Lawyers representing those for and against the proposed 1500-lot Northlake subdivision in Wanaka have made their final cases to the Environment Court.
Plan Change 45-Northlake Special Zone (PC45) was the subject of an Environment Court hearing in March, after a group of Wanaka residents appealed the Queenstown Lakes District Council's decision last year to approve the plan change.
In the past few weeks, closing legal submissions have been filed with the court by Warwick Goldsmith, of Queenstown, acting for the PC45 requesters, and Jan Caunter, of Wanaka, representing the residents behind the appeal.
In her submissions, Ms Caunter reiterated Wanaka's existing supply of land zoned for residential purposes was ''more than sufficient'' to meet the community's needs, a fact which was ''fatal to PC45''.
Mr Goldsmith said it was not necessary to establish need or demand before PC45 could be approved and if the appellants' claim of an oversupply of residential capacity in Wanaka was correct, ''why would the landowners involved in PC45 even embark upon the PC45 process?''
Ms Caunter said even if more residential land was needed, there were better alternatives than the PC45 land and without an identified urban growth boundary (UGB) for Wanaka the court could not assess whether the land should be rezoned.
Mr Goldsmith said the council had initiated PC20, which intended to establish a UGB, in 2009 and then put it on hold.
''It is now 2015. How long is a landowner such as the requester supposed to wait until the council establishes a Wanaka UGB?''
Ms Caunter argued the future of the Northlake land was best considered in the overall scheme of the new district plan - to be notified later this year - which would identify Wanaka's UGB and make all options for urban growth available to the public to test through submissions.
''The appellant suspects that the purpose of PC45 has, all along, been a device to avoid the requestor's land having to compete on a merits basis with other options for urban growth.''
However, Mr Goldsmith said the planning initiative resulting in PC45 started with an earlier consent application in 2009 which was converted into a private plan change request after the QLDC asked for a ''more holistic rezoning proposal'' for a larger area of land.
''The contention that PC45 has been devised to beat the district plan review is very difficult to sustain.''
Ms Caunter submitted Chris Meehan - whose wife owns the development arm of the project, Northlake Investments Ltd - was ''not at all focused on the wider picture'' or what the Wanaka Structure Plan 2007 intended for the land, but ''focused solely on achieving the most financial return''.
His claims at the hearing of insufficient residential land supply had no direct supporting evidence.
Mr Goldsmith said Mr Meehan was an experienced development adviser whose evidence challenged claims there was no need for more residential land and explained why he considered there were buyers likely to buy Northlake sections.
Ms Caunter concluded approving PC45 would create difficulties for QLDC in setting a UGB and planning the release of land within it.
The urban growth of Wanaka would have already been determined for at least the next 20 years and setting a UGB would be an ''utterly hollow and pointless exercise''.
Summing up, Mr Goldsmith said the case for approval of PC45 was ''beyond doubt'', particularly in terms of positive benefits and consistency with the district plan.
Environment Court case manager Christine McKee said it was unlikely the court would issue a decision on the appeal for at least a few weeks.
