Publications

Heritage New Zealand Magazine Magazine Request Winter 2008 Autumn 2008 Summer 2007 Spring 2007 Winter 2007 Autumn 2007 Summer 2006 Spring 2006 Winter 2006 Autumn 2006 Summer 2005 Spring 2005 Winter 2005 50th Anniversary commemorative issue Autumn 2005 Summer 2004 Spring 2004 Winter 2004 Autumn 2004 Summer 2003 Spring 2003 Winter 2003 Autumn 2003 Summer 2002 Spring 2002 NZ Historic Places Magazine May 2002 February 2002 November 2001 August 2001 May 2001 February 2001 November 2000 August 2000 May 2000 February 2000

From issue: November 2001

Queenstown's Heritage Flagship

by Wayne Foley

Heritage and development interests worked closely and constructively together on the strengthening and conservation of Eichardt's Hotel in Queenstown..

In the Queenstown of the 1880s, Eichardt's Hotel (centre of the picture) was already a landmark in the town. Picture: Turnbull Library, ref. no. F4548-1/2*

The early 1870s were a turning point for Queenstown. As wooden shanties started to give way to more permanent buildings, the rough goldmining settlement started to take on the appearance of an established town. 1871 saw the erection of a new two-storey stone wing attached to an existing wooden structure named the Queen's Arms Hotel. The new building was designed by the prominent Southland architect Frederick Burwell. During Albert Eichardt's tenure as its proprietor, the hotel became known simply as Eichardt's. In 1873 Albert Eichardt replaced the original timber section of the hotel building on Ballarat Street with a substantial two-storey stone building, again designed by Burwell. This addition included a handsome portico as the main entrance to the hotel. After Albert Eichardt's sudden death in 1882, his wife Julia took over the hotel. Under her management the hotel continued to prosper. In 1886 she had the remaining wooden structure demolished and replaced by a further Burwell-designed stone building to fill the gap between the two earlier stone structures. This 1886 work left Queenstown with a spectacular building that became a focal point of the town as well as an important stopover for early tourists.

Queenstown celebrates the re-opening of the splendid "new" Eichardt's Picture: Queenstown Project Management

After 1886 the building was further modified to meet new business requirements. Most notable were the 1936 alterations carried out by a new owner. These alterations included removal of the portico, along with the roof level cornice, balustrade, pillars and ornate vases. Reinstatement of these features removed in 1936 is a significant part of the recent restoration discussed later in this article. Much of the 1936 work was intended to make the structure sound, and possibly ensured the building's survival for the rest of the twentieth century. Alterations since 1936 were sadly haphazard and carried out with little regard for the structural integrity of the building.

The 1873 building which is part of today's Eichardt's. Many original architechtural features have been reinstated Picture: Queenstown Project Management

Eichardt's has long been a key part of the social and cultural fabric of Queenstown. After the 1999 floods the landmark stood empty for some time and the rife speculation about its future was an indication that locals regarded it highly. The decision was made in February 2000 not to continue using the building as a bar and hotel but to seize the opportunity to restore it for alternative uses. This decision was made only after weighing up the estimated restoration costs against the additional revenue a restored building could generate for its owners. Nevertheless, it was a brave move on the part of the overseas owners to undertake the restoration of a building that structurally was close to the end of its useful life. By July concept plans had been developed and an anchor tenant signed up. Actual work on the building began in December 2000.

In the 1999 Queenstown flood, Eichardt's Hotel was half submerged Picture: Mountain Scene

Eichardt's high profile in the community meant that its restoration had to be carefully managed and involve all interested groups. A project group was formed. Historic Places Trust Dunedin staff, Guy Williams and Janet Stephenson, along with local heritage representatives, Jackie Gillies and Ray Timmins, had numerous meetings with the project development team as we worked our way through the restoration issues. Early on, Jackie proposed that we involve Salmond Reid Heritage Architects from Auckland. These leading heritage consultants brokered the marriage of project and construction developers with heritage interests.

From the outset we began building a team relationship with interested heritage groups by providing free access to the building as and when required. Trust staff and Peter Reid of Salmond Reid Architects promoted the idea of a Memorandum of Agreement between the parties which allowed for the partial demolition and restoration process to be handled on a progressive basis, with regular, on-going consultation, in much the same way as a project manager and contractor work together. This process has been used successfully by the Trust on other complex projects and proved to be an excellent basis for working relationships.

We also agreed to the Trust's suggestion of a conservation plan for the building, which was prepared by Salmond Reid Architects. This proved a useful reference document during the construction process and is now a point of reference for any future work on the building.

Within the project group all respected the different points of view around the table and accepted that retention of the building fabric and integrity of the construction process were as important as construction costs and good building practice considerations. Having Jackie and Ray on the team provided an invaluable interface with local heritage groups.

The general aim was to relieve the historic stone walls of he building of all but their own weight. New concrete foundations, the installation of a concrete slab on the ground floor, and incorporation of an extensive structural steel frame to brace the building and take the weight of a new concrete first floor and roof structure all resulted in a load bearing and self supporting structure. Historic stone walls were core-drilled and fitted with cement-epoxy grouted galvanised deformed steel rod to hold interior and exterior faces together. These walls have also been bolted to the new structural steel frame. During the construction process, the heritage partners often gave additional advice about types of materials and finishes and came up with constructive suggestions and product options that the contractors had not considered.

That the work proceeded at a fast pace was a significant advantage for the owners, who enjoyed an early start to rental income and lower holding costs. The building was ready for tenant fit-out in six months, hardly more (and possibly even less) than erecting a new building of the same size would have taken.

Eichardt's is once again the heritage flagship of Queenstown. The positive impact of the project in the local community has been a wake-up-call for many. The building has been occupied by sound commercial tenants providing the developers with a good return. The project has proved you can create value by restoring a heritage building.

The valuable lessons to be drawn from the Eichardt's experience are:
· Mutual Respect. In order for heritage parties to participate in such projects they must respect the investment that owners have made in a building. Conversely, investors who own heritage buildings need to appreciate that the buildings have cultural significance to the community and that this can be turned into an opportunity.
· Trust. One of the key reasons that developers avoid talking to heritage people about their intentions is that they don't always trust that the information being provided will be considered fairly. The Resource Management Act is often used in an adversarial way, to threaten developers. Heritage people and developers need to be able to talk about their intentions and trust that they can work towards finding solutions.
· Progressive Development. Often with heritage restoration, the extent of work is not always known at the start. One good option is to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement which can form part of the resource planning process. This allows for planning consent to be granted and development work to commence with the ability to deal with issues on an ongoing basis. In the Eichardt's example, none of us knew how much of the interior fabric of the building it would be possible to retain. Typically in the past Historic Places Trust involvement in such projects has ceased with the issuing of planning consent, which has made the process difficult and stressful. If you are able to develop a project team which includes heritage parties, then there is no reason why consent can't be granted and a development proceed on a collective management basis.
· Constructive Contributions. Rather than always looking at what developers can't do with heritage buildings, heritage interests should be looking at constructive options that may result in the restoration of the building and provide the commercial return that the developer is looking for. There is no doubt in my mind that, had we not restored Eichardt's, the building would have eventually been lost to the Queenstown community, due to its extremely poor structural state, quite possibly in the next earthquake!

Eichardt's Hotel has been registered by the Historic Places Trust as a category 2 historic place.

Wayne Foley owns and operates Queenstown Project Management Ltd. He is a member of the Queenstown-Lakes Branch Committee of the Historic Places Trust.