Ooh! Media’s billboard determined in court after opposition from Transport for NSW, local council

A development stoush over a new digital billboard on the side of a busy Sydney highway has ended up in court after a local council and transport officials claimed the sign could cause driver distraction and result in rear-end collisions.

A development stoush over a new digital billboard on the side of a busy Sydney highway has ended up in court after transport officials claimed the sign could cause driver distraction and result in rear-end collisions.

The Land and Environment Court has blocked major advertising company Ooh!Media from upgrading a vinyl advertising sign on the corner of the Pacific Hwy and Boundary St in Roseville into a new digital LED billboard following an 18-month planning battle with Willoughby Council and Transport for NSW.

The current billboard – located on top of the White Lady Funerals home – has stood on the busy intersection since 1987 and is passed by an average of 55,073 cars and trucks per day.

Ooh! Media wanted to give the sign a digital makeover in a move which would enable more ads to be displayed to passing traffic with digital ads rotating at 10 second intervals.

The existing sign – comprising vinyl skin attached to a steel support structure – currently has advertisements rotated each month.

A photo of the current sign.

But Willoughby Council and Transport for NSW staunchly opposed the development on the grounds it could result in “unacceptable impacts on road safety”, including drivers becoming distracted and rear-ending other motorists.

The council said the intersection – which connects the Pacific Hwy to the northern beaches – carries a large volume of traffic and has several “conflict points” which require drivers to make important decisions within a short space of time.

An artist’s impression of what the digital sign could have looked like.

Transport for NSW meanwhile argued peak traffic flows at the intersection had a tendency to ‘platoon’ – a term describing “a group of vehicles that travel in close proximity to one another, nose-to-tail, at pretty much the same speed”.

The department claimed a small lapse in a driver’s concentration resulting from the billboard would increase the “chance of rear-end collisions between vehicles travelling in such a platoon”.

Ooh Media! – which launched an appeal to the Land and Environment Court in a bid to have the plans approved – said the billboard would not make the intersection “inherently unsafe” and rejected suggestions the digital sign could be misconstrued as a traffic signal.

The Land and Environment Court held an on-site hearing to inspect the sign and in its long-awaited decision this week rejected the proposed billboard.

Acting court commissioner Alan Bradbury said the sign’s clear purpose was to draw attention to itself and was therefore likely to distract motorists.

The intersection is one of the busiest on the north shore. Photo: Google maps.

“In my view, the proposed sign, with a change in the advertisement displayed every 10 seconds, will increase the level of distraction to those drivers above and beyond that which results from the existing sign,” he said.

“(It) would unacceptably increase the potential for driver distraction and consequently the risk of collisions and for that reason should be refused.”

Brooke Bellamy – who co-owns the Framing and Mirror Factory shop directly next to the existing billboard – was not convinced the digital sign would have made the intersection unsafe for drivers.

“The (current) layout of the intersection is more dangerous than the sign so if they’re serious about safety then they should look at the layout of the road rather than a billboard,” she said.

An architect’s plan of the proposed billboard.

“It’s a very busy intersection – I see people do the most stupid things and there might be some who’d become distracted but not as much as mobile phones.

“You’d hope anyone with a drivers’ licence would be educated enough not to become distracted.”

A spokesman for Ooh Media! declined to comment on the outcome, saying the company does not comment on legal proceedings.

Planning documents show the proposed sign would have cost the advertising giant $250,000.

The company had also been willing to pay Willoughby Council $10,000 a year if the sign had been approved – as well offering the council five per cent of ‘screen time’ on the billboard to display community messages for free.