The first was from Ngai Tahu Holdings for a subdivision of 14.4ha on State Highway 8 between the Alexandra Golf Course and Molyneux Estate subdivision. It would also include an extension of the existing road, which would be the sole entry point to the new development.
A motel in Clyde was the subject of the second hearing.
Councillors Neil Gillespie, who chaired the panel, Tracy Paterson, Martin McPherson and Ian Cooney considered the two resource consent applications.
Council planner Adam Vincent recommended the first application be approved without being publicly notified.
Despite New Zealand Transport Waka Kotahi’s assessment the Henderson Dr intersection was adequate for the future potential subdivision development with ultimately 220 dwellings on it, members of the panel were less confident.
Cr Gillespie was concerned that eventually 450 homes would be using Henderson Dr to access SH8.
While both Ngai Tahu and council planners were content to take a wait-and-see approach as the project had a 10-year development plan, Cr Gillespie pursued the question of who would pay for any extra access if it was needed in the future.
Southern Planning Group planner Sean Dent, for Ngai Tahu, said it was up to the council to decide how to use the development contribution required of the applicant.
Cr Gillespie asked why, if the extra access was needed because of the resource consent, the applicant should not pay for it.
Mr Dent said it did not meet the traffic threshold for that.
If the application could progress as a non-notified consent Ngai Tahu Holdings was willing to pay a fixed contribution agreed with the council.
The panel also raised questions about an old clay bird shooting range near the site, as it was concerned about possible lead contamination.
Mr Dent said any contaminated soil would be removed and there would be no development on those areas until the contamination was remediated.
The hearing panel reserved its decision for 15 working days.
On behalf of Clyde motel owner Nick Beach, Terramark planner Darryl Sycamore presented the case for the subdivision of the existing motel complex.
Mr Sycamore proposed the property at 56 Sunderland St would be divided into freehold and unit title properties, which could be used for either short-term visitor or private accommodation. The existing motel units would be managed by a body corporate.
Mr Beach asked if there was any flexibility in the rules regarding requiring asphalt, curbing and channelling around the unit. The new requirement was a long way from what was already there. "It’s a pretty significant cost."
Cr Gillespie said there was no flexibility in the conditions.
Mr Sycamore opted to submit a written closing to the panel.
