BT Goldsmith Planning Services Pty Limited v. Blacktown City Council Country/Territory Australia Type of court Others Date Jul 1, 2005 Source UNEP, InforMEA Court name Land and Environment Court of New South Wales Judge Pain Reference number 10985 of 2004 Language English Subject Wild species & ecosystems, Land & soil Keyword EIA Land-use planning Abstract This preliminary question of jurisdictional fact had arisen in proceedings filed pursuant to s 97 the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 against a deemed refusal of a development consent by the Blacktown City Council. The preliminary question was whether pursuant to s 78A(8)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act the Development Application for a 34 lot residential subdivision was required to be accompanied by a Species Impact Statement before the Court could consider the development application. A development application had to be accompanied by a Species Impact Statement if the application was in respect of development on land that was a critical habitat or was likely to significantly affect threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats. The proposed site had an area of 4.172ha of which 3.86ha was currently vegetated by regrowth Cumberland Plain Woodland, which included groundcover, understorey and canopy vegetation. The Applicant relied heavily on a quantitative approach, meaning that the percentage to be cut down was so small given the remaining area in the Cumberland Plain Woodland, that this area simply could not be significant. The court analyzed the provisions and objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in relation to the Species Impact Assessment. It also applied the principle of “ecologically sustainable development” and the precautionary principle. Considering the precautionary principle here, there were clearly threats of serious or irreversible harm to the Cumberland Plain given its listing as an endangered ecological community. It was necessary to rely on incomplete or out of date data in relation to the assessment of conservation value and scarcity of “prime” Cumberland Plain, and the vulnerability of Cumberland Plain. The court therefore took a precautionary approach in determining whether in relation to the regional distribution of the habitat “a significant area of known habitat” was to be removed or modified. The court decided that the proposed clearing of the Cumberland Plain Woodland on the site was likely to significantly affect a threatened ecological community and taking into account the cumulative impact of clearing on the viability of Cumberland Plain Woodland across the region. It therefore found that pursuant to s 78A(8)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act the development application was required to be accompanied by a Species Impact Statement before the Court was empowered to consider the merits of the Applicant’s development application. Full text 210.html References Cited by Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council Jurisprudence | National - higher court | Australia | Mar 24, 2006 Keyword: Electro-magnetic pollution, Precautionary principle, Public health, Sustainable development Source: UNEP, InforMEA Gales Holdings Pty Limited v. Tweed Shire Council Jurisprudence | Others | Australia | Feb 27, 2006 Keyword: Protected animal species, EIA, Drainage/land reclamation, Precautionary principle Source: UNEP, InforMEA