The Dunedin City Council's decision to grant resource consent for Ryman Healthcare to build an $18 million retirement village in Roslyn has elicited mixed reactions.
The proposal for a retirement village at 383 Highgate has stirred up strong opposition from some quarters about the scale of the facility and shading on nearby properties.
The latest version of the development (released in July) has one building instead of two, is further from the boundary on all sides, and has more rooms for residents - 122 compared with the original 100.
The size of the proposal had been reduced after a previous attempt by Ryman to gain council approval was turned down at both consent and Environment Court hearings in 2006 and 2007, respectively.
Thirty-one submissions were received on the latest application to build the rest-home - 10 in support, 16 in opposition and five neutral.
Associate Prof Stuart Young was disappointed with the decision.
He lives opposite the proposed site and had made a submission against the application being approved because he believed the new building design was not a significant amendment to the original proposal.
"The new concept does not address the Environment Court's objections."
He believed the development would be too big, the excavation would scar the urban landscape, his property would be significantly shaded and the transportation effects would not be minimal.
However, Jane Parker, a close neighbour to the proposed project, was delighted with the decision.
Ms Parker said the site was ideal for a rest-home and she believed shading and increased traffic would not be a problem.
"I'm delighted on behalf of older people in the community who have been unable to put in submissions themselves."
Community Preservation Society chairman Kelvin Wright was opposed to the development, but was stoical about the decision.
"It was a democratic process. We gave it our best shot, and now we have to take the decision that's been made. We'll just have to live with it and try to be good neighbours," he said.
DCC hearings committee members Paul Hudson, Fliss Butcher and chairman Andrew Noone gave 15 reasons for granting the application.
The committee noted the applicant had reduced the size and site coverage, compared with the previous proposal, and had moved the external walls back from the boundaries.
Except for a small height plane breach at the northeast corner, the building would meet all bulk and location requirements of the district plan.
The committee considered this breach would have minor effects on the amenity of the neighbours.
The committee also considered the activity to be a community support activity which would help keep elderly residents within the community.
The retirement village would provide many positive benefits to the wider community.
For several blocks, Highgate was already occupied by community support activities, many of which also had large buildings, some of which were built close to roadside boundaries.
The operation of the facility and vehicle movements were not expected to generate significant noise, and even if it was considered to be a hospital, the committee believed the proposal would have minor effects on the community.
The growing need for rest-home facilities in Dunedin was another major consideration for the committee.
Submitters have until November 18 to appeal the decision to the Environment Court.
