A clear message has been sent to developers that elevated, isolated landscapes should be protected from residential development, after a Queenstown Lakes District Council commission refused consent for a ski lodge/residential dwelling on the lower reaches of Mt Cardrona.
Mt Cardrona Station Ltd had hoped to establish an 875sq m residential building platform about 785m above sea level on Mt Cardrona, and to construct a 392sq m building and ancillary structures within the platform to be used for residential purposes and visitor accommodation.
After a hearing earlier this month, commissioners David Whitney and Lyal Cocks have refused consent for the proposal because of its likely adverse effects on rural character, landscape values and visual amenity.
Their decision said the proposal failed to "harmonise with local topography", as required by the district plan, and would introduce residential development on a "very exposed northeast facing slope within an isolated mountainous landscape" devoid of vegetation and situated 180m above existing residential activity, resulting in "over-domestication" of the landscape. The proposal did not represent sympathetic development in the context of the Cardrona Valley's rural character, which was "derived from traditional farming patterns where dwellings and outbuildings are typically located on the valley floor".
The development would be clearly visible "at close range" to users of the Cardrona Alpine Resort skifield access road, and the building and its domestication effects - including smoke emissions from fireplaces and "domestic lighting and headlight sweep [at night]" - could also be seen by the public from Cardrona Valley Rd and the Snow Farm/Snow Park access road.
Although the proposed development's location within a ski area sub zone excluded it from landscape classification and assessment, the commission had "no doubt elevated land within the Cardrona Valley, including the subject site, is an outstanding natural landscape", which was consistent with several previous Environment Court decisions.
In assessing the proposal's effects, the commission placed little weight on the sub zone's provisions, because the development was not associated with skifield activities and was 9km away from Cardrona Alpine Resort skifield's base facilities, so therefore inconsistent with the objectives and policies specific to the sub zone.
If consent was granted, a "significant precedent" would have been established for residential and visitor accommodation development remote from skifield base facility areas within ski area sub zones throughout the district.
A covenant offered by the applicant, which gave the council control over future development on 148ha of land, was considered "of limited value", as any positive effects were outweighed by the proposal's adverse effects.
The commission also said residential and visitor accommodation in that part of the Cardrona Valley was already provided for by the Mt Cardrona Station special zone, established when plan change 18 became operative last year, and consolidation within the special zone was preferable to providing for such development "in an isolated manner at the elevation that is proposed in this instance".
Mt Cardrona Station has 15 working days to appeal the decision.
Refused consent
• Ski lodge and residential dwelling on Mt Cardrona.
Consent sought for an 875sq m building platform 785m above sea level.
• Mt Cardrona Station Ltd's application rejected as not sympathetic to rural character of the area.
