Report detailed in Appendix C of the Statement of Environmental Effects that accompanies the Development Application.
To create interesting and vibrant mixed use centres with safe, high quality urban environments with residential amenity.	The SEPP 64 Transport Corridor Advertising and Signage Guidelines 2017 encourage advertising structures to be placed within the context of other built structures and to be located so as not to protrude above a skyline. Independent analysis has been undertaken by a range of consultants and forms part of the development application document and confirms that the upgrade to digital technology will not give rise to any adverse environmental impacts that would jeopardise the existing quality of the urban environment or interfere with residential amenity.
To maintain existing commercial space and allow for residential development in mixed use building with non-residential uses concentrated on the lower levels and residential uses predominantly on the higher levels.	The application involves the digitisation of an existing advertising structure. The proposal will not reduce or alter the quantum of commercial floor space within the centre. Independent investigations into illumination and visual impact have determined that the proposal will not adversely impact the amenity of surrounding residential properties.