Post in Loss of Heritage

Topic Navigation

Useful Links

All posts in Loss of Heritage

Loss of Heritage From: Irinka Britnell Date: Aug 01 04:38 UTC Short link

Hi Tim
No I'm not suggesting turning the Purcase St allotment into a vege garden -
but it's not a bad idea either. I'm just suggesting caution and to think
about what type of city we are creating, to have appropriate and caring
development. To have room for veges if we want them.  Care for the people
and care for the character. Care for what we are loosing.

The Aukland development mentioned as 'not wanted' - but it's too late we are
stuck with it. People sometimes don't have choices and are forced to live in
these places because that is all there is.

Case in point re empty allotments and heritage, and I think I spy a few
others is:
Next door to us on Worcester Street was a lovely old villa home with veranda
and two bay windows at the  front . It was one of four all in a row. The
overseas absentee landlord decided to pull it down and put up 3 x ugly
utilitarian 2 story flats.
The problem was he was allowed to pull the house down before he had approval
for his plans. How can that be allowed?
 The neighbours objected as the building was too close to their fence line.
So now the empty allotment has sat there for two years with rubbish
gathering and nothing happening. He has been caught out by paying
$230,000.00 for land and house, but  no one is going to pay that for land
only in Linwood and then pay for building on top. Even building two flats
will not give enough profit for the investment. So the land was worth more
with the original  house on it which was already split into two flats. He
just needed to 'spend that money on it' to bring it up to speed. Now he has
been loosing for two years and the gap looks like a missing tooth.

On earthquake strenthening
We have had to do some on our old buildings - it's an expensive pain. But
sometimes some things have to be a labour of love. I wish it was possible to
get real dollar value for all the energy output one does.I comfort myself
with the thought that quality of life is worth that extra mile. Smile.

People should be encouraged to plant veges this spring especially with the
rising prices of everything. I might even put a vege patch in that empty
allotment  if I see nothing happening there this Spring!

Nice to hear your opinion Jo, thanks for the debate.
Irinka



----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Kerr" <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz>
To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 2:39 PM
Subject: [Canterbury Issues] Loss of Heritage


> Hi Irinka,
>
> If places like the Purchas St lot you are criticising do not suit people
> then they will not get enough tenants/owners to make them viable. (As has
> happened in Auckland) The 'cost' to those who invested in such projects is
> loss of capital. It happens.
>
> Now, if - and I do not think it will happen... If, we suddenly have food
> shortages then tin-pot construction like the Purchas St one will quite
> easily be torn down.
>
> Whether the place would be converted to cropping or horticultural use
> would
> then be a moot point. The bare land may we be more important (i.e., worth
> more) set up as a caravan park...or something...
>
> You cannot grow food to feed the hungry masses while the rates are higher
> than the income. Purchase St converted to a food garden would probably
> come
> under that category.
>
> Just because the city suddenly runs out of food (because four days have
> passed and no trucks have arrived according to your scenario) it does not
> mean that the CCC suddenly reduces the rates to a level able to sustain
> the
> growing of produce on inner city land.
>
> Jo Colgan, a property developer and new contributor to this forum  has
> tried
> to explain why some places are pulled down and replaced with less
> attractive
> buildings. In the end, someone wants to use the property. They cannot use
> it
> if rules state it has to be earthquake-proofed, the zone no longer applies
> or it has difficult access, window display area, car-parking etc.
>
> To some degree the perceived earthquake danger can act as too strong an
> incentive for demolition. The fact is, earthquakes of building-demolishing
> intensity are relatively rare. Those that are likely to collapse are -
> relatively - small compared to modern earthquake-proof structures. Thus
> few
> people would be in them in the event of an earthquake. Add the possibility
> an earthquake occurs at night (50/50 chance of that - closer to 60/50 if
> you
> count the hours from 1800 to 0800 as "night" hours) when few, if any are
> in
> the building... and you get something like a reasonable cost/benefit
> ratio.
>
> To make the point more clear, some part of Christchurch Hospital is under
> strength. If an earthquake occurs the building might (I emphasise MIGHT)
> collapse. Those in it may be killed or injured. The cost to replace the
> building with a complying one is quite a few million dollars. If NOT
> replaced that leaves quite a few million bucks to pick up the pieces from
> the rest of a devastated city - a few stuck in hospital may die but
> represent far fewer deaths than the many outside the hospital where the
> resources would be better spent or invested....(But I bet the hospital
> will
> be replaced)
>
> To preserve heritage building (as Jo Coglan pointed out) you need to have
> people who WANT to use them, regulations that allow affordable conversion
> of
> the building into something usable, some sort of visible sign as to the
> standard of earthquake proofing so Armageddon-fixated persons can choose
> to
> avoid entering the building, and up-to-date technology that allows
> relatively inexpensive up-grading of older buildings.
>
> It is sad to see old building disappear but sometimes it is better to let
> old buildings gradually disappear than to have some sort of regulation
> that
> firstly forces owners to retain their old buildings and secondly requires
> new buildings to emulate the style of the period being protected. A
> classic
> example of this is Napier. This city has some marvelous art deco
> architecture. However, instead of preserving the art deco buildings many
> property developers have taken the "theme" on board and have built modern
> renditions in the art deco style. To do this they have knocked down
> pre-art
> deco wooden buildings along the Napier foreshore and replaced them with
> their architectural art deco interpretations.
>
> Now, you may think I am a little cynical... but have you ever seen an
> architect "interpret" anything? Yep, he (it is usually a "he") adds his
> own
> interpretations to a style and ends up incorporating stuff that is not
> within the style at all. He produces synthetic abominations finally
> creating
> a fairy-tale fantasy of frivolous fuck-ups that ultimately spread through
> the historic area dominating and drowning out the true heritage buildings.
>
> Oh, if Napier is too far away go take a look at Arrowtown. Its original
> buildings have been utterly ruined by owners and the tenants - but they
> still collect a few tourist pennies.
>
> I do not know what the answer is. Perhaps, if you want to "save" a
> building
> or precinct then it has to be registered as a museum and isolated from any
> economic activity.
>
> But the answer is neither regulation nor enforced compliance codes.
>
> Although there are beautiful places in Europe where buildings take on a
> delightful uniformity that blends into the surroundings one has to
> remember
> that many of these places are now satellite towns with most economic
> activity taking place in nearby grey cities...
>
> It is a worthy topic - anyone any ideas?
>
> Cheers,
> Tim Kerr
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike and Irinka Britnell" <avoncitybakpak@slingshot.co.nz>
> To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 12:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Introductions Loss of Heritage
>
>
>> It's all about the value we place on our heritage of character buildings,
>> homes, trees and gardens. Are we not the Garden City?
>> We in Christchurch as a community including our city council (for they
>> write
>> the rules that allow or disallow the building conditions), have lost our
>> way
>> with no comprehensive overall vision for our city.
>>
>> We are also loosing our vision for quality of life for our citizens.
>> I don't know if anyone has seen the horrific 5 storey, thin concrete
>> cubbyhole, with small windows, developement proposal for Purchase St and
>> Madras St Block to go from L 3 to L5?. Hundreds of appartments which are
>> small and pokey with no proper parking and a tiny recreation facility for
>> all. Developements like this have no concern for the food shortage
>> problems
>> of the future, as in we are going to need more people planting their own
>> gardens. ( There is only 3 days supply in our supermarkets if for any
>> reason
>> the supply trucks were to stop running). What about the  quality of life
>> for
>> the consumer who will have no room for a hobby or recreation. Where will
>> the
>> children play?  Never mind the CCC stipulation for required green space
>> per
>> ratio of population.
>>
>> It's a cop out to say ' Unfortunately that is the climate we are in and
>> this
>> work has to be done...'
>> Is that what the Maori say, when they are trying to not only save, but
>> also
>> rebuild their Heritage?
>> I think we could take a leaf out of their book and show some respect for
>> our
>> ancestors and those who helped build our nation before us.
>> Every time you wipe out Heritage, you are wiping our 'our stories'. Like
>> the
>> lovely history that Brian just shared with us about the lady who helped
>> the
>> war verterans at the Ozone Hotel. I am also incensed at the lack of
>> respect
>> and that someone should choose to pull it down. Everything is restorable
>> and
>> we should be lobbying the CCC and the powers that be to increase the
>> budget
>> to incentivise people with heritage buildings, to assist them protect
>> them.
>>
>> We have been in the Tourism business for 12 years - They tell us how much
>> they love this Garden - Heritage Character City - It is our 'point of
>> difference' and uniqueness. We do not want to build ourselves a city that
>> just looks like any other modern city.
>> How do the countries of Europe get on saving their heritage buildings?
>> By not buying in to some psuedo modern shallow philosphy, that will
>> continue
>> to be churned out by greedy bureacrats, desperate to make their mark,
>> with
>> no thought for the future generations.
>> Irinka
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Joe Colgan" <joe.colgan@arrowinternational.co.nz>
>> To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
>> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:50 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Introductions
>>
>>
>>> As someone who works in the property development/construction sector, I
>>> too lament the loss of historic buildings but the economic reality of
>>> refurbishment of buildings such as this is harsh; bringing old buildings
>>> to even 1/3rd of code compliance (often 2/3rds)  with respect to
>>> earthquake strengthenging is usually an onerous and expensive task.
>>> Unfortunately that is the climate we are in and this work has to be done
>>> if the building is to be safely inhabited.
>>> Building owners/developers are faced with costs that make the proposal
>>> return less than could be gained by leaving monies deposit, they are
>>> mindful of the need to return a profit and maintain their business and
>>> the funding difficulties and risk premium placed on undertaking
>>> refurbishments with the inherent unknowns that accompany such a venture,
>>> force them to seek easier, more fundable, lower risk options and often
>>> demolition and new build is the obvious one. That or find a greenfield
>>> site.
>>> It is not always a free choice.
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Joe.
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From: graeme stanley [mailto:walk.tologist@paradise.net.nz]
>>> Sent: Thursday, 31 July 2008 4:27 p.m.
>>> To: Canterbury Public Issues Forum
>>> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Introductions
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Brian, I am deeply saddened by your news that The Historic Ozone
>>> Hotel has been sold and that demolition has been tendered for. This
>>> holiday resort hotel was built by Mrs Isabella Hucks in 1914. The hotel
>>> has some unique features including distinctive leadlights and prominent
>>> fenestration and the dining room was built with special narrow boards
>>> for dancing At the end of WW1 Mother Hucks as she was known allowed the
>>> Veterans Association to use the hotel for twelve months. It was to be
>>> the first invalids soldiers home in New Zealand. There was a disasterous
>>> fire in 1922 It was gutted. A strong-minded Mrs Hucks completely rebuilt
>>> it and it opened one year after the fire. Mrs Hucks was also the
>>> proprietor of The Theatre Royal Cafe and Bellvue Boardinghouse in
>>> Gloucester ST. Other unique buildings around here are OZONE DRESSING
>>> SHEDS &OZONE STORES with its distinctive dome on cnr. across the road. I
>>> am endeavouring to find out more on this story.North Beach was a barren
>>> wast
>>> eland of sand before 1911 when a loan was raised for road formation
>>> Thanks Brian for information and also for webcam from New Brighton
>>> Pier.Cheers, Graeme Stanley.
>>>
>>>
>>> graeme stanley
>>> ST ALBANS, CHRISTCHURCH
>>> Info about graeme stanley: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/graemestanley
>>>
>>> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
>>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2A1cLTsE2HtkzOlPebfGEO
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>>> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>>> in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>>>
>>> More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>>>
>>> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> WARNING:
>>> This email contains information that is CONFIDENTIAL and may be subject
>>> to LEGAL PRIVILEGE.  If you are not the intended recipient, you must not
>>> peruse, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this email or attachments.
>>> If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately by
>>> return email, facsimile or telephone (call us collect) and delete this
>>> email.  Arrow International Limited accepts no responsibility for
>>> changes made to this email or to any attachments after transmission from
>>> Arrow International Limited. Thank you.
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> Corporate signoff created by Fluid Software Ltd web:
>>> www.fluidsoftware.co.nz
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> Joe Colgan
>>> Merivale/St. Albans, Christchurch
>>> Info about Joe Colgan:
>>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/1WCV77ccw80U47vRhxCRGu
>>>
>>> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
>>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1dORLayB0AetBv2x6Ca8YC
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>>>  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>>>  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>>>
>>>  More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>>>  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>>>
>>>  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.5.6/1578 - Release Date:
>>> 7/28/2008
>>> 5:13 PM
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Irinka Britnell
>> Englefield Historic Neighbourhood Precinct, Christchurch
>> Info about Irinka Britnell:
>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/irinkabritnell
>>
>> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/25VUPEKjP6dFQRpejYvoCO
>> -----------------------------------------
>>  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>>  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>>  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>>
>>  More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>>  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>>
>>  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
>> -----------------------------------------
>> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1392 - Release Date: 4/22/2008
> 3:51 PM
>
>
> Tim Kerr
>
> Info about Tim Kerr: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/timkerr
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/mA8Wvy4RcykQiYRUweF0
> -----------------------------------------
>  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>  More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
>  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
>  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.5.6/1578 - Release Date: 7/28/2008
> 5:13 PM
>
>

Need help? Please contact technical support. To support your forum, please donate. Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using GroupServer.