|
The
Bush
P & J Smith Ecological Consultants were engaged in 1996 to identify features of botanical significance on the Ardel site and on the adjoining Housing Department Land.
The survey carried out on 2nd September 1996 found 147 seperate native plant species (128 on the Ardel block and 74 on the Dept. of Housing Block), they sighted at least 50 of the rare Tetratheca Glandulosa plants which, surprise, surprise, were totally overlooked by Ardel's own commissioned survey.
They also observed four plant species listed by authors Benson and Howell as species of particular conservation significance. The diverse vegetation community is associated with remnant "lateritic" or ironstone soils on ridge-tops between Terry Hills and Allambie Heights.
It is widely recognised as having very high conservation significance, being naturally restricted in area, poorly represented in conservation reserves, extensively cleared through past urban developments and threatened with further clearing of the few unreserved remnants.
The Ardel block also contained an area of rare sandstone swamp vegetation.
The lateritic vegetation community was later named the Duffy’s Forest Vegetation Community and in 1998 it was listed as endangered under the threatened species legislation.
|
|
 |
Development
Applications
In May 1999, Ardel submitted development applications for further subdivision and erection of houses on the site. These did not come before council until after the September 1999 council elections. Any development on this site is likely to cause pollution of the downstream Manly Dam Reserve, unless very effective pollution control measures are taken.
Ardel has proposed building a pond to reduce pollution, but at that time it had not yet been approved by NSW Fisheries and there were doubts about its effectiveness.
At the first meeting of the new council, Councillor Forrest proposed that a decision on the DAs be deferred until NSW Fisheries had considered the application to construct the water quality control pond.This was adopted.
Ardel took this as a "deemed refusal" and took the matter to the Land and Environment Court.
The case was discussed on two occasions in September / October 1999 but no hearing date was fixed since the council's solicitors had not received instructions from council. They were expected to present a statement of issues and an estimate of how many witnesses they wished to present, so that the court could be booked for a suitable length of time.
If no issues were presented, council would have great difficulty defending its case. The matter was heard again on 9h November 1999 and the case eventually proceeded in February 2000. The court approved the subdivisions and DAs.
|
|
