The following is the text of the Historic Places Canterbury Submission on the Natural and Built Environment Bill Exposure Draft.
Submitter Details Full Name:Historic Places Canterbury Contact: Lynne Lochhead
Submission to the Environment Committee Inquiry on the Natural and Built Environments Bill Exposure Draft
Historic Places Canterbury (HPC), an independent regional society affiliated to Historic Places Aotearoa (HPA). HPC is the NZHPT (now Heritage New Zealand) approved body which the Canterbury Branch Committee transitioned to. Our objectives are the protection of heritage, providing local advocacy on heritage and promoting the education of the public in their appreciation of heritage values.
HPC welcomes the opportunity to comment on the exposure draft of the Natural and Built Environments Bill. We note that the exposure draft only deals with a selection of provisions and that others are yet to be drafted. For this reason it is difficult to know how the drafted provisions will relate to the still to be drafted provisions and what impact the full draft might have on views. Nevertheless there are a number of matters which we wish to address in relation to the exposure draft. Given our role as an organization concerned with promoting protection of heritage our comments will largely address the impact of the Bill on managing and protecting cultural heritage in New Zealand.
HPC supports the need for a major reform of resource management law. The existing legislation, despite an emphasis on sustainability, has failed to adequately manage the natural environment, with key environmental indicators getting worse every year. lt has also proven to be insufficiently responsive to major issues such as global warming. Numerous amendments over time have resulted in an Act that is cumbersome and increasingly complex. A complete overhaul is timely.
HPC welcomes the emphasis on pursuing positive outcomes within clearly defined environmental limits and the emphasis on a national planning framework. However we feel concern that despite the name of the Bill, the importance of the built environment is downgraded in this draft and that cultural heritage is significantly downgraded from its status under s. 6 of the RMA as a matter of national importance.
MEDIA STATEMENT ON THE NEED TO RETAIN THE THREATENED NG BUILDING From: Christchurch Civic Trust and Historic Places Canterbury.
The Christchurch Civic Trust (“CCT”) and Historic Places Canterbury (“HPC”) strongly support the retention of the historic NG building, 212 Madras St. “Our primary aim is to see this important heritage building retained for the city’s future,” said Mark Gerrard, Chair of HPC.
Professor Chris Kissling, Chair of CCT said “We object to the fate of the building being a matter subject to special post-earthquakes legislation by which normal RMA democratic process is bypassed. Much to the detriment of democracy and the city, this approach was freely used by the National-led government and now, in several other instances by the Labour government.”
“The NG building was not included at the time CCDU was compulsorily acquiring properties in the Madras St area,” continued Dr Kissling. “Owners Roland Logan and Sharon Ng have shown incredible determination in retaining, earthquake strengthening and fully restoring this wonderful building. It will be manifestly unfair if LINZ does not honour the promise CERA made to them that their building would not be included at a later date in the acquisitions and that the historic building was capable of being incorporated in the design of the all-purpose arena”. He noted that the NG Boutique Café and Gallery was awarded a Category A Award in the Christchurch Civic Trust Annual Awards in 2009. “We are proud to continue our support for this building and its owners Roland Logan and Sharon Ng in their hour of need”.
“We appeal to the Minister for LINZ Hon Damien O’Connor to intervene and direct his ministry to act in good faith towards the owners”, Chris Kissling continued. Kissling and Gerrard are appalled that ten tears after the earthquake event, strong-arm government action is still being used to deny public participation, bypassing the RMA. “We would like to remind the Government that in opposition firstly Grant Robertson and then Jacinda Ardern, as spokespersons for heritage, were vocal in their condemnation of the National-led government’s ‘scorched earth’ treatment of post-quake Christchurch heritage, including the widespread use of the s38 and the compulsory acquisition of inner-city sites for various redevelopment projects.”
CCT and HPC wholeheartedly support members of the public who have written to The Press urging the designers to exercise their utmost creativity to ensure that the building becomes an integral part of the complex. Retention and integration of the distinctive exterior and wonderful interior, complete with its original kauri match lining walls and kauri flooring, would provide a vivid link to this site’s past and a shining example of how old and new can co-exist. It is an important reminder of the commercial buildings of the past which are all too rare in the city.
TheChristchurchCityCouncildocument‘OurHeritage,OurTaonga–HeritageStrategy 2019 – 29’ shows that context and function are important parts of what constitutes ‘heritage’; this building was a key part of the commercial urban fabric of the city for well over 100 years and it stands as one of the very few survivors in this part of the city. From the document: Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner, Introduction p4 “Our heritage is precious and valuable. It has social, cultural, educational, recreational and commercial benefits. It contributes to our cultural wellbeing and brings visitors to the district.” Executive Summary P 10: “We have always shown pride in our heritage, and have a long history of striving to protect it. The loss of our heritage buildings and places as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes changed Christchurch forever. ... It has also raised awareness of the importance of retaining our remaining built heritage as being vital to the district’s identity.” (our emphasis)
“Intheextremelyregrettableeventofitbeingdeemedabsolutelyimpossibleto incorporate the NG building into the stadium, HPC and CCT would fully support relocation to a nearby site, if requested by the owners, who have investigated means by which this could be achieved,” said Mark Gerrard. He notes that Murray Strong, Chair of the arena’s project delivery company appears to be very interested in the possibility of a location move for the building. “Heritage New Zealand Poutere Taonga and Christchurch City Council Heritage Team would need to be fully involved in this process,” Gerrard added.
RossGray,DeputyChairofbothgroupssaid,“Withclimatechangeinmind,wewishto draw attention to the part the retention of existing building stock can and should play in mitigating the effects of climate change. The adage that ‘the greenest building is the one standing’ has unfortunately not been a guideline for the treatment of heritage buildings post-Canterbury earthquakes.”
“Cement production alone accounts for about 8% of global CO2 emissions. As it is, the destruction of AMI stadium and the construction of the enormous new covered all-purpose arena will incur a heavy environmental toll. The retention of the embodied energy of the building along with the retention of its invaluable historic record should be regarded as essential and complementary aspects of the development of this new Christchurch facility,” Gray said.
10. Christchurch Civic Trust and Historic Places Canterbury urge all parties to work together to achieve a win-win for heritage, sport and culture – and for the environment.
Background: The Arts Family and their Historic Duncans Building “Shop”. Pre-quake: Nicky Arts and brother Joe ran a family printing business in the Duncan's Building shop they owned. Since the earthquake they have wound down the Printing Business and sold off the equipment. After much effort, their heritage Duncan's building “shop” is now restored, earthquake strengthened and tenanted upstairs and downstairs.
The Heritage Blue Plaque project: The Heritage Blue Plaque project was initiated by Historic Place Mid-Canterbury, It was endorsed as a national campaign by Historic Places Aotearoa and its Membership Organisations. The Function of the distinctive plaques is for heritage buildings to be easily identified when travelling in a city or town. The Plaques individually and collectively raise the profile our Heritage Buildings. The Heritage Blue Plaque project is grassroots community lead. Local heritage groups have final approval and funding is sourced locally by fundraising or building owner contribution.
Historic Places Canterbury Chair Mark Gerrard gave a verbal Deputation supporting the Staff Recommendation that the Heritage Funding that was not dispersed due to COVID-19 be carried over. In addition HPC supported the proposed new more relaxed criteria for qualifying for Heritage Grant Funding and the proposed criteria for the new Intangible Heritage fund.
Chair Mark Gerrard presenting the HPC Deputation appears 52 minutes and 38 seconds into the Youtube video.
Christchurch mayor devises plan to pay for heritage buildings The Press online. "Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel wants the city to consider paying a targeted rate to help fund the restoration of heritage buildings. She says her proposal will not increase rates. ..." ... Historic Places Canterbury chairman Mark Gerrard said it was good to see Dalziel thinking about ways to fund the restoration of heritage buildings, including the provincial chambers. ..."