After years of trying, and numerous consent and court hearings, Purakaunui landowner Tom Richardson has been granted consent to build a single-storey home with garage on Potato Point.
Provided there are no appeals to the Environment Court by the time the appeal period closes at the end of next week, he will be free to build on the site.
"I'm very pleased it's been granted after a battle of nearly seven years," Mr Richardson said yesterday.
The headland between Purakaunui and Long Beach, prominent within the North Coast Coastal Landscape Preservation Area, has been the subject of controversy since Mr Richardson first applied to subdivide the area.
The Dunedin City Council declined consent on landscape and precedent issues in 2005, after Mr Richardson proposed to subdivide 73.9ha of land above Purakaunui township.
His plans were also opposed by the Purakanui Environment Group (Peg) set up to oppose the development, and were later turned down by the Environment and High Courts.
His most recent attempt was to build just one home on the point, and an August hearing received 50 submissions, with 17 in support and 33 opposing.
Opposition was based on aspects such as the impact on the natural character of the land, the feasibility of promised plantings, the viability of farming on the site, and even the visibility of smoke from a domestic fire at the planned house.
A hearings panel of Alan Cubitt, David Benson-Pope, Cr Richard Walls and Chalmers Community Board member Jan Tucker released its decision recently, granting consent.
The decision said landscape architects had noted there would be "very low visibility" of the home from beyond the site, the committee was satisfied a planting plan had been produced by a suitably qualified person, and the domestic fire would have to comply with building codes.
There was concern about "incremental development" if it went ahead, but the committee's decision included a condition requiring a covenant restricting ancillary structures within the site.
After a site visit, the committee decided the development would have "a minimal effect on the landscape character and of the quality of the setting".
Mr Richardson said he was "a little bit surprised" by how restrictive some of the conditions were, and was concerned permitted activity at the site was not being allowed.
He was not sure when building might begin.
Opposition to his plans in the area had become entrenched, he said, and opponents "could not find it within themselves to give any ground".
"I find that extraordinary."
Peg member Chas Tanner said yesterday no decision had been made on whether the group would appeal the decision to the Environment Court, and he did not want to comment further. david.loughrey@odt.co.nz
