Commissioners hearing a resource consent application to realign Dunedin's Lovelock Ave noted there was "considerable uncertainty and suspicion" among Opoho residents when they called for more information on the project.
That information was given at a reconvened hearing yesterday, but failed to impress a Dunedin City Council planner, who recommended, as he did last year, that consent be declined, after he heard nothing to make him alter his stance.
"My recommendation remains unchanged," Darryl Sycamore told the committee.
The long-debated plan to realign the road, which runs through the Dunedin Botanic Garden, was subject to three days of hearings in October last year.
Garden managers want to realign Lovelock Ave to allow more room for the Rhododendron Dell, allow relocation of propagation houses and administration buildings, and deal with safety issues related to the road; a project supported by the Friends of the Dunedin Botanic Garden.
Many Opoho residents have angrily opposed the plan, claiming the new road would be too steep, too frosty in winter, and too prone to sun-strike.
They argued the road should stay where it was.
Commissioner Roger Tasker, who is hearing the application with Allan Cubitt and Cr Colin Weatherall, asked for more information in November, when he said the information provided at the earlier hearing was insufficient.
Council botanic garden and cemeteries team leader Alan Matchett presented a report to the meeting covering issues including a pedestrian-cycleway on Lovelock Ave and on the planned new road, fencing at the garden, enhancement of Lovelock Bush, and a liaison working party of councillors being considered.
Submitters returned to the hearing to give their views on the report. Most, like Mr Sycamore, were not convinced.
A common theme was concern about the safety of Lovelock Ave as both a cycleway and pedestrian route.
Mr Matchett suggested a 3m wide strip with cyclists only being allowed to travel uphill, but submitters questioned how that could be policed.
Council counsel Michael Garbett, in his right of reply, told the committee the applicant included the cycleway "reluctantly", and urged it to give consent without the need to have bicycles in the garden.
In the earlier hearing, some submitters bemoaned the loss of the avenue as a cycle and vehicle route.
Mr Tasker again adjourned the hearing, and asked traffic engineer David Gamble, who appeared for the garden, for information on other roads where cyclists and pedestrians used the same path, and how that was managed.
