The following is the text of the Submission on behalf of Historic Places Wellington by the Chair John Daniels.

NOTIFIED RESOURCE CONSENT - APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 95(A) OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991- HARCOURTS BUILDING, 30 GREY STREET / 203 - 213 LAMBTON QUAY

This submission is made by Historic Places Wellington Incorporated in opposition to the following application:

Applicant: Lambton Quay Properties Nominee Limited

Location:  Harcourt’s Building, 30 Grey Street / 203-213 Lambton Quay, Wellington

Proposal:  Demolition of a listed heritage building (heritage listed ref: 185)

Service Request Number: 263649

 

Objector

Historic Places Wellington Incorporated
P O Box 12426, Thorndon, Wellington 6144
Contact person: John Daniels, Chair
Phone 9387971
Email jr.daniels@xtra.co.nz

Purpose of Objection

Historic Places Wellington opposes the application and recommends that the building be retained on the Council’s Heritage List.
Background Concerning the Objector

Historic Places Wellington Incorporated was formed in 2011 in affiliation with the national organisation Historic Places Aotearoa Inc., to take over the role of the Wellington Branch Committee of the New Zealand Historic Places Trust which has been dis-established.

The principal objects of Historic Places Wellington are to promote the identification, protection and conservation of historic places in the Wellington region, for the benefit of communities and the general public, and to inform, advise and educate the public on the significance of historic heritage.

Historic Places Wellington aims to work in co-operation with local authorities, the New Zealand Historic Places Trust and other organisations in the Wellington region concerned with the preservation of historic heritage.

Statutory Recognition of Harcourt’s Building

·      Historic Places Act Registration

The building is registered Category One in the register which is administered by the New Zealand Historic Places Trust under the Historic Places Act 1993.  Category One signifies places of special or outstanding historical or cultural significance or value.

 

·      Wellington City District Plan

The building is included on the Heritage List in the Wellington City District Plan.

 

Heritage Significance of Harcourt’s Building

 

·      Historical Significance

The building was erected in 1928 for The Australian Temperance and General Mutual Life Assurance Society Limited (T&G).  The company was established in 1876 in Melbourne. Business developed rapidly and by 1903 the company had offices in New Zealand and all over Australia.

T & G's first offices in Wellington were sited where Midland Park, Lambton Quay is now. Prior to the T & G, Commercial Union Assurance Company had owned and occupied a building on this site since 1890. T&G bought the site of the present building in 1924 and in 1928 erected what was then one of Wellington's biggest and grandest buildings. T & G merged with National Mutual in 1983.

 

T & G was one of New Zealand’s major insurance companies until its merger with National Mutual.  Wellington was the home of T & G's New Zealand head office from the time it was established in the country in 1903.  The Harcourt’s building is historically significant as the company's head office for 55 years.

• Architectural Significance

The distinctive T & G architectural style, developed by the firm’s Australian architects, is well displayed in this building.  It is aesthetically significant for its bold, sculptural facade, a prominent element in the Lambton Quay streetscape, and perhaps the best example in the city of the so-called Chicago style pioneered by Louis Sullivan and other architects.  This style sought to establish proportions and design features, as well as engineering practices, particularly appropriate to tall buildings.  The term “stripped classicism” is sometimes used to describe this style.

The T & G building is a worthy representative of the transitional period between the Classical revival and Art Deco movements. The building uses contemporary materials of structural steel and reinforced concrete in an imaginative manner combined with the formality of classicism.  This is a prestige building representing the best in design and finishes of its time.

The building is in remarkably authentic condition, both outside and in significant interior spaces.

 

• Townscape and Landmark Value

The T&G’s corner siting gives it a strikingly handsome presence.  The character and scale of the land and building are comparable to the nearby Harbour City Building (formerly DIC) and together they form a coherent and pleasing architectural statement. Moving further north along the east side of Lambton Quay, the Kirkcaldie’s Building façade, the former State Insurance Building, and the former Public Trust building, represent an important streetscape of commercial buildings from earlier periods of the city.

• Assessment of Heritage Values
  

Attention is drawn to the Assessment of Heritage Values prepared by Salmond Reed Architects which forms part of the application under consideration.  In the Introduction this states:

The building is a notable building in the Wellington commercial centre and is an important artefact in the history of the insurance industry in New Zealand, and the roles these played in the shape and character of the main centres.  It is also significant as a work of architecture of the first half of the twentieth century in New Zealand, and at the time of its construction was considered to be a robust structure, capable of resisting damage by earthquake, a quality that it no longer enjoys.

 The report later quotes from the Conservation Plan for the building prepared by the same firm in 1999, as follows:

Harcourt’s Building has considerable significance in Wellington and New Zealand because of the following:

• Its association with the development of the insurance industry in this country, and the T&G in particular;
• Its architectural character and design, as an example of the early 20^th century Classical Revival style in New Zealand, its use of classical decorative motifs applied to both its exterior and interior, and the quality and consistency of its architectural detail;
• Its technical interest as an early building incorporating concrete encased steel construction;
• Its setting in the modern central Wellington streetscape;
• The survival of some original interiors of very high architectural quality.

The Plan also draws attention to

A high level of fabric integrity, including notably; finishes in the ground floor lobby, stairs and stair foyers, lift entrance doors (including indicator panels); and original ceramic finishes.

These assessments are a very accurate and valid statement of the considerable heritage merits of this building.

City Council’s Role

The Council has the difficult responsibility of balancing public safety, property rights, and heritage interests.

Historic Places Wellington urges the Council to give the most serious consideration to upholding the integrity of the Historic Places Act registration and its own heritage listing in this case.

Category One registration requires passing the test of special or outstanding historical or cultural significance or value. It follows that this high status is conferred only sparingly and in special cases. There is only a limited number of these in central Wellington. Category One buildings therefore demand a high degree of attention to their protection and preservation.

It has been notable that in the past ten years (apart from the exceptional case of post-earthquake Christchurch) only seven Category One buildings have been lost throughout the whole of New Zealand. Of these seven, two were lost to fires. Two were large railway bridges whose preservation was deemed impractical. Of the remaining three, one was in an isolated rural location and a safety risk. The remaining two buildings were in urban areas, one in Napier and the other in Whanganui. It would be a most unfortunate and notable precedent if the present application resulted in the first loss of a Category One building in a major city (apart from Christchurch).

The Wellington City Council has been a leader among local government administrations in its regard for past history and its use of heritage assets to enhance the city's liveability. If it were conversely to be a leader in approving the demolition of a central Category One building, this would signal that the Council has changed direction and is prepared to sacrifice its most important heritage assets without full exploration of possible options.

If full demolition is granted this is likely to have a profound effect on heritage not only in Wellington, but also setting a precedent for heritage building owners around New Zealand, that it is acceptable to demolish our architectural heritage, thus destroying our “Sense of Place”.

Historic Places Wellington urges the Council to refuse the application in its current form, i.e. the demolition of the building.

Structural and Economic Factors

Historic Places Wellington accepts that public risk and safety considerations are paramount in the inner city.  We note that the building is subject to an Earthquake Prone Building notice under section 124 of the Building Act 2004.  Strengthening and other remedial works are essential if the building is to have a future.

These issues are exacerbated by the problem of pounding between Harcourt’s and the adjacent building in the event of an earthquake.  Although there are ways of mitigating this problem they would result is a reduction in usable floor space.

The Harcourt’s building has significant issues in regard to the air rights and future development of the building caused by the redevelopment of the neighbouring HSBC Building.  This in turn means that substantial value has been transferred from the Harcourt’s building to the HSBC building, thus making any development by a new buyer of the Harcourt’s building probematic.  This is clearly shown by the financial calculations and current "as is" value in the Collier’s valuation.  Upon reading the various reports supplied by the applicant it is easy to see how the costs could blow out in trying to strengthen and refurbish the building within its current envelope.

Because of these factors it may be difficult to develop an economically viable scheme to strengthen and refurbish the building as is, and may require partial redevelopment of the property encompassing use of some of the air space above.

It has been well documented in the press that due to the Christchurch earthquakes building owners throughout New Zealand, and especially Wellington, are now paying the price in significant increases in insurance premiums. This has had a devastating effect on value of all buildings but most notably heritage and unreinforced masonry buildings built around the time of the subject building in the 1930’s.

Seeking a Solution

Nevertheless, Historic Places Wellington urges the Council to enter into discussions with the applicant to develop a viable proposal that preserves the most important elements of the building.  The full range of mechanisms available to the Council should be used to encourage this outcome.

From a heritage viewpoint, the best outcome would be to strengthen and refurbish the building in its present form.  Possible uses that would capitalise on the quality and character of the building might include professional offices or a small high-end boutique hotel.

Wellington is in need of a 5 star-plus hotel as has been shown by the possible options for a Hilton Hotel on the Wellington Waterfront.  It is understood that a hotel proposal has been talked about for Harcourt’s building in the past.  Such a development would require a lot of internal walls, which would in turn add the overall strengthening process for the building.

If this sort of outcome proves unattainable, then some degree of additional development would be required.  This should only be permitted if key elements of the building were retained.  Other measures, such as replacement of decorative features in lightweight materials, could assist.

Mechanisms open to the Council to assist in retaining the building include

• Use of the Built Heritage Incentive Fund for assistance to owners of buildings listed in the District Plan Heritage Lists or in a heritage area.
• Rating relief – This was provided to the owner of Old Bank Arcade, one of Lambton Quay’s icons, to assist in the redevelopment in the 1990’s.
• Remission of fees when a resource consent is required because the building is listed in the District Plan Heritage Lists or in a heritage area.
• Use of Transferable Development Rights.  These were used in the 1980’s to facilitate some heritage building projects, e.g. the Old Public Trust Building.

Added to these might be possible changes at central government level.  The government is currently waiting on Royal Commission findings, with the first report due out in November this year. This is likely to provide guidance in reviewing the Building Act 2004, the Earthquake Prone Building policies, and what if any tax concessions may be offered to building owners to strengthen their buildings more quickly to make our cities safer places in which to work and live.

Historic Places Wellington understands that we are in difficult times, and that building owners need to make decisions and move forward soon as possible.  We realise that compromise will often be required to save some of our most important heritage buildings.  Those compromises should aim at preserving as much of the significant fabric of heritage buildings as possible.

There needs to be compromise from all parties, so that the benefits are also shared with future generations, and that the city can grow at the same time.

The city has some fine examples of heritage buildings that have been redeveloped and in some cases incorporated in new developments.  This has been done very successfully with the Old BNZ buildings and the Chews Lane development with the Ballinger building.

Conclusion

Historic Places Wellington recommends

1. that the application be declined.
2. that all options for retaining the building in or near its existing form be further explored and discussed.
3. that if preserving the building in its existing form proves impracticable, consideration be given to allowing a redevelopment retaining the most significant heritage features of the building.

 

John Daniels
Chairman
Historic Places Wellington Inc.