The next round in a fight over a planned luxury lodge near Queenstown will be heard in the Environment Court.
Just before Christmas, independent commissioners Ian Munro and Jan Caunter rejected B Property Group’s proposal for the Waimarino Luxury Lodge, on a 1.8-hectare site overlooking Bob’s Cove, to comprise 24 luxury villas on Tui Drive land.
Chief executive Andrew McIntosh is also proposing a restaurant, sauna, yoga studio and distillery, all for residents’ use, within the Bob’s Cove sub-zone.
Queenstown landscape expert Nathan O’Connell initially recommended consent be refused for several reasons, including the increased use of Tui Dr, and visual amenity affects.
But following a hearing, held in three parts between October and November last year, O’Connell changed his mind, given many matters of concerns could be addressed through consent conditions.
The commissioners didn’t agree, in part because there was no written approval from the Tui Dr owners to seal and widen the access road and a proposed condition of some financial compensatory arrangement to confirm access wasn’t ‘‘satisfactorily workable or administrable’’, finding site access an ‘‘insurmountable barrier’’.
B Property’s subsequently appealed their decision.
On the access issue, lawyer Joshua Leckie submits Queenstown’s council’s adopted an ‘‘incorrect legal interpretation of the instrument providing for access to the site’’.
‘‘The decision wrongly identifies the payment mechanism provided for within the right-of-way instrument as a mechanism to confirm access.
‘‘The appellant is not relying on a proposed financial compensatory arrangement to confirm access.
‘‘Access is already legally enabled in favour of the appellant by the right-of-way instrument.’’
Further, he says the council’s erred in concluding the proposal will be contrary to the transport objectives and policies within the proposed
district plan, due to site access not being provided.
‘‘This incorrect conclusion flows from the respondent’s inaccurate conclusion that the easement does not provide access to the site.
‘‘This was a fundamental error given that all other transport effects were identified as being appropriately addressed.’’
Other issues include the relevance of underlying consents and assessment of landscape and visual effects.
B Property’s seeking for the commissioners’ decision to be cancelled, consent granted and costs.
