No dividing rural plots on outskirts of Wanaka

The Upper Clutha Environmental Society was opposed to both developments on the outskirts of Wanaka. Photo / File.

A plan to develop two plots of rural land on the outskirts of Wanaka into residential sections has been declined by independent commissioners.

Ballantyne Barker Holdings Ltd and Criffel Deer Ltd applied for resource consent to subdivide land in Mt Barker and Ballantyne Rds into rural-residential sections

Wellington lawyer Michael Garnham is the director of both companies.

If approved, up to nine new residential sections could have been developed on Ballantyne Rd and up to four new sections on Mt Barker Rd.

Both proposals included keeping large areas as farm land to be part of Mr Garnham's deer farming operations.

During the hearing Mr Garnham told the commissioners the rural-residential type property he would be offering was in demand and there was already a waiting list of potential buyers.

Independent commissioners Wendy Baker and David Whitney heard submissions on both proposals during two separate hearings in April. They recommended both consents be denied because they would change the character of the rural landscape and adversely affect the value of the landscape from both public view and of those of the neighbours.

It would also set a precedent for any future applications in the rural zone.

Both proposals attracted submissions from nearby landowners who opposed parts of the plans.

Black Peak Rd residents Robert and Sharynne Le Brun live directly north of the proposed development on Ballantyne Rd.

They were concerned about the density of the proposal and the possibility of complaints from potential neighbours about activities such as motorbike riding which took place on their property.

The Upper Clutha Environmental Society also was opposed to both developments.

The society's secretary, Julian Haworth, told the commissioners about 200 building platforms had already been approved on rural land south of Wanaka which was at the upper limit of what the landscape could cope with.

Mr Haworth said in his opinion the proposals would be more appropriate as plan changes for rezoning rather than through the resource consent process.