Neighbours objecting to a proposed amusement park near the Wanaka Airport were asked about the effects of other existing commercial activities in the area at an Environment Court hearing yesterday.
Ulrich Staufenberg and his family live at Mt Barker Rd, near a site earmarked for a commercial entertainment facility featuring karts, bumper boats, ten-pin bowling and a cafe.
His family trust has appealed to the Environment Court against the development - on the corner of State Highway 6 and Mt Barker Rd - for which former Invercargill businessman Ross Young, his wife Judith, and their son Eamon, gained consent in 2010.
Mr Staufenberg had submitted evidence to the court that the amusement park would adversely affect the rural experience of the area, which at present was characterised by "open landscapes with few visible structures in the wider vista" and "no constant recognisable noise".
Responding to Commissioner John Mills' question about what airport-related noise was detectable from his property, Mr Staufenberg said he had only ever heard helicopters flying overhead to Queenstown and the occasional "screaming" of customers in freefall at the airport's skydive operation.
"You understand, I'd imagine, that that airport will grow?" Commissioner John Mills asked.
"If the growth exists, it will be at a slow rate," Mr Staufenberg replied.
He and fellow appellants Jeffrey and Margaret Feint - also Mt Barker Rd residents - are concerned about the potential for increased traffic generated by the amusement park.
In addressing the concerns, the Youngs' lawyer, Jan Caunter, cross-examined Mr Staufenberg and Mr Feint about their attitudes towards Criffel Station Woolshed, further down Mt Barker Rd, which hosts weddings and other functions.
Both appellants had previously expressed a neutral view of the commercial activities at the venue and Mr Feint had provided written approval for its consent application.
Ms Caunter pointed out the Woolshed's consent permitted up to 136 events each year, which would generate considerable traffic flow along Mt Barker Rd past the Feint and Staufenberg properties.
Both appellants conceded that point but maintained the Woolshed had no noise or visual effects on their properties.
Mr Feint was worried the amusement park buildings would interrupt the view towards Mt Roy from the top of the Luggate hill.
Ms Caunter asked if the development's proposed screening mitigation, including mounding and plantings, offered any comfort in terms of adverse visual effects.
"My only concern is that they're [plantings] jolly slow to grow sometimes, especially native trees," Mr Feint replied.
Mr Staufenberg and the Feints expect the amusement park to set a precedent for further commercial development in the area, particularly on the western side of State Highway 6.
Environment Court Judge Jon Jackson suggested the "no development covenant" proposed by the Youngs for the 83% of their land not occupied by the amusement park could be registered in favour of the Feints and Staufenbergs, along with the Queenstown Lakes District Council. That would offer their families a "safeguard that the council's not going to backtrack at some stage in the future".
Mr Feint said he would still rather consent for the amusement park be declined, but if not, having control over the covenant was "something that might help".
The hearing was adjourned yesterday and will reconvene on Friday.
