ueenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC) has issued a statement defending its conduct after it was reprimanded by Environment Court judge Prudence Steven over its role in a recent appeal.

In her judgement, which denied US billionaire Peter Thiel’s appeal to overturn a QLDC consenting panel decision turning down his proposal for a luxury lodge near Wānaka, the judge said she found the council’s position as respondent “troubling”.

Read more: Billionaire loses lodge bid, council criticised

QLDC had changed its position on the proposal since the 2022 decision and “the court has a measure of discomfort with the council’s position, and its explanation of it,” the judge said.

“Despite the proposal before the court being essentially the same as that which was considered by the panel, the council elected not to support the panel’s decision.”

If a council is intending to call evidence in support of an opposite position, its duty is to act with fairness and full transparency, but QLDC hadn’t done that, she said.

She cited meetings between council representatives and Thiel’s team which excluded other legal parties and said QLDC “was in breach of a duty to be fair and fully transparent to all parties to the proceeding”.

She also said the council “took an active and supportive approach of the appellant’s position in court and was hardly neutral”.

QLDC planning and development general manager David Wallace said there was “no intention” by the council to support the grant or decline of consent for the proposal.

He said Thiel’s company Second Star Limited had made changes to its proposed development during the appeal, including to reduce its visibility from Wānaka-Mt Aspiring Road and include additional green roofs and gardens.

An assessment of those changes “included meetings and a site visit with Second Star Ltd’s representative to understand the changes,” he said.

“Council aimed to assist the court by explaining its altered view, that a consent pathway existed, through the provision of evidence to the court,” he said. “Council accepts that this was not how the court viewed its contribution.”

David said the council will consider the findings of the court “and any learnings therein” in future Environment Court hearings.

QLDC strategy and planning committee chair Lyal Cocks told the Wānaka App the Environment Court encouraged the QLDC to undertake mediation with the involved parties before it went to Court. That mediation took place, and council went to the hearing with the mediated outcome, which the court did not accept, he said.

Lyal said the council’s role in the case would be reported by staff to the next planning and strategy committee in July and any issues would be considered then.

IMAGE: Supplied