"It's beyond question that it will be appealed. I have no doubt whatsoever that the decision will be vigorously appealed by a number of developers," he said yesterday.
It is the first attempt in New Zealand for a council to use statutory powers in an effort to address housing affordability.
The plan change has been the subject of intense debate and discussion over several years, and even at its final airing in the council chambers on Wednesday, some councillors were still not comfortable with the recommendation.
In the end it was Clive Geddes who cast the deciding vote, with Cr Leigh Overton absent from the meeting.
Crs John Mann, John S.Wilson, John R.Wilson, Lex Perkins and Mr Geddes voted in favour of putting the plan change out for public notification; Crs Gillian Macleod, Cath Gilmour, Vanessa van Uden, Lyal Cocks and Mel Gazzard voted against it.
"I think the five councillors who have voted against the recommendation were right to be concerned," Mr Porter said.
"I think it would have been much better, given the changed financial circumstances, to have let this plan change go through a few more rounds of consultation to find a better solution, rather than what will happen now, which is the expensive route of Environment Court appeals."
Mr Porter said he was disappointed he was unable to be at Wednesday's meeting to address the councillors during the public forum, before the agenda item was discussed.
He was not convinced the plan change would achieve the outcome the community needed.
"Most developments in this new [financial] environment are not viable. This is just going to add an extra layer of bureaucracy and cost, which is only going to make it harder to do developments."
The plan change would drive up the cost of building and those costs would need to be passed on to the consumers, "which is what we don't want".
Plan change 24 was also "very complex" and affordability was "about simplicity".
"The Queenstown Lakes District Council has been very successful in the past in negotiating custom solutions with various developers.
"The big advantage with [that] is you get the solution that best fits for any particular development rather than trying to mandate one set of rules that they have to [apply] to all."
Council housing senior policy analyst Scott Figenshow said plan change 24 was the first attempt in New Zealand to utilise the Resource Management Act to address the social issue of housing affordability.
It supported a sustainable management principle to ensure housing was accessible to a range of households, thereby retaining a diverse, mixed community, he said.
The plan change was not intended to impose any obligations on landowners who applied for consent for a controlled activity, or if the activity was permitted, or anyone who applied for a consent to build a house on an approved section.
"It is geared to capture affordable housing in new subdivisions or developments."
A large part of the discussions around the plan change had revolved around the scope of the Act to address affordable housing.
"The plan change provides a method for assessing the impact of a development and/or subdivision on the supply of and demand for affordable housing," Mr Figenshow said.
If an impact was identified, it would then need to be mitigated by increasing the supply of affordable housing through a variety of means.
The decision will be publicly notified on January 14, 2009, and the appeal period will be 30 working days from the date submitters receive the decision, until about February 27, 2007.
