Compromise can be painful and empowering for Heritage: DCC on Former Art Gallery

Dunedin City Council
Media Release

DCC Reveals Plans For Old Art Gallery

The DCC is to apply for a Resource Consent which would allow it to modify the old Art Gallery building at Logan Park.

The Council wants to extend the size of the adjacent University Oval cricket ground to Test status and a Resource Consent to remove part of the old Gallery is required to facilitate this.

The Resource Consent option, which is an alternative to original proposals to demolish or relocate the complex, has been discussed with NZHPT whose stance is “supportive of” the modifications outlined in the application.

Part of the application, which has been described as satisfying the needs of both DCC and NZHPT and the various stakeholders by preserving most of the original building on its 1925 site, would also involve significant changes to the Sargood Wing, which was a later addition at the northern end of the old Art Gallery.

The building has been the subject of a Conservation Assessment, the main elements of which will be incorporated into a plan to guide the project and its future management.

The modification will assist Otago Cricket who will gain a playing area which meets the requirements for fixtures against all the major Test cricket playing countries. The new ground will have similar dimensions to the Basin Reserve in Wellington.

The Resource Consent application is proposed to be lodged by the DCC on Thursday 1 April 2010.

Contact DCC on 477 4000

Last reviewed: 23 Mar 2010 1:00pm

Post by Elizabeth Kerr

13 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Construction, Design, Economics, Politics, Project management, Site, Sport, Town planning, Urban design

13 responses to “Compromise can be painful and empowering for Heritage: DCC on Former Art Gallery

  1. wirehunt

    What a load of rubbish. So why are we building a new stadium????

    I am getting sick and tried of the council.

    Do they not know what their job is? It seems they need to be reminded of a few facts.

    Pissed off RATE PAYER.

  2. Russell Garbutt

    Dear wirehunt

    What an interesting question you ask.

    Why are we building a new stadium? Well, you may ask another interesting question. Why are the Highlanders based down at the Art Gallery site now and are exclusively using the DCC grounds round that facility? It would be good to get some answers from the DCC as to what payments have been received from the ORFU or the Highlanders franchise for the rights to use this ground for the pursuit of professional sport. Bet you won’t get one.

    The answer to your question, put plainly, is that the DCC, or rather a few fixated individuals within the DCC, are desperate to prop up this failed business and will spend your money, as well as mine, in order to preserve it at all costs.

    Why Otago Cricket is now based at the University Oval is, put simply, that cricket and rugby could not come to any agreement on the use of Carisbrook, and since the ground was owned by the ORFU, Otago cricket had to shift. Now that the DCC own Carisbrook nothing will alter. The DCC need to hold on to the ground so that the ORFU can hold a few matches that only a few will attend, and that it can be the fall-back position so a few can watch Georgia play a pool match during the so-called World Cup if the new rugby stadium is not completed in time.

    And to your last question.

    Does the Council not know what their role is?

    Oh yes, they do – suck the ratepayers of this City dry to pay for the pursuit of the ridiculous by the few. You know what to do?

    Make sure that you don’t register any vote whatsoever for the likes of Chin, Walls, Guest, Collins, Acklin, Bezett, Weatherall, Brown, Noone for a starter – these are the individuals that are driving this.

    • Elizabeth

      See heritage-related comments at Public meeting: planning the future of Dunedin heritage buildings. You might want to take this one into account.

      • Elizabeth

        ### ODT Online Wed, 24 Mar 2010
        Building makes way for cricket
        By David Loughrey
        Dunedin should have a cricket field big enough to host major tests from next year, after a compromise was hammered out between the Dunedin City Council and the New Zealand Historic Places Trust. The compromise means the trust will support the council’s resource consent application to demolish part of the protected historic former art gallery at Logan Park, as long as the council places a binding covenant on its title ensuring the remainder of the building stays put.
        Read more + Images

        ### ODT Online Wed, 24 Mar 2010
        Big is good – Dykes
        By Adrian Seconi
        Bigger is better, as far as Otago Cricket Association chief executive Ross Dykes is concerned. If the proposed demolition of a section of the former Dunedin Art Gallery goes ahead, the association will be able to press on with a planned expansion he hopes will see the venue attract regular tests against higher calibre opponents.
        Read more

        ### ODT Online Wed, 24 Mar 2010
        Cricket: Art gallery decision culmination of a lot of effort: Dykes
        By Adrian Seconi
        You might describe Ross Dykes’ push to have part of the former Dunedin Art Gallery demolished as a patient and diligent innings. Certainly the Otago Cricket Association chief executive has had to dig in and bide his time while the Dunedin City Council worked out how best to get on the front foot. But the four-year wait appears to have been worth it for Dykes with the DCC yesterday announcing it would apply for resource consent to remove a further three bays from the building situated at the northern end of the University Oval.
        Read more

        • Elizabeth

          Here’s an odd opinion piece – written by the reporter who carried two of the (positive) news stories yesterday about the old art gallery and the Oval – expressing doubt. A strange freedom of the press?!

          And, what has the sidelong comment about Dunedin resident Peter Entwisle got to do with any of it – absolutely nothing. I note Peter has not been quoted directly, so why include the passing reference? I don’t know Adrian Seconi, or his journalistic skills, maybe he’s having a bad week.

          ### ODT Online Thu, 25 Mar 2010
          Is expanding the Oval worth the price tag?
          By Adrian Seconi
          It is the envy of every English village but is the proposed expansion of the picturesque, tree-lined University Oval worth the $5 million price tag? If the Dunedin City Council gets the go-ahead to remove a section of the former Dunedin Art Gallery situated at the northern end of the ground – and it seems a fait accompli – then the Otago Cricket Association can push on with a planned expansion which it believes will future-proof the venue.
          Read more

          ****

          COMMENTS AND REPLIES originally posted on this thread that are stadium related have been moved to Stadium designers justify the unjustifiable to assist archive search.
          -Eds

  3. wirehunt

    Elizabeth, this is very much a part of ‘the stadium’ If it was indeed of a proper size there would be no need whatsoever to commandeer the park. But it seems that is a much more attractive way to do things.

    Was the Brook not meant to be for all? Is this not in fact some kind of prize because the rest has gone to shit?

    Or does Council just need to get rid of even more money? The root of the whole thing comes from one place.

  4. James

    The Brook was a dismal place to watch cricket.

    BUT, to topic, I found this great picture of the exhibition in the National Library Archives today. It might be the same image that they had in Gardens New World over the meat chiller.

    Incidentally, I just realised that you can actually see the existing building I think. It’s just behind the smaller dome to the right of the main dome (if you zoom in).

    • Elizabeth

      Further to your photo link, James – here’s the Heritage New Zealand Category 1 registration information for the old art gallery at Logan Park: List No: 2149

      • Elizabeth

        ### ODT Online Fri, 26 Mar 2010
        Editorial: Playing ball
        Compromise, by its very nature, comes at costs to all parties. And so it is with the agreement between the Dunedin City Council and the Historic Places Trust over the former art gallery at Logan Park.
        Read more

  5. wirehunt

    This compromise you talk about Elizabeth. Where is it between rugby and cricket around here?
    I must have missed that day.

    The only compromise that seems to be going on to me is with our money and our assets. The council seems bent on compromising the position of the ratepayers by spending every last cent. So now getting the ok somehow for the stadium that means we have given the green light for everything.

  6. Elizabeth

    ### ODT Online Sat, 14 Aug 2010
    Work on former gallery approved
    By David Loughrey
    Work to demolish three bays of the former art gallery at Logan Park, in Dunedin, should start within weeks, after the release yesterday of a resource consent decision allowing the work to go ahead.
    Read more

    ****

    The resource consent hearing was held on 16 June 2010. Dunedin City Council was the applicant.

    The written decision acknowledges the primary point I made at hearing, and this flows into the conditions attached to the resource consent:

    [Summary of Evidence]
    Commissioner [David] Benson Pope raised the issue of further architectural information and the need for “well-articulated renderings” as set out in the submission of Ms Kerr. Ms Kerr’s submission suggested that the information was necessary in order to assess the effects of the proposal upon its setting. Mr Shane Roberts [an independent planning consultant from Opus, author of the Section 42A Report on behalf of Dunedin City Council] disagreed with the need for further information and felt that an adequate level of detail had been provided by the applicant.”

    [Evidence of Submitters]
    “Ms Elizabeth Kerr…advised that her stance on the application was neutral but submitted that the Committee needed further information before coming to a final decision. She believed the architectural renderings supplied were rather minimal and schematic and lacked accuracy. Ms Kerr, overall, was largely supportive of the concept but felt that more detail was required on the finish of the building as it related to the cricket ground. She also expressed concern in regard to the tightness of the curtilage proposed around the building.”

    [Evidence of the Council’s Heritage Planner] “Mr Glen Hazelton…also agreed with Ms Kerr that the view of the grandstand from the cricket ground would be increasingly important and the treatment and materials used there would be important…”

    [Handling Officer Review of Recommendation]
    “…with respect to the parking issue raised by Ms Kerr, [Mr Roberts] noted that Transportation Operations had not raised any issues and that it was a matter largely outside the scope of the hearing. He did, however, indicate that a parking management plan would be a postive thing to develop for the future development of that part of Logan Park.”

    [Applicant’s Right of Reply]
    Ms Lauren Semple [a solicitor from Anderson Lloyd Lawyers, leading the applicant’s team] “agreed with Ms Kerr that Logan Park was not just another park, it was very well utilised”.

    [Reasons for the Decision]
    [Re landscape and amenity effects] “…the Committee did share the concerns raised by Ms Kerr and Mr Hazelton in relation to the link between the new southern elevation and the cricket ground and how that may be designed. Mr Ross Dykes [Chief Executive, Otago Cricket Association Incorporated] told us that the cricket ground developed to the proposed dimensions will ensure that the major cricket nations regularly play in Dunedin and that Dunedin would gain significant world wide exposure as a result. With South Africa scheduled to tour New Zealand as early as 2011/12, the quality of both the interim finish and final design of the southern elevation was of concern to the Committee. The further information provided by the applicant on this matter satisfied the Committee that the treatment of this elevation will be appropriate given its importance as the elevation viewed by those watching cricket at the ground or on television across the world.

    Consequently, the Committee agreed with both planners’ conclusion, that the proposal also passes through the effects limb of the section 104D gateway test.”

    [Conditions]
    “2 That the interim finish of the southern elevation of the building shall be in general accordance with option 2 as presented in Jackie Gillies & Associates letter dated 12 July 2010 and the associated drawing sketch number A3-10 (Appendix B).

    3 That the final finish of the southern elevation of the building shall be completed within 18 months of the demolition work having been completed. Demolition shall take no longer than three months to complete.”

    [my square bracketing and bolding in the paragraphs above]

  7. Stu

    If only there was some kind of system that could be used to augment the current view with proposed architectural drawings and views of future development…

    • Elizabeth

      Oh I agree. Plus I expect a higher standard of drawing than often appears at consent hearings. Most often, little relationship to context is shown by the architects and developers – it’s infuriating, especially when I know that as competent professionals they’re capable of producing this type of information by low tech or CAD means.

      In actual fact, Ian Taylor (Animation Research et al) can show you what his firm does in imaging (proposed) large building developments in the landscape context… plus the Department of Surveying has access to an amazing imaging machine that it shares six-monthly with Australia, it can get right down to showing the tree leaves in the existing landscape… that might be pushing things a bit far by analogy but it can be used to ‘get the picture’ for superimposition of building proposals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s