Is this the end of heritage buildings

[eri]

sense from simon

There is risk in everything we do. It is striking the right balance that is the trick, and the legacy of the Canterbury quakes may have been to put the chance register right out of kilter.
By the time it resettles, for example, we may have lost the great bulk of our unreinforced masonry buildings across all our towns and cities, and along with them, the majority of our built heritage - despite the fact that the single largest contributor to the toll, the CTV building, belongs to the modern era.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/blogs/opinion/8340368/Cunliffe-Life-its-a-risky-business

[Bob Kane]

Owner may leave heritage block empty for 15 years

Wellington developer Mark Dunajtschik, who has been denied permission to demolish the heritage-listed Harcourts building in Lambton Quay, says he may appeal the ruling or just leave the vacant building as it is for another 15 years.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/business/commercial-property/8373514/Owner-may-leave-heritage-block-empty-for-15-years

If he can't demolish his building then I'd suggest he leave it empty.
After a while some squatters will occupy it and start a few fires.
Once it gets into a dangerous state then it will have to be demolished.

[Davo36]

Yep, this could happen all up and down the country. There's 25000 buildings that may need strengthening, and it will only be economically viable for some of them.

[Bob Kane]

Who will buy an old building now?
The tide has turned.
The heritage building protection league needs to be disbanded or outlawed.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=10868962

Multibillion-dollar surprise for proprietors of heritage sites: lawyers

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=10868961

Strengthening 'a cost burden with no return'

[gavinc]

It's not only heritage that is affected. I was looking at an apartment built in 1968, 32 apartments on 8 floors so falls under the multi occupancy rules. Decided not too because of the risk that big costs might arrise down the line.

[Maccachic]

What happens when the 10-15 year limit is up? What are they going to do to enforce it, take the buildings off owners?

[w44vi]

What happens when the 10-15 year limit is up? What are they going to do to enforce it, take the buildings off owners?

As I understand it some councils will consider taking over ownership of buildings that owners have done nothing to improve there safety ratings

[Maccachic]

So ratepayers get lumped with the costs again.

[McDuck]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...y-for-15-years

If he can't demolish his building then I'd suggest he leave it empty.
After a while some squatters will occupy it and start a few fires.
Once it gets into a dangerous state then it will have to be demolished.

I used to wonder why people bothered with character houses and buildings…when I was a much younger fan of minimalism and functionalism.. older buildings seemed annoyingly decorative and dysfunctional, but as I became educated I started to appreciate craftsmanship, classical proportions and continuity with the past. Now I don’t understand or appreciate minimal architecture at all… it’s seems robotic and lacking a soul. If New Zealand was full of that stuff, why would people come to visit, you might as well be anywhere in the world.

[Glenn]

Well McDuck.
I do appreciate that not everyone views properties through a set of glasses that are filtered to only show those that return a dollar to the owner. Obviously the bulk of the wonderful buildings around the world that pilgrims do their pilgrimages to such as the Kabba in Mecca have nothing to do with making money.
However does it really matter that you are killed by a modern falling brick or an old one with wonderful carving on it. I seem to have had an unfair share of council officials telling me off over the years. I have noticed that the bulk of the views expressed by those officials was scaled by the commercial interests of the owners.
I think officials and dare I say the world have two sets of opinions.
Commercial ventures need a higher standard than non commercial.
So churches, bridges, towers, and momuments are permitted to just hang in there and it is the hand of God that kills you when they fall on you.
Shops and factories only fall down and kill you because the evil landlord did not care about those under the rubble.

[Davo36]

Oh and we're all filthy rich evil doers so we can pay to have them strengthened and still have millions left over. I'm sure that's the perception.

[Maccachic]

A new theme on the herald comments is - if you are not a filthy rich evil LL then you did something wrong and shouldn't be in the business.

[eri]

finally a plan for action on st.james

Auckland's historic St James Theatre will be restored and a neighbouring 39-level residential tower built in a project expected to create thousands of jobs.

.....

Funding is yet to be agreed but it is likely Relianz Holdings, Auckland Council and the Auckland Notable Properties Trust will each contribute, with funding from other sources also likely.

The St James Suites will feature 307 apartments made up of 16 three-bedroom, 120 two-bedroom and 171 one-bedroom apartments.
Relianz Holdings bought the site on Friday and said the apartments would go on sale from the plans in January.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...-gets-new-life

[Glenn]

Yes just saw it on TV news. The wonderful old owner is lamenting that he is not involved in its restoration.
Nothing like loving the stuff that used to fill his pockets with money.
I still dream about the wonderful times I had watching Davy Crockett etal there when I was a boy.
Goodness the world was so simple then. All I had to do was earn enough money to get into the theatre and buy an ice cream. When I got home the state housed me and my parents fed me regardless of what I had been up to that day.

[eri]

$10m to strengthen 1909 building

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/64406672/10m-renewal-for-heritage-building