Quote:
Originally Posted by ngcles
Hi Glen,
I'm probably stating the bleedingly obvious, but have you spoken to them about Council's obligations to comply with Australian Standards, in particular AS 4282—1997 -- Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting?
I think you will find somewhere in the Council documents that they are bound to only act in accordance with Australian Standards.
Best,
L.
|
AS4282 says...". This Standard does not apply to-
(a) public lighting, as defined in Clause 1.4.10;
(b) internally illuminated advertising signs;
(c) the obtrusive effects of brightly lit surfaces, e.tc......"
Street Lights are public lighting, but they are covered under AS/NZ1158.
"This Standard specifically refers to the potentially adverse effects of outdoor lighting on nearby residents (e.g. of dwellings such as houses, hotels, hospitals), users of adjacent roads (e.g. vehicle drivers, pedestrians, cyclists) and transport signalling systems (e.g. air, marine, rail), and on astronomical observations."
However, since public lighting is exempt, and street lights covered under AS1158, it's effect on astronomical observations are not considered grounds for objection or violation of the Standard.
Believe me I have not been able to find anyone at the Council who cares. The planning approvals folks only care about DAs complying, or sighting, AS4282 in the Environmental Impact Statement supplied by the developer. I found that the Trinity Point Development (approved) actually submitted a EIS written by a subsidiary of the developer. It's enough to convince me it's all rigged.
