The appeal against the facility will now be heard in the Environment Court after a failed attempt at mediation between the Wanaka Watersports Facility Trust and the Save Wanaka Lakefront Reserves Society.
In July, independent commissioners recommended resource consent be granted for the facility, which was appealed by the society about a month later.
Trust chairman Michael Sidey said about $100,000 would be needed to cover the cost of the Environment Court hearing.
Donations had already been received and Mr Sidey was confident enough money would be raised.
Already $279,000 had been donated to the trust to assist with the cost of the resource consent process, he said.
A date for the hearing had not been set but it would likely take place early next year, he said.
The two groups did not proceed to mediation, as their views on the location of the facility were too far apart, he said.
''Both parties wanted to go to mediation but the distance between us on that substantial issue was just too great so it didn't make any sense in the end.''
Save Wanaka Lakefront Reserves Society spokesman Alan Cutler said it was disappointing mediation did not go ahead.
''We were ready to go in and mediate but we met a stone wall in terms of the trust not even considering another suitable location.''
The group would not have gone to the lengths it had to oppose the facility if it believed the resource consent had been granted correctly, he said.
Mr Cutler said the group was opposed to the location, not the facility or the benefits it would bring.
''It's such a shame so much time and money has been spent on a process which could have been avoided from the start if they had chosen one of the suitable locations,'' he said.
If there had been no other suitable sites, Mr Cutler said he did not think the opposition would have been so strong.
The cost of the Environment Court appeal would be covered by members of the group, he said.
Mr Sidey said half the facility could had been built by now but understood the appeal was part of the democratic process.
Even if the court did not find in favour of the facility the trust would not view the time and money spent as being wasted, he said.
''If we don't get the decision we want then someone else down the track will pick it up and get it done.''
Funding for building the facility had not been affected by the cost of the appeal process, he said.
