Big housing development rejected

Property developers have lost a bid to build a large-scale residential development on the outskirts of Cromwell.

Winton Development had sought a plan change for its proposed 900-lot subdivision on Sandflat Rd, about 60 kilometres from Queenstown and opposite Highlands Motorsport Park.

Nearly 500 opposing submissions were received, including from the motorsport park and the Central Otago District Council.

Evidence was presented to independent commissioners in June. In their decision, released yesterday, the commissioners said the plan change was declined because the site was not suitable.

In particular, the development would be exposed to significant noise levels from lawfully established horticultural and motorsport activities, the report said.

The site was also poorly integrated with the urban form of Cromwell, it said.

Winton Development chief executive Chris Meehan was disappointed with the outcome.

‘‘The unprecedented population growth of permanent residents along with increasing short-term workers servicing the growing horticulture and viticulture sector is putting pressure on housing supply and therefore, unforeseen growth in house prices in the district,’’ he said.

As part of its Plan Change 13 proposal, Winton Development had committed to selling 200 affordable lots, priced at $180,000 to $250,000, and 200 affordable houses, priced at $485,000 to $600,000, totalling 400 within stage one, along with a range of options to suit buyer needs, he said.

‘‘Cromwell needs more quality and affordable housing ... The shortage and pressure on house prices will only get worse.’’

Winton Development intended to appeal the decision.

Central Otago District Council chief executive Sanchia Jacobs said she was pleased with the decision.

Meanwhile, the council was still trying to recoup outstanding fees owed by Winton Development relating to the Plan Change 13 application, she said.

A Winton spokesperson said the amount invoiced by the council was ‘‘significant and unprecedented’’ and the company wanted proof the balance of costs was ‘‘accurate and reasonable’’.