Facts
The construction company Breitloo AG and the heirs of Jakob Streuli own an undeveloped parcel (Cadastral No. 3269) in the municipality of Kilchberg. The parcel was initially located in a single-story residential zone in a sensitive area, but was later rezoned to the single-story residential zone W1. A design plan provided for the parcel to be developed together with the surrounding open space.
In 1991, the Department of Economic Affairs of the Canton of Zurich determined that the vegetation on the parcel, covering an area of 788 m2, constituted a forest within the meaning of the Forestry Act. The parties with rights to the property unsuccessfully appealed against this determination of forestry.
In 1993, the construction company and the heirs applied for a re-assessment of the determination of forestry. Consequently, the Department of Economic Affairs determined in 1994 that the vegetation on the parcel did not constitute a forest. The Swiss Association for Nature Conservation (SBN) unsuccessfully appealed against this decision.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court upholds the appeal of the SBN. It determines that the vegetation on the parcel with Cadastral No. 3269 is indeed a forest within the meaning of the Forestry Act.
The Federal Supreme Court explains that while the cantons are authorized, but not obliged, to enact implementing provisions on the definition of a forest under the Forestry Act, until a canton has done so, the previous case law of the Federal Supreme Court on the definition of a forest continues to apply. The…