Sorting through sound and fury

Applicant Brendan McHugh still has the option of having Wednesday night’s decision tested in the Land and Environment Court, which could prove another interesting chapter in this story.

While councillors on Wednesday night were clearly swayed by neighbours’ concerns over the proposed facility’s impact on their rural lifestyle, Land and Environment Court judges might prove less sympathetic.

For them, the key issue would likely be whether the proposed development could operate within acceptable noise standards within the valley, and it’s impossible to say which way they might rule.

As deputy mayor Ian North noted on Wednesday night, the existence of two contradictory noise reports put councillors in an impossible position as they decided the fate of the cattery and kennel.

He likened it to a court case where two feuding parties each had solicitors telling them they could win.

The difference on Wednesday night, though, was that councillors who make no claim to being noise experts were left to stand in judgment.

In the end, it was a “reasonable doubt” argument that won the day for residents.

Councillors were not satisfied that they could be guaranteed the noise issues raised by residents had been properly addressed; that traffic concerns had been addressed; or that environmental concerns had been addressed.

And, as Cr Bobby Bourke put it, once the facility was up and running it would be too late to find that residents were right all along.

Bathurst’s councillors rarely vote against the advice of expert staff and they have not done so lightly in this case.

And whether others agree with their decision or not, councillors deserve congratulations for taking seriously the community representative role they were elected to fulfil.