The final day of a three-day resource consent hearing to decide whether a 420sqm watersports centre will be built in the Roys Bay Recreation Reserve heard impassioned pleas from people both for and against.
Submitter Derek Valentine, of Wanaka, offered his expertise as an engineer to suggest an alternative proposal to the commissioners.
"The proposal as it stands is just too big.
"Make it smaller, move it out of the way so you can't easily see it and then I'd be happy.''
He said if the building were repositioned slightly back from the proposed site, 11 trees could be saved, and a "minimum'' amount of the building would be visible from most iconic views in Wanaka.
Mr Valentine echoed the view of many submitters, that the value of the trees - mainly Douglas firs - lay in the shade they offered.
"They are unremarkable trees but they do offer shade.''
Quinn Curtis (13), of Wanaka, was the youngest submitter to speak at the hearing.
He had started rowing last year and said he supported the centre because transporting boats from storage at the Wanaka showgrounds could be both time-consuming and dangerous.
Wanaka-Hawea Reserves Trust secretary John Coe challenged the assertion of some submitters that the facility would help troubled youth in Wanaka.
"This building's contribution to solving that problem will, sadly, be almost non-existent.
"Children who have the attitude to get up at 5.30am or six in the morning are not the problem and never will be.''
Alison Stretch, a supporter, said claims the approval of the building would set a precedent for developments on the lakefront were a "red herring.''
"This is a recreational building on a recreational reserve and I believe the rowing club has been stymied enough.''
Queenstown Lakes District Council planner Sarah Picard said while the applicant had made "some improvements'' to the application, the proposal still did not pass the test set under section 104D of the Resource Management Act.
In a report released in February, Ms Picard said the application should be refused (pending new or additional evidence at the hearing) because of its potential adverse effects.
Yesterday she said the effects would be "more than minor.''
Lawyer for the applicant Graeme Todd said he would exercise his right of reply in writing.
The commissioners will rule on the proposal within 15 days of receiving Mr Todd's reply.
