Arcadian Triangle Ltd is one of two companies which sold sections from the former Hawthorn Estate development, situated in an area known as "the triangle" in the Wakatipu Basin between Domain and Lower Shotover Rds.
The development gained consent in 2004 to subdivide a 34ha block into 32 residential lots, each with a water feature and mounds for privacy.
However, the land was later subdivided and onsold by original developers Warwick Goldsmith (now of Arcadian Triangle Ltd) and Fred van Brandenburg, of Freddi Ltd, and is now owned by 14 different parties.
The Environment Court declaration - sought by the Queenstown Lakes District Council and released last Friday - means buyers of the subdivided properties have the responsibility to develop the ponds and mounds specified in the original resource consent.
Mr Goldsmith said the new owners would have to consider their own positions themselves.
"It's got nothing to do with Arcadian and the consent can still be implemented. The only issue is where each lot's got to have a pond and mounds, and that's a matter for individual landowners to discuss with the council."
Mr Goldsmith yesterday declined to comment on whether Arcadian had been contacted by any buyers.
He said Arcadian was still considering the Environment Court's decision, and as he did not know landowners' individual situations, he thought the ruling was "likely to affect different people in different ways".
Asked if, when onselling the subdivided properties, Arcadian had told prospective buyers they would not have to develop the ponds, Mr Goldsmith said the company had not said anything.
Mr Goldsmith further pointed out that when Hawthorn applied to vary the consent by building nine larger ponds instead of the original 32 ponds required, independent commissioners appointed to the process in 2008 found that building them was optional under the 2004 decision.
In contrast, in the latest ruling Environment Court Judge Melanie Harland ruled that building the ponds and mounds was still a condition of the consent, as they were an integral part of the proposal - the introduction of water-birds through the ponds helped the proposal "narrowly" outweigh negative aspects of rural environment development.
Mr Goldsmith had submitted to Judge Harland that the Environment Court should not grant the declaration because Arcadian and others had relied on the commissioners' view that the ponds were optional, confirmation of this by QLDC's legal adviser in 2010, and "QLDC's knowledge that Arcadian's property was being marketed on the basis that no ponds were required".
However, Judge Harland said the best course of action to address the problem would have been for a declaration to have been sought at the time when the confusion first became evident, "rather than some time down the track"
"Arcadian and Freddi must bear some of the responsibility for choosing to continue with the subdivision when it was evident to them that there was dispute about this issue, " she said.
