From issue: Summer 2002

Development Danger: putting the heat on district plans

by Kate Edwards

A dawn demolition raid on a Greymouth bridge, a quirky post office hogging prime Queenstown space and a glass thorn among the roses of Akaroa are splitting communities over developments in heritage areas.

These incidents show that, despite decades of outcry and advocacy, communities in which heritage is highly valued are still left lamenting the loss of historic structures and character.

In Greymouth, a 76-year-old railway footbridge was in the way of a proposed supermarket on Maori lease land. Enter developer Hugh Pavletich. His Christchurch-based Pavletich Properties had removed the former Greymouth post office and the Uniting Church, both 90-year-old brick buildings registered as Category II historic places.The bridge was also listed as a Category I historic place. It is now a pile of iron bits - left to the structure's defenders to look after until they find the place and money to put them back together.

Greymouth's railway bridge before it was removed. Picture: New Zealand Historic Places Trust

Their frustration has overflowed into the Environment Court as the "ramps to nowhere" case. It has drawn in the West Coast Tai Poutini Conservation Board to support the Greymouth Heritage Trust and residents who battled to keep the bridge over the former railway yards.

The 22-metre bridge is one of only seven bowstring truss bridges left in the country. However, it was not in the Greymouth railway historic area listed in the Grey district plan. This meant railway-yard owner Mawhera Incorporation, to whom Tranzrail sold the bridge for $1, needed only a building consent to demolish it.

Hugh Pavletich, developer: "...unless heritage and developers work together to find commercial solutions for heritage properties, nothing is going to save them." Picture: John McCoombe

Early on a Saturday morning in March, contractors began taking the bolts out of the structure. It was being hoisted away by the time the alarm was given and residents arrived to intervene.Their turn for revenge came in August - aided by a mistake in the district plan, which included the bridge ramps in the railway historic area. Mawhera had to seek resource consent to finish the job and faced 97 opposing submissions. It now faces nine appeals to the Environment Court.

At the October council meeting, Mawhera said the ramps could stay if the council took responsibility for them. The Greymouth Heritage Trust agreed to raise money for their restoration and maintenance.

Historic Places Trust southern region heritage adviser Nicola Jackson says it is hoped that the proposed supermarket owners will eventually restore the bridge access to that area as part of the complex. The Trust had earlier given its approval to relocating the bridge as an alternative to demolition.

The Trust had also been frustrated by the council's refusing protection for the bridge in the new district plan and was seeking remedy in the Environment Court. "If only the matter had followed the resource consent process and the Trust had an opportunity to put a case, then the issue would have been worked out. It's a good example of what can happen if you don't list these things on the district plan."

Hugh Pavletich says strong resistance was encountered over the old post office and the church. "But Greymouth heritage people should learn, as the Historic Places Trust has learned, that, unless heritage and developers work together and find commercial solutions for heritage buildings, nothing is going to save them. It all comes down to money in the end."

Mawhera Incorporation chairman Maika Mason says its project was delayed while it tried to help the council with relocating the bridge. Patience ran out when the council asked Mawhera and Tranzrail to match its $30,000 contribution towards relocation.

Greymouth mayor Kevin Brown has lived in the town all his life and says he does not like to see its old structures go. But more than history was at stake, because other issues, such as the $100,000 cost of relocation and debate over which areas the bridge should serve, had to be considered.

It was Tranzrail's responsibility to give access over the tracks and it chose to give away the bridge to Mawhera instead of the council, he says.

Queenstown from Ballarat Street, circa 1910-1920, with stone council chambers on the right, and court house opposite partly obscured by trees Picture: Lakes District Museum /EL2986/EN1636

QUEENSTOWN has thrived on its beauty, snow and heritage but has few historic buildings left. What remain have to earn their keep in a town where land for building is scarce and expensive.

Janet Stephenson, Historic Places Trust heritage adviser for Otago/Southland, believes in guiding new development so that heritage character is nurtured rather than lost. But she says that it is difficult to freeze time against the pressures and economics of development."One must look at what is a reasonable development for today, given that there may well be other heritage features in an area."

The Queenstown courthouse, registered as a Category I historic place. Picture: Brian Walton, info@dotco.co.nz

Stephenson says a number of southern district plans include special areas for heritage precinct or character where they recognise heritage values of structures. Some councils also have non-statutory guidelines to advise developers on what is acceptable.

However, clashes still arise between what the developer and community think was reasonable and acceptable. A recent example was the Ngai Tahu Property Group's resource consent for its central Queenstown development.

Queenstown's 1938 post office was not protected under the District Plan. Picture: Brian Walton, info@dotco.co.nz

In September the Queenstown-Lakes District Council granted the group's application to demolish the 1938 post office on the Camp St corner and adjacent buildings housing Telecom, the Pig and Whistle pub and Joe's Garage café. In their place will be five buildings in a "post office precinct" designed by Queenstown architect Michael Wyatt, whose work includes the Steamboat Wharf.

The district plan of the Queenstown-Lakes District identifies "heritage precincts" and "special character areas" where new development is controlled to try to retain heritage character. Although part of the development site was recognised as a heritage
precinct, the post office was not included for protection and the district plan allowed new buildings to be 12 metres high.

The Trust and community heritage groups were concerned about the effect of three-level buildings on the adjacent courthouse, built in 1876-77 and registered as a Category I historic place.

Stephenson says the developer had expectations arising from what the district plan allowed and, while the courthouse will not be physically affected, it is important to work with the developer to try to get the best result. The developer did a good job in designing buildings adjacent to the courthouse and setting them away from the courthouse, which is also owned by Ngai Tahu Properties. However, the Wakatipu Environmental Society and the Queenstown and Districts Historical Society are upset at the loss of the unprotected post office building, and believe the development intrudes into the historic precinct and alters the character of the town.

Council consent was conditional upon the developers revising the design of a building facing Ballarat and Camp Sts that was considered too hard-edged. Ngai Tahu say the building's site coverage was well within the 80 per cent allowed to give open spaces and views in the gaps between buildings.

The height of their buildings matched the 12 metres allowed for the Village Green development by former mayor Warren Cooper. That development drew intense opposition when it was floated in September 2000 and the council allowed it as a non-notified application, thus shutting out public submissions. Part of the project was to demolish the 128-year-old Foresters Lodge, which was designed by F.W. Burwell.

Stephenson says the Trust became involved to push for public notification and get the lodge retained. The council could not afford to buy and restore the building so the task was to persuade the Coopers to make it part of the development and to reduce the impact of it on the village green and nearby heritage buildings. Negotiations resulted in a design where the rear of the lodge was incorporated in a new commercial building but could be seen from outside through areas of glazing.

Stephenson says the Trust generally advises councils that some design control is necessary so that incompatible buildings are not built among historic buildings.

Kate Edwards is an Auckland writer.