The planning commissioners ultimately agreed, during a recent consent hearing, the apartments would change the suburban character in a way that could set a precedent.
“The planned character of the single house zone is one of predominantly one or two-storey buildings ‘within a generally spacious settting’,” the commissioners said.
“If the subject site is developed as proposed, that area of single house zone cannot realistically be said to be predominantly in accordance with the planned character.”
Bentley Studios director Leon Da-Silva told a media outlet he thought the commissioners hadn’t given his project a fair hearing by listening to public opinion over the opinions of experts.
But local opinion has been strongly against the proposal.
About 180 residents held a January meeting in which they formed a group to oppose planning approval for the project.
That helped mobilise residents and others to make 167 submissions against the project’s resource consent application, while 16 submissions supported it.
“Cheap, poorly planned, unattractive, and hastily-considered proposals are a recipe sure to extinguish what is left of the Kiwi suburban lifestyle we once all aspired to,” one resident wrote in a submission.
Another said Beach Haven would become a “cesspit for crime and unsocial behaviour”, saying the “giant complex” looks “horrid” and would be built “in the middle of family housing”.
The submissions also made regular complaints the project’s height and size are far outside what is permitted in the area and worried it would cause traffic gridlock on a narrow road, strain wastewater systems, leading to runoff on beaches, reduce privacy and increase noise.
A number of those making submissions also complained about the character and look of social houses being built in Beach Haven, saying these are ruining the suburb’s character.
The Kaipatiki Local Board also made a submission opposing the development, saying it had “serious concerns”.
“This proposal came as such an outrageous shock to the community (a blindside just before the Christmas/New Year break), that in a short space of time, opposition to the proposed development escalated, culminating in a public meeting on January 19, 2023, attended by 180 concerned local residents,” the board wrote.
“These residents were not opposed to development at the site, but very concerned at the unexpected scale of the proposal, the inadequate local infrastructure and the numerous breaches of the Unitary Plan.”
During the hearing, the commissioners agreed with council evidence there was sufficient street parking and wastewater system capacity to handle the development.
They also agreed the height of the apartments would only cause minimal loss of sunlight to neighbours.
But the commissioners ultimately believed the project’s design was outside of the Unitary Plan’s guide for the area, meaning it could set a precedent for other such developments to be approved in breach of the plan.
Da-Silva told Stuff the company was “licking its wounds” after the shock decision.
He said he’s spent three years trying to get consent for affordable homes and was prevented by residents living in $2 million houses.
“We could accept the decision if we felt that we had been given a fair crack, but the commissioners seem to have listened to residents over the expert opinions of the professionals.”
Labour MP for Northcote Shanan Halbert said the panel’s decision was a “good test” of the ability of planning laws to “uphold good design standards”.
“It’s vital that developers strike the right balance between design and scale, and that investment is put in place in our growing community,” he said.
