You are not permitted to download, save or email this image. Visit image gallery to purchase the image.
Neighbourly relations on Currie Rd look set to be tested further, following the decision of the Dunedin City Council to grant a variation to the resource consent of Grandview Gardens function venue near Outram.
Owners Jo and Wayne Lindsay say they are not satisfied with the council's decision because it did not go far enough for them to increase their operation, while their neighbours say it did do enough to rein in the operation.
Mrs Lindsay called the decision disappointing and upsetting, and said the couple were considering appealing to the Environment Court.
Their Currie Rd neighbours said they were also considering their options.
The Lindsays applied to vary their consent to increase the number of functions from 48 a year to 88, and to allow more people at a function.
But Mrs Lindsay said the main purpose was to clarify conditions they had breached unintentionally by having staff clean up at the venue later than the consented time. The couple also wanted a venue sign at the end of the road, among other things.
Four submissions from neighbours were received, three opposed and one neutral, and the council's consent hearings committee of Crs Andrew Noone, Kate Wilson, Teresa Stevenson and Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board member Martin Dillon issued its decision to the parties last week, after a two-day hearing and a site visit.
It decided to varied the Lindsay's consent to add six new week-day functions during winter and and two non-profit charity functions annually, but did not allow more summer functions.
It increased the number of people allowed at a function from 100 to 120 and altered function hours so guests could leave slightly later, 30 minutes before the site needed to be vacated by staff and service people.
But Mrs Lindsay said 30 minutes was not enough time to clean up and having daytime functions in the winter was "useless" to them.
They had no issue with new conditions to have travel, traffic and dust management plans, but were not happy with having to produce a noise control plan, believing there was no issue with noise, nor with being required to clean up the side of the road after events no matter who put the rubbish there.
She was also concerned about a ban on photographers taking photos on the road outside the venue.
The main concerns of submitters were about the effects of more events on the amenity of the area, previous breaches of existing conditions, the practicality and enforceability of consent conditions, the lack of a break from functions during winter and the effects of dust and traffic on the country road.
Karen Warrington, one of the opposing submitters, said she was unhappy with the committee's decision, but the neighbours as a group were still considering their options with regards to an appeal.
Mrs Lindsay said they would decide this week whether to appeal.
"We have spent $41,000 on this so far, so I almost think we have to. It's our livelihood we're talking about."
Both sides said they were unhappy with the consent process and the personal nature of certain things saidat the hearing, while the committee noted its disappointment with thenature of some matters raised in the submissions.