The two-lot subdivision would create a new site for a house beside the existing house of the applicant, Glen Dene Ltd.
The new house, off the Makarora to Lake Hawea Rd (State Highway 6), would be in an outstanding natural landscape area, visible from the lake and the Te Araroa Track, and could create a situation where more lots could be created between it and the applicant’s existing house, the hearing was told.
Before independent commissioners Bob Nixon and Wendy Baker in Wanaka yesterday, Glen Dene counsel Graeme Todd agreed if someone was on the lake they would be able to see the development.
"In terms of context, however, I think it is important that you are considering a view from a very small portion of an overall public place," Mr Todd said.
Glen Dene owner Richard Burden told the hearing "open season on the lake is all year, yet the lake is often found without a single boat ... depending on the season and where the lake level is, this part of the lake does not have much activity".
When asked by Ms Baker if he had considered any other locations for the building platform that were not visible from the lake, Mr Burden said "not really".
Because of the slope and angle of the property around the lake edge there were no building areas in hollows.
Submissions had been filed opposing the application citing adverse visual, amenity and natural landscape value effects.
The Upper Clutha Environment Society said if the application was granted it would set a precedent for subdivision and development within an outstanding natural landscape beside and close to Lake Hawea and beside SH6 in the approaches to Hawea township.
The society was also concerned the site would be very visible from the Te Araroa track.
In his evidence for the applicant, landscape planner Ben Espie said from SH6 the built form on lot one would be appropriately screened by vegetation, and at distances of 2km or more it would be practically invisible.
Mr Nixon raised the issue of cumulative effects if the building platform was granted.
"I just wonder if a consent on lot one would create a facts on the ground situation for, say, one or two more building platforms between the one that is proposed and the applicant’s existing dwelling [on lot 2].
"You have a big open space there that we walked over this morning that is almost begging to have houses on it," Mr Nixon said.
Mr Espie agreed adding a new dwelling was accumulation.
"But I think that cumulative effect in this case is pretty low," he said.
"Having said that, at the other end of the scale there probably is a threshold point. We cannot continue to add more and more and more to it and not have an effect.
"This is not it, it is well short of it," Mr Espie said.
Mr Nixon said a decision would be issued within 15 days.
