Roof raised on ‘over-height’ building

Questions are being raised over whether this building is over-height. PHOTO: SCOOP
Questions are being raised over whether this building is over-height. PHOTO: SCOOP
A former planning hearing commissioner is blowing the whistle on an alleged over-height accessory building in Queenstown’s blue-chip Speargrass Flat.

The local, who doesn’t want to be identified, claims the building, currently under construction, has been built into a landscaping bund and its roof gabling is at least 8.8 metres from ground level.

"The permitted height for the zone is 6.5m, the non-complying activity threshold is 8m and the consent was granted for 7.28m."

Over the past week he’s written to both mayor Glyn Lewers and the council’s duty planner, querying the process.

The complainant tells Lewers "your consultant planners and independent commissioners are seriously letting you down and unnecessarily exposing you to litigation and public ridicule".

"I would go further and suggest your planning department has set a dangerous precedent that will undermine the confidence in not only your organisation but the property market."

He points out bunds were designed to hide a one-storey building, "but the council’s allowed, effectively, a one-storey building on top of a bund".

That’s because, he says, the bund was used as the ground level from which to base the building height.

Ironically, despite his emails, the complainant reports builders were yesterday still putting on the roof.

In his email to Lewers, he says: "From neighbouring properties, the proposed two-storey dwelling effectively looks like a one-storeyed building on top of bunding designed to hide a one-storeyed building.

"This is nuts!

"In my 30 years of experience with the Resource Management Act and local government, I thought I’d seen it all.

"I have shown the [resource consent] decision to several colleagues and they are horrified by the implications it could have on their current and completed developments.

"In the circumstances, there are grounds to review or cancel the [non-notified] resource consent.

"The top storey of the proposed building should be removed, the applicant should reapply for resource consent, and [it should] be processed on a notified basis.

"That would be more efficient than the protracted process of litigation where your council faces the risks of damages and costs awarded against you."

Commenting on the issue, council planning & development GM Dave Wallace says all documents relating to the resource consent are available on eDocs.

"Council’s monitoring and enforcement team are undertaking monitoring to ensure the works are in accordance with the resource consent."

 

Advertisement

OUTSTREAM