New chance for project opponent

Lake Hayes architect Fred van Brandenburg points to his model of the proposed Threepwood...
Lake Hayes architect Fred van Brandenburg points to his model of the proposed Threepwood development, which he submits would be seen at the Lake Hayes end of the development as a result of the avenue of exotic trees being "limbed up" by developer Meadow 3 in 2005. Photo by James Beech.
Sole Threepwood resort opposer Fred van Brandenburg will have his day in the Environment Court again next year, following a procedural hearing in Queenstown last week.

Judge Jon Jackson heard the application by Meadow 3 Ltd, the developer behind the planned multimillion-dollar luxury visitor accommodation, for the resource consent to be granted as it related to landscaping.

Consent has already been granted by the Queenstown Lakes District Council.

No party has argued against the proposed mounding and planting, which was designed to screen the rural subdivision from views beside Lake Hayes, and is the main subject of an appeal.

Council solicitor Jayne Macdonald said Judge Jackson indicated he would likely approve the landscaping component of the consent, subject to the condition no houses would be built on lots 10 to 20 until the court had heard the appeal and issued its decision.

The judge reserved his decision on the application.

Meadow 3 also applied to take priority in the queue for Environment Court hearings in 2010.

The project began in 1998, but progress was repeatedly delayed by legal challenges from Mr van Brandenburg.

The judge reserved his decision and pencilled in a hearing in Queenstown for the week of May 10.

An alternative judge would sit, as Judge Jackson was pre-booked.

Mr van Brandenburg, of Lake Hayes, represented himself as the initiator, solicitor Phil Page represented Meadow 3 as the applicant and Ms Macdonald represented the council as the respondent.

A timetable of exchanges of evidence was set during the prehearing conference on Thursday.

Meadow 3 would give evidence by February 26, the council by March 12, Mr van Brandenburg by April 9, with rebuttal by April 23.

Mr van Brandenburg said Meadow 3 should adequately reinstate the tree screen the developer removed, which broke the consent order he signed in 2001.

He said Meadow 3's proposed reinstatement and mitigation measures were not effective enough to preserve the landscape's character.

 

Add a Comment

 

Advertisement

OUTSTREAM