ORC corporate services director Wayne Scott said last night he was aware of the issues and "relaxed" about a pending judicial review of the track consent.
"How can we have a problem with people seeking judicial review? They are entitled to do that," Mr Scott said.
The two councils did different portions of the track, using different contractors. The regional council spent about $150,000 while the district council spent about $400,000.
Mr Taylor, one of three directors of Damper Bay Estates Ltd, said yesterday the main argument was with the unacceptable, "badly-planned and executed", non-notified work by the regional council. Problems included hanging fences, damage to landscape character and boundary encroachment.
The difference between the two councils' work was like "chalk and cheese", but the court action had to be levelled at the district council because it was the consenting authority, he said.
The dispute relates to about 417m of the track, which is on Damper Bay Estate land without consent, and the company is seeking a realignment.
The issue was not likely to affect public access, Mr Taylor said.
Mr Scott believed the dispute was being "pushed into a set of wider issues".
"It depends on what is going to happen. Remediation and realignment are two completely different things," Mr Scott said.
The pending court proceedings have forced the second adjournment of a hearing into Damper Bay Estate's six-house resource consent application.
One of the main issues that would have been addressed at next week's hearing was the visual effects of the houses when viewed from the track.
Damper Bay Estate wants all parties to reassess the visual effects from a proposed realignment that is not on their land but the ORC has suggested retrospective consent be granted for that part of the track.
Damper Bay Estate's consultant planners Mitchell Partnership issued a memorandum this week saying it had not received approval from the QLDC, as landowner, to peg the realignment.
Wanaka Community Board chairman Lyal Cocks was surprised to hear that, because he wants the matter "sorted out".
Mr Taylor said the approval was "a matter of sequence" and "probably not unreasonable, from the QLDC's point of view, because there is a need to agree on an alternative realignment for the track.
