Lake front house and woolshed get approval

An artist's drawing of the proposed Dippie house at Waterfall Creek. Image supplied.

Wanaka developer Allan Dippie has been granted consent with conditions to construct a dwelling and relocate a historic woolshed to his lakefront property in Wanaka.

Beech Cottage Trustees Ltd, of which Mr Dippie is a director, applied for resource consent to build a private, two-storey, 8m high, 478sqm residential home, paved area and swimming pool at the high point of the site and relocate a woolshed from his Luggate subdivision to his 35.1ha of land at Waterfall Creek, 4km west of Wanaka.

Mr Dippie said the property was once the Waterfall Creek recreational reserve. He had bought it from Ngai Tahu nearly 20 years ago, and had landscaped it over the years with a long-term vision of eventually building a home on it when he came to live in Wanaka permanently.

The site overlooks Lake Wanaka and Ruby Island and is in an area of outstanding natural landscape, between Mt Roy and the lake.

Three submissions opposed the development including the Upper Clutha Environmental Society, which said views from Ruby Island, Roys Peak and Lake Wanaka would be significantly altered if construction went ahead.

In granting the consent independent commissioner David Whitney said ''the dwelling will not be visible from adjacent public roads and will be visible from public places to a limited extent only''.

He said the woolshed would be visible in glimpses from Ruby Island Rd and other public places but that ''such a structure is not unexpected in this rural environment''.

The relocation of the wool shed would retain its ''historic'' characteristics for the benefit of future generations, he said.

One of the conditions of land use consent was the retention of the 12,000 native plantings and development of the site Mr Dippie had undertaken to date.

''If any plant or tree should be removed, die or become diseased it shall be replaced within the next available planting season if the loss of such plant or tree would expose any part of the dwelling to greater view from outside the site.''

The commission concluded the proposal would not be contrary to the objectives and policies of the Proposed District Plan.

It said the development would ''occur in an area that has the potential to absorb change without detraction from landscape and amenity values''.