After years of wrangling, bad decisions and no decisions, Banks Peninsula finally has a district plan, but some fear what it will mean for the area, John McCrone of The Press reports.

A Banks Peninsula District Plan was first mooted in 1997, but continually stalled due to the impasse between farmers, developers and greenies.

It began in the mid-1990s, when the Banks Peninsula District Council drafted its first proposal. The council suggested designating half of all the rural land as landscape and coastal-protection areas.

Farmers reacted angrily to the prospect of new controls across their land. They would have to jump through hoops just to continue doing the usual things you do on a farm. They would also lose the option of flogging off the odd corner of their properties - not that they had any firm intentions, mind you, but it was always prudent to retain this kind of insurance against hard times, the farmers said.

Given the heat of the response, a rural task force comprising Federated Farmers, Friends of Banks Peninsula, Department of Conservation (DOC), Forest and Bird and others, was formed, with the hope of mediating a solution.

But after several years of fruitless wrangling, in 1999 it was reported that positions seemed more polarised than ever. A real town and country split had emerged.

Matters drifted a few years with temporary planning rules in place. In 2002, the district council put forward a plan variation with drastically shrunken protection areas. This appeared to please no-one. Eventually, after another few years going round in circles, all parties headed to the Environment Court for an appeals process to sort things out.

At this stage it was recognised that the Banks Peninsula District Council had skimped on the research - perfectly understandable given its thin resources. But there needed to be accurate maps of the peninsula detailing its types of terrain, its various existing activities.

In 2006, a full landscape study was commissioned from consultants Boffa Miskell. A complete rethink seemed necessary.

All the more so as the world had moved on so much over the decade since the exercise was first started. The commercial value of a landscape like Banks Peninsula, and the kind of things that might happen to it, were by now only too apparent from the experiences of places like Queenstown and Golden Bay.

Elsewhere, permissive planning regimes were being wound right back. Queenstown Lakes District Council created headlines by making a Wanaka homeowner repaint a bluebell-coloured feature wall - part of an internal courtyard - a more natural hue. And need we mention Shania Twain?

Banks Peninsula was also beginning to feature strongly on the shopping list of rich foreigners.

A Rothschild family member had splashed out $2.7 million on a 440ha farm in Hickory Bay. A United States congressman and British investment banker had both bought into Akaroa, the latter building a secluded pad said to be worth a cool $7 million.

There were well-heeled Kiwis with their dreams, too. Around the other side of the peninsula especially, in Diamond Harbour, Governors Bay and Lyttelton, sprawling dwellings were appearing at the water's edge or creeping ever higher up the slopes. The pressures on the landscape were growing fast.

A further issue for everyone to deal with was the imminent amalgamation of Banks Peninsula with Christchurch City Council, a fresh set of tensions.

While many expected that the Boffa Miskell study would open the district plan for public debate again, the Environment Court's Judge Smith wasn't having it. Patience appears to have worn thin with the endless talking. Judge Smith said the case would be decided on the Boffa Miskell report and existing submissions. No fresh lines of argument would be permitted.

Environment Canterbury (Ecan) did try to widen the scope of the discussions during the hearings and looks like paying the penalty. Christchurch City Council and Federated Farmers are both seeking costs from Ecan for taking up more court time.

Many believe Judge Smith ought to have used his powers more liberally, allowing the district plan to go back to the public and preventing it reaching any premature conclusions.

But a decision was made, a verdict delivered, and now the region is going to have to live with the results.

Some believe the new district plan provides a robust enough framework - read the fine print and you will see plenty of clauses dealing with the concealment of driveways, the use of natural colours, rules to prevent roofs appearing above ridgelines, restrictions on reflective walls of glass.

Others say too many of these caveats are at the council's discretion. Or will need more backbone than traditionally shown to police them.  These people suggest that a properly thought-out district plan, one which all parties had signed up to, would have given more assurance that in 10 years time we won't be looking at the peninsula's hill crests and headlands and asking, how on earth did we ever permit that?

Read the full story here.