Wharf Hotel and the former Gregg’s Coffee Factory, Fryatt St

Today Otago Daily Times columnist Dave Cannan kindly provided lift-off for a little social history project that’s dear to my heart.

At Facebook:

The call for information also appears at page 2 of today’s print and digital editions of the newspaper and at the ODT Facebook page.

We need STORIES – can you help?

Dave and I will be sharing information for publication.

We will take any stories people have, from any era – people can write a couple of paragraphs only if they want (email The Wash), or phone Dave with details.

I welcome a catchup with people hosting larger stories and more complex memories.

Contacts for Dave Cannan:
phone: (03) 479 3519
email: thewash@odt.co.nz
tweet: @thewashodt
http://www.facebook.com/thewashodt

The photograph of the ‘Glenlora’ at Dunedin Wharf was taken circa the 1890s. Glenlora was an iron barque of 764 tons, built in 1864 in Liverpool. Owned by Shaw Savill Line, the ship brought several thousands of immigrants to New Zealand between 1874 and 1895. Photographer: David Alexander De Maus, 1847-1925. D.A. Maus Collection – Alexander Turnbull Library.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post os offered in the public interest.

NZ Loan and Mercantile : Concept and master plan by architect Paul Ries

Letting the building “tell its story”, involves retaining and keeping exposed as many historic features as possible.

### ODT Online Wed, 4 May 2016
Redevelopment revised (+ video)
By Vaughan Elder
Owner Russell Lund’s previous plans to redevelop the three-storey 143-year-old heritage warehouse building in Thomas Burns St involved building 24 long-term apartments on the top floor, but he told the Otago Daily Times yesterday he had changed tack. He has brought over United States architect and friend Paul Ries, who has drawn up ambitious plans to convert the two top floors into more than 50 short-stay apartments, with the ground floor used as a commercial space.
Read more + Gallery

Otago Daily Times Published on May 3, 2016
Dunedin Loan and Mercantile building

█ Site Plan and Images: Paul Ries | Supplied by Russell Lund

Related Posts and Comments:
6.8.15 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —meeting tomorrow
13.3.15 Making heritage work | Dunedin New Zealand
28.11.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —Resource Consent granted (pics)
26.11.14 Retraction (see comment on ‘Heritage Counts’)
26.9.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —what ESCO said!
30.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing
24.10.09 Rodney Wilson: Dunedin as national heritage city

█ For more, enter the terms *harbourside*, *heritage* or *lund* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Building Owner | Architect

Vogel Street Party —Sat, 10 October

Admission: FREE

The inaugural Vogel Street Party was held last year in conjunction with the first ever Dunedin Street Art Festival; this year’s event will again be staged in the warehouse precinct and will collaborate with the Dunedin UNESCO City of Literature group for a party themed around Literature and Light.

LITERATURE To celebrate Dunedin’s creative city status as a UNESCO City of Literature Dunedin, New Zealand. You can find us sitting alongside only 10 other cities in the world that hold this status, including Edinburgh, Melbourne, Dublin, Prague & more.

LIGHT As 2015 is the International Year of Light, the VSP will be Dunedin’s major effort to join in the world-wide celebration of light and light based technologies.

The events, exhibitions and activities will follow these themes and showcase the talent and creativity we have hidden in our city.

The Vogel Street Party 2015 — fun attractions for people of all ages.
PARTY STARTS 10 October at 3pm.
Note start times vary for Open Hours at Heritage Buildings.

█ Webpage: http://vogelstparty.nz/

█ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/1611938749075531/

█ Download: Vogel Street Party PROGRAMME

—

OPEN Buildings [excerpt from programme – click to enlarge]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Esco —‘just the global hardball player we always were’, sorry staff….

Esco Dunedin was among a group of neighbouring businesses objecting to Russell Lund’s plans to redevelop the 142 year old Loan and Mercantile building, citing reverse sensitivity concerns, including over noise. The outcome of Environment Court mediation talks was yet to be revealed, but Mr Kershaw said the issue played no part in the company’s decision. (ODT)

### ODT Online Wed, 2 Sep 2015
Foundry closure ‘a blow’
By Chris Morris
Australia’s mining downturn is set to deliver a “real blow” to Dunedin’s economy with the closure of the Esco foundry and the loss of dozens of jobs. Staff at Esco Dunedin were told yesterday the foundry would close by the end of the year, with the loss of 34 jobs. Esco products division president Jeff Kershaw, of Portland, in the United States, said in a statement the decision reflected a downturn in Australia’s mining industry that showed no sign of letting up.
Read more

—

TWO THINGS

█ Remember when Esco pushed this button (highlighted) at the NZ Loan and Mercantile Building resource consent hearing:

ODT Online [screenshot]

█ From file records, see Russell Lund’s percipient closing to hearing:

[para] 102. The biggest hurdle would seem to be the decline of the Australian coal mining industry. I refer to a Guardian article May 5, 2014 Australian Coalmining entering structural decline.

116. Esco have a large foundry operation in China. They employ 675 people in China.

117. I am very sure the production costs of Esco’s Chinese foundries are markedly less than in Dunedin, Portland or anywhere else. That is the ticking clock for the Dunedin foundry, and other Esco foundries.

118. The bottom line is that Esco will operate this small Dunedin foundry only as long as it serves their shareholders’ interests. If the market conditions dictate that consolidation is required and it is surplus to requirements, then they will act swiftly, as they did in Brisbane.

LUC-2014-259 RV Lund Applicant Right of Reply 22.9.14
(PDF, 6 MB)

—

Related Posts and Comments:
6.8.15 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —meeting tomorrow
13.3.15 Making heritage work | Dunedin New Zealand
7.1.15 Industrial Heritage Save: Cowes Hammerhead crane
28.11.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —Resource Consent granted
26.11.14 Retraction (see comment on ‘Heritage Counts’)
● 26.9.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —what ESCO said!
30.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing
16.3.10 Public meeting: planning the future of Dunedin heritage buildings
24.10.09 Rodney Wilson: Dunedin as national heritage city

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile*, *heritage*, *bradken* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —meeting tomorrow

“You can’t be too confident, but if we’re all reasonable I think an agreement is definitely within reach.” –Russell Lund

Farra Engineering chief executive John Whitaker agreed yesterday when contacted there had been “good work” during mediation.

### ODT Online Thu, 6 Aug 2015
Extra conditions may rescue project
By Chris Morris
Plans to breathe new life into Dunedin’s historic Loan and Mercantile building could be about to take a significant step forward. Building owner Russell Lund will meet a group of neighbouring harbourside businesses, as well as Dunedin City Council and Otago Chamber of Commerce representatives, tomorrow to discuss the stalled project.
Read more

—

Related Posts and Comments:
13.3.15 Making heritage work | Dunedin New Zealand
28.11.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —Resource Consent granted (pics)
26.11.14 Retraction (see comment on ‘Heritage Counts’)
26.9.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —what ESCO said!
30.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing
24.10.09 Rodney Wilson: Dunedin as national heritage city

█ For more, enter the terms *harbourside*, *heritage* or *lund* in the search box at right.

[click image to enlarge]

—

Post/image by Elizabeth Kerr

Design alternatives to (pre-selected) bridge not canvassed by DCC

GOODBYE to Rattray St VIEW Shaft from Queens Gardens to the waterside.

HELLO to other serious impediments to unique and very significant harbourside cultural heritage and landscape values at the planned city.

Here is another DCC-inspired critically dead PLONK OBJECT.
An overhead rail bridge. Who gains.

—

DCC files: Harbourside connector Rattray Fryatt Streets [click to enlarge]

—

It looks innocuous, nothing to scare the horses. A simple sling over the tracks at an estimated a cost of “about $3 million”.

What’s the fuss? Ahhh well.
The history of political deception through use of loose architectural sketches is tied (here as anywhere) to DCC departmental reports and estimates that hardly ever approximate REAL cost. Multiply by two.

Then the idea that the “hotel” is back on the drawing boards, if not a screw-us invitation to Asian investment for the south side.

By all means let’s escalate this (an idea) – the tame little cheapie bridge (pictured above, significantly downplayed structurally as a pencil mark) is another potential rort in the grand family of Council rorts that includes the Stadium*, Centre for High Performance Sport*, Carisbrook*, Dunedin Town Hall Redevelopment*, Citifleet*, City Forests*, Delta investments (severally)*, Cycle Network et al, and very probably the proposed Mosgiel pool if it gains traction for Taieri property speculators. For each, an independent forensic audit isn’t out of the question – for ratepayer ‘information’ that could depose the Council in favour of a Commissioner, presupposing later redress at Court. Visit resort to the *Crimes Act. Now, there’s a ‘visitor strategy’ for Dunedin !!

Meekly, more circumspectly (after all, it was just an idea, a stretch), those of us trained in architectural rendering and graphics as well as contemporary design philosophy of the marketplace know the tricks intimately; we’re not above exploiting them for a quick buck and a further string of new jobs by secret handshake.

Lucky for some, each deal at Dunedin (with links to Queenstown and Auckland if via Christchurch lawyers and accountants) can be sown up by a very small number of predatory boys. The same list we’ve had on our backburner books tracing the Stadium debacle —beginning to rise apparent at the ODT front page of Friday, 22 May 2015. An intriguing warning shot.

—

But is this right ? Has Dunedin City Council been wowed by just one bridge proposal ? Has DCC in the first place only ever been looking for a bridge —not seeking opportunities for alternatives, such as a designer underpass or an immediately legible automatically controlled crossing at grade, for light vehicle transit as well (shared roads) ?

It’s pretty poor and conflicting if Dunedin City councillors and senior council management have indeed sold out (under a red-carpeted table) to a lone solicited vision of an overhead bridge UNTESTED BY PROFESSIONAL COMPETITION – another signature WHITE model, to augment those other visions in WHITE for ORC sites at the Steamer Basin —nicely, satisfyingly calculated by that little list of club players.

It’s not hard to imagine that this mere slip of a concrete and steel flyover, is an “enlightenment” carrying the City re-brand. A cause célèbre for ego-fired DCC infidels and speculator man-pals. The very people who can’t bear to endure sage, conservative, long-term economic modelling for Dunedin, taking the city and region through 10 to 50 years of solid management to ensure business diversity and job creation. No, they prefer ad hoc spurts and short-term squander plans (how manly, even when couched as the soft-illustrated 2011 Central City Plan FFS).

Where, for this crossing, is the city council’s reasonably time-lined, broadly advertised, professional design competition with clearly expressed intent to utilise open tendering methods for architectural design, engineering and construction ??

TO SAVE US FROM COI’S AND RORTS.

****

The Otago Daily Times has learned the bridge is among only a few New Zealand projects vying for the next allocation from the Urban Cycleway Fund.

### ODT Online Thu, 28 May 2015
Bridge on funding short list
By Chris Morris
A multimillion-dollar bridge linking Dunedin’s inner city and waterfront has been short-listed for Government funds. […] An announcement is expected next month, and, if successful, the bridge could be considered for construction over the next three years.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC explains Harbourside subdivision in reply to Vandervis

Received from Sandy Graham, DCC Group Manager Corporate Services
Friday, 16 January 2015 5:06 p.m.

—

From: Sue Bidrose
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 3:59 p.m.
To: Lee Vandervis
Cc: Council 2013-2016 (Elected Members); Sandy Graham
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Lee

Here is the Planner’s discussion about the Chalmers subdivision in the paper today. They have given generic information about how such decisions are made (to be notified or non-notified) and then how those principles stacked up in this specific case. They have then also addressed each of your specific attributes for this particular subdivision (size, political interest, transparency etc.) and how much impact that each of these can/can’t have on their decision-making around making the application notified/non-notified. I know you know much of this background Lee, but as you cc’d all Councillors, I wanted a generic response for Councillors who are not Hearings Panel members, so forgive my ‘teaching Granny to suck eggs’ approach.

Attached is also a couple of sketches that the planner (Lianne) made for herself showing the subdivision at the start of the process, and then at the end, just for your information for those of you who are interested in knowing exactly which lots were affected.

Regards
Sue

Dr Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive Officer
Dunedin City Council

[click to enlarge or view PDF immediately below]

█ Download: Chalmers subdivision diagrams (PDF, 1.0 MB)

——————————

From: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 3:36 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose [DCC]
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Sue,

Please see below an email that Lianne has prepared in response to your query. I will also be sending some diagrams.

Please let me know if you need anything further.

Regards,
Jeremy

——————————

From: Lianne Darby [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 2:03 p.m.
To: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Subject: RE: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Jeremy

In response to Sue’s questions:

1. All subdivisions require resource consent. This is not a suggestion that there is a fault with subdivision, but is simply a matter whereby Council maintains control i.e. makes sure there is access, servicing, the land is geotechnically stable, etc.

The District Plan sets out the criteria for subdivision within the different zones, and where a subdivision meets the criteria, it is usually processed non-notified. In the case of the Port 2 and Industrial 1 zones, subdivisions are expected to comply with Rules 18.5.3 (access), 18.5.4 & 18.5.4 (requirements for esplanade strips or reserves), 18.5.6 (service connections), 18.5.9 ( a rule which has since been deleted and no long applies), 18.5.10 (lots in unserviced areas) and 18.5.12 (structure plans). Some/most of these rules will not be relevant to specific proposals. It should be noted that there is no minimum area or frontage requirements for lots in these zones. A subdivision meeting all these rules is a restricted discretionary proposal. It is worth noting the final paragraph of Rule 18.5.1 which states:

“… any application for subdivision consent involving a discretionary activity (restricted), the written approval of affected persons need not be obtained.”

… that is, a land owner may subdivide in accordance with the expectations of the District Plan for the zoning without needing to consider others as affected parties.

Subdivisions which do not meet the above rules (unrestricted discretionary and non-notified activities) are often processed non-notified as well if the proposal involves no change in land use, the non-compliance can be mitigated, or there are no consequences for neighbours, the general public or the District Plan integrity. For example, in the residential zones, new lots require frontage. Many lots do not have any frontage at all and the subdivision is a non-complying subdivision as a result. However, these lots will have rights of way providing them with legal and physical access, so the lack of frontage is not considered of any consequence. We do not notify these applications.

As a general rule, subdivisions are notified when there is a breach of density i.e. the new lots are undersized and will result in development at a greater density than the zoning would anticipate. This has the potential to change the wider amenity of an area or overload Council’s services, among other matters. However, if the land is already developed, then the subdivision of the land into lots smaller than anticipated is not usually considered a matter of concern as there will be no actual change occurring except on paper. For example, a lot with two houses could be subdivided into two undersized lots, each containing a house, without the subdivision being notified.

Large subdivisions are not notified simply because they are large. If the subdivision is in accordance with the District Plan expectations, i.e. meets the relevant rules, it will not be notified. For example, the large Mosgiel residential subdivisions currently underway have not been notified except for Heathfield which involved a lot of undersized lots.

Planning does not take into account political or commercial interests when processing resource consents.

2. The subdivision of Chalmers Properties was non-notified for several reasons.
a) It meets the necessary requirements for subdivision in the Port 2 and Industrial 1 zone. Any deficiencies there may be in servicing (e.g. the need for individual water connections) will be addressed as part of the consent conditions, as is typical.
b) There is no new development proposed. The subdivision is not for the purpose of creating vacant sites for new development. This does not mean that the new lots cannot be redeveloped, but this is not the purpose of the subdivision; nor is redevelopment dependent on the subdivision. The existing sites can be redeveloped at any time should the property owner desire.
c) The subdivision is not so much a large subdivision as a number of small subdivisions all being put on the same plan. We are starting with 15 existing titles and finishing with 34.
d) The new lots have, by my understanding, been selected mainly to coincide with existing leases. Council does not have access to lease information and does not know who the leaseholders are (barring door-knocking). Council does not normally consider lessees or property renters as affected parties as the tenancies are private agreements. The subdivision of the freehold parcels should not have implications for the terms of any leases or leasehold titles.
e) Many of the existing titles are comprised of multiple sections. The original subdivision created many small parcels, and these have been grouped into freehold titles to give the 15 subject sites. Section 226 of the RMA allows a property owner to separate these parcels onto separate freehold titles if certain conditions are met. This is not a subdivision, and Council does not have discretion to say ‘no’ if the conditions are satisfied. Many of the new lots follow existing parcel boundaries and could arguably have been dealt with using s226. Given the number of titles being dealt with and the fact that some buildings might actually, when checked by survey, be over boundaries, the applicant decided to deal with them all by a formal subdivision at once; a one step process whereby any breaches of buildings over existing parcel boundaries will not cause the project to stall.

3. As noted above:
a) Size. The size of the subdivision is not a deciding factor in notification if the subdivision rules are met. In this case, the subdivision is not so much a large subdivision as a number of small subdivisions dealt with together. There is no change in land use anticipated as a direct result of this subdivision as there are already established land uses for the new sites.
b) Political implications: Council does not take into account political implications when processing resource consents. Consents are assessed on their merits and not according to who the applicant is or where it is situated. The zone is the relevant factor, not the neighbourhood or the history of the area.
c) Planning implications: There are no planning implications associated with this subdivision. The subdivision meets the necessary rules as set out by Rule 18.5.1(iv) for the Port and Industrial zones. There is no minimum site size set for the zones, so there are no undersized lots. All lots are serviced and have access. They are already developed with lawfully established activities. Any existing encroachments of buildings over boundaries will be resolved by this subdivision. The subdivision is a restricted discretionary activity.
d) Public interest: It is difficult to see how public interest is relevant in this case. The subdivision does not challenge the integrity of the District Plan in any way, and this is the public planning document being applied. The terms of all existing leases should not be affected (and this is a matter between the property owner and tenants anyway, not Council). There is no change to the sites occurring as a direct result of the subdivision. While the new lots may be sold and/or redeveloped, the land is in private ownership and can already be sold and/or redeveloped. Council does not decide whether or not a property owner can sell their land. Redevelopment proposals will be assessed by Council if and when they arise.
e) Commercial interest: Council does not take into account commercial interests when processing resource consents. The RMA sections 74(3) and 95D(d) instructs a consent authority to disregard trade completion or the effects of trade competition.
f) Transparency: The applicant is a private land owner who is entitled by the District Plan to undertake certain activities on their land. While subdivision is not a permitted activity, Council does not decline subdivision applications where the proposal is in accordance with the relevant subdivision requirements and the land is stable (i.e. section 106 of the RMA is not triggered). This is not Council land, nor Council’s project. The resource consent application and decision are public documents available for anyone to view, and in this regard, there is transparency about the proposal. It was decided for the above reasons that the proposal did not need to be notified.

The consent decision makes evident that there are a large number of addresses involved. In a nutshell, the property owner has a large number of addresses which do not fully align with leases, which do not fully align with freehold titles, which do not fully align with buildings on-site. The subdivision seeks to tidy up, or rationalise, the landholdings for ease of the property owner’s administration, as noted in today’s Otago Daily Times paper.

Regards

Lianne

——————————

From: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 8:43 a.m.
To: Lianne Darby [DCC]
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

FYI…

—

From: Sue Bidrose [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 8:11 a.m.
To: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Cc: Sandy Graham [DCC]
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Jeremy
Please read the Councillor email below about why the subdivision in today’s paper was done on a non-notified basis. I need details on this – is it possible (please read the details below) to do this today?

I need the details about:
1. Generically: how a planner decides notified vs non-notified – the things you are legally allowed to take into consideration generically, not specifically this case – what are the RULES and steps for making that decision
2. Specifically: how those rules were applied and steps taken in this specific case

Given my response to the Councillors is quite likely be shared reasonably widely, it might be useful in answering that first dotpoint for you to imagine you are writing a sort of ‘guide to the notification decision-making process’.

Thirdly, it would be also useful if you could tell me specifically on how each of the following issues is allowed to have weight in that decision of notification:
Size (of subdivision/change)
Political implications
Planning implications
Public interest
Commercial interest
Transparency.

Jeremy, if you could cc Sandy in your response please, as we will disseminate the answer and all relevant emails the way we do with LGOIMAs – and I suspect we could well get LGOIMAs about this also.

Thanks
Sue

Dr Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive Officer
Dunedin City Council

—

From: [name redacted on forwarding to council staff]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 7:53 a.m.
To: Sue Bidrose [DCC]; Sandy Graham [DCC]
Cc: (all councillors)
Subject: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Dear Sue,
Why has the massive subdivision of 15 ORC properties into 34 lots [today’s ODT p4] been processed on a non-notified basis, given the size, political and planning implications, and public and commercial interest in this range of properties?
Notification is surely a necessary prerequisite for such a large range of subdivisions to be carried out in a transparent manner is it not?
Kind regards,
[name redacted]

[ends]

—

Related Posts and Comments:
9.1.15 DCC: Non-notified decision for harbourside subdivision
27.12.14 Port Otago Ltd + Chalmers Properties
17.11.14 Bradken keen to sell Tewsley Street premises
12.6.14 Dunedin’s industrial land
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC: Non-notified decision for Harbourside subdivision

Updated post 13.1.15 at 1:25 a.m. Map added.

Notice:

20 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 32 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 36 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 8 Bombay Street Dunedin, 10 Bombay Street Dunedin, 14 Tewsley Street Dunedin, 47 Willis Street Dunedin, 59 Willis Street Dunedin, 34 Mason Street Dunedin, 44 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 47 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 56 Willis Street Dunedin (SUB-2014-149)

This consent was an application to/for subdivision at 20 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 32 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 36 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 8 Bombay Street Dunedin, 10 Bombay Street Dunedin, 14 Tewsley Street Dunedin, 47 Willis Street Dunedin, 59 Willis Street Dunedin, 34 Mason Street Dunedin, 44 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 47 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 56 Willis Street Dunedin.

This was considered by the Council’s Senior Planner (Consents) on 25 November 2014.

█ http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/planning/browse-non-notified-decisions?result_146838_result_page=3

Information obtained from City Planning 12.1.15

Harbourside subdivision (SUB-2014-149)
Applicant: Chalmers Properties Ltd

“The proposed subdivision is to be undertaken in one stage, and will not create any vacant sites intended for development. Nor is any redevelopment of the new lots anticipated.” (from the Decision) ??? Are we sure….

█ SUB-2014-149 Decision (DOCX, 1.62 MB)

█ SUB-2014-149 Application 2014-10-30 (PDF, 9.33 MB)

Decision (final page) – Copy of Plan: Not to Scale. [click to enlarge]

DCC Webmap – Dunedin Harbourside [click to enlarge]

Dunedin City District Plan – Harbourside zones (detail) via Map 35 and Map 49

Heritage New Zealand – Dunedin Harbourside Historic Area # List No. 7767

—

DCC Ratepayers:

● 20 Cresswell Street Dunedin – Anzide Properties Ltd
● 32 Cresswell Street Dunedin – Anzide Properties Ltd
● 36 Cresswell Street Dunedin – McCormick Carrying Properties Ltd
● 8 Bombay Street Dunedin – Ross D Matheson, Mary K O’Hara Matheson
● 10 Bombay Street Dunedin – Nicen Ltd
● 14 Tewsley Street Dunedin – Ewen W Heather, Leanne M Kent, Russell S Melville
● 47 Willis Street Dunedin – Steel and Tube Holdings Ltd, Pacific Oriental Holdings Ltd
● 59 Willis Street Dunedin – Christie Paper Ltd
● 34 Mason Street Dunedin – Otago Daily Times Ltd
● 44 Cresswell Street Dunedin* – Graeme M Crosbie, Gillian K Crosbie
● 47 Cresswell Street Dunedin – Hyde Park Industrial Developments Ltd
● 56 Willis Street Dunedin – Development Six Ltd

*Note: Conflicting DCC mapping information for 44 Cresswell Street, Dunedin. Property adjoins 14 Tewsley Street, does not include 14 Tewsley Street.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
16.1.14 DCC explains Harbourside subdivision in reply to Vandervis
27.12.14 Port Otago Ltd + Chalmers Properties
17.11.14 Bradken keen to sell Tewsley Street premises
12.6.14 Dunedin’s industrial land
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Industrial Heritage Save: Cowes Hammerhead crane

Cowes Hammerhead crane at J S White Shipyard, Thetis Road

The 80 ton giant cantilever crane built of cast iron with a square tower of three stages with its base embedded in concrete was completed in 1911 by British firm Babcock and Wilcox.

—

via Twitter

Cowes Isle of Wight @cowesofficial Long over-due repairs to the iconic Cowes Hammerhead crane have been announced by the Isle of Wight Council. fb.me/1qTwdPn6v 24/12/14 12:38:54 a.m.

IOWCouncil Official @iwight Repair works to Cowes Hammerhead Crane to begin in March. Full details at iwight.com/news/Hammerhead-Crane-repair-works-to-begin pic.twitter.com/K57leaER1h 23/12/14 10:24:23 p.m.

TheVictorianSociety @thevicsoc Cowes Hammerhead crane named in Victorian Society’s Top Ten List of Most Endangered Buildings shar.es/1moLcS 9/10/14 4:12:22 a.m.

—

### onthewight.com Tuesday, 23 Dec 2014 9:35am
Isle of Wight News
Council make active moves to save important Island heritage
By Sally Perry
Repair works to secure the long-term future of the Cowes Hammerhead Crane are to begin in the new year after funding was received from English Heritage. Well done to all involved in moving this forward. The Cowes Hammerhead Crane is on English Heritage’s ‘at risk’ register and the organisation has put forward £76,000 to cover the costs of repairs to the famous structure. The council has appointed a specialist firm to carry out the works, which are due to begin in March 2015. The works will mainly see the corroded sections of steel from the crane’s tower replaced, with all new steel receiving a coat of paint. […] Clare Charlesworth, heritage at risk principal advisor for English Heritage, said: “Our grant towards the repair of the Hammerhead Crane means this nationally important piece of industrial heritage is one step closer to coming off the at risk register.”
Read more

****

Only remaining pre-WWI hammerhead crane
The giant cantilever crane was built within the first decade of these cranes’ development and is the only remaining pre-WWI hammerhead crane in England.

### onthewight.com Wednesday, 8 Oct 2014 8:07am
Isle of Wight News
Cowes Hammerhead crane named in Victorian Society’s Top Ten List of Most Endangered Buildings
By Joe O’Donnell
Last year the iconic giant cantilever crane in Cowes – used for the production of naval warships – was named Most at Risk by English Heritage, today it has been added to the Victorian Society’s Top Ten List of Most Endangered Buildings. […] Cowes’ industrial past is epitomised by shipbuilder J.S. White’s 80 ton hammerhead crane – installed to increase capacity for the production of naval warships. One of these, HMS Cavalier, is preserved at Chatham Dockyard as a memorial to the 143 British destroyers and over 11,000 men lost at sea during WWII. […] Earlier this year, Isle of Wight Council issued an urgent works notice to the crane’s owner after the crane was found to be structurally unsound. The owner is now disputing the urgent works notice but we urge the Council to continue to press to secure the future of this industrial landmark.
Read more

[click to enlarge]

█ English Heritage List entry – No. 1390949 (history and description)

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images: Cowes Hammerhead crane – (from top) cowes.co.uk | iwradio.co.uk | staticflickr.com [6938825525_abb3906851_z] | woottonbridgeiow.org.uk (mixed media to b/w by whatifdunedin) | cowes.shalfleet.net (1950)

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —Resource Consent granted

Dunedin City Council has granted resource consent with conditions (LUC-2014-259) to Russell Lund, owner of the former NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building, for the development of residential apartments on the upper (top) floor.
The building is located in the Port 2 zone and the Queens Gardens Heritage Precinct (TH12).
The entire external building envelope is listed for protection in the Dunedin City District Plan.
Heritage New Zealand has registered the former industrial warehouse as a Category 2 historic place and recognises its heritage values and significance within the registered Dunedin Harbourside Historic Area.
The building is pivotal to contextual readings and narratives for the Port of Dunedin, Steamer Basin, and reclaimed foreshore as much as future development in the Port 2 and Harbourside zones incorporating public access to the water’s edge.

Decision
The final consideration of the application, which took into account all information presented at the hearing, was undertaken during the public-excluded portion of the Hearing.
The Committee reached the following decision after considering the application under the statutory framework of the Resource Management Act 1991:

Land Use LUC-2014-259
Pursuant to section 34A(1) and 104B and after having regard to Part 2 matters and sections 104 and 104D of the Resource Management Act 1991, the Dunedin City Council grants consent to a non-complying activity being the establishment of residential activity within the NZ Loans (sic) and Mercantile Building and associated building alterations at 31 & 33 Thomas Burns Street, Dunedin, being the land legally described as Section 21-22 Block XLVII held in CRF 0T288161 (Limited as to Parcels) subject to conditions imposed under section 108 of the Act, as shown on the attached Certificate.

█ Download: LUC-2014-259 Letter of decision

Right of Appeal — In accordance with Section 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the applicant and/or any submitter may appeal to the Environment Court against the whole or any part of the decision within 15 working days of the notice of the decision being received.

—

[click to enlarge]

Recently, architectural historian Peter Entwisle assessed the building’s significance in the national context and recommended review of the registration status to Category 1. Earlier assessment work in the 2000s commissioned by the Otago Branch Committee of New Zealand Historic Places Trust and led by Elizabeth Kerr, included the achievement of two academic studies by University of Otago history student Stephen Deed with supervision from Dr Alexander Trapeznik towards Committee review of the building’s registration and establishment of a historic area on the Dunedin harbourside. Assessment work for registration of the historic area was successfully completed by the NZHPT Otago Southland Area Office. Unfortunately, ongoing restructuring within the Trust has meant review of the building’s registration has not been prioritised or resourced. It is hoped that Mr Entwisle’s strong research will lead Heritage New Zealand to mandate the work with some urgency.

Onwards…….

—

Related Posts and Comments:
26.11.14 Retraction (see comment on ‘Heritage Counts’)
26.9.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —what ESCO said!
30.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Post and images by Elizabeth Kerr

*All images lowres only at this webpage.

Retraction

Updated post 28.1.14 at 2:20 p.m.
Jump to latest comment —the Decision is in.

—

What if? Dunedin had been informed early this evening via a local heritage advocate via a local heritage group that resource consent had been granted for LUC-2014-259, NZ Loan and Mercantile Building, 31-33 Thomas Burns Street, Dunedin.

THIS WAS NOT CORRECT. NO DECISION HAS BEEN ISSUED.

The site owner regrets the misrepresentation and sincerely apologises to applicant Russell Lund.

Mr Lund has generously responded and indicated the post which I took down this evening may have been a touch previous, in other words the Decision is due fairly soon. WHATEVER that decision may be.

She said, dying a thousand deaths (interim).

The hearing for the application closed on 22 September 2014.

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Bradken keen to sell Tewsley Street premises

### dunedintv.co.nz November 17, 2014 – 6:25pm
Bradken’s move to Hillside Workshops foundry delayed
It’s been two years since Bradken announced it would move its Dunedin operations to the Hillside Workshops foundry. But the global company seems unable to sell its long-time premises in Tewsley Street. Bradken signed a five-year agreement with KiwiRail to lease the Hillside foundry. It planned to move its entire operation to the site, and expand capacity. Some workers have moved to Hillside, and the foundry’s been marked with the Bradken logo. But the company’s Tewsley Street premises remain open and on the market. Bradken’s been in Tewsley Street for almost 50 years.
Ch39 Link

Bradken Resources Pty Ltd, Mason St frontage (detail) | Derek Smith 2003

ODT articles:
25.1.13 Bradken tight-lipped over Hillside move
22.5.13 Bradken on the move
8.6.13 Bradken’s foundry site likely to be divided
5.7.13 Final day at Hillside
7.8.13 4-day week as Kiwi Rail tender lost
8.8.13 Otago unemployment up 37% on year ago
14.8.13 Bradken earnings down at $A183.6m
21.12.13 Rally helps keep Hillside hopes alive
29.12.13 Bradken staff back on five-day week

DCC Webmap – Bradken, 2 Tewsley Street, Harbourside [click to enlarge]

—

### dunedntv.co.nz November 14, 2014 – 7:02pm
Nightly interview: Des Adamson
There’s been good and bad news for the Dunedin business sector recently, with the closure of some operations and expansion of others. Des Adamson is the manager of economic development at Enterprise Dunedin, and he’s here to tell us about the state of business in the city. Video

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*In 2003 photographer Derek Smith generously shared two DVDs of Dunedin images he had made, for my use in heritage advocacy. These include industrial and commercial subjects.

Octagon: What?! DCC pointy heads actually care about small businesses?

So they should.

The following report will be tabled at the Council meeting to be held on Monday 3 November 2014 at 2:00pm (Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers).

█ Report – Council – 03/11/2014 (PDF, 1023.1 KB)
Options to Trial Pedestrianisation in Lower Octagon and Lower Stuart Street

Octagon to Steamer Basin, cherry stains by whatifdunedin

█ Octagon Webcam

█ [Agenda and Other Reports, including Financial for Monday]

—

The “do minimum” option – one of five options councillors will consider – has the support of lower Octagon and lower Stuart St business owners and retailers, who have banded together to oppose any road closures.

### ODT Online Fri, 31 Oct 2014
Council cools on Octagon trial
By Debbie Porteous
The Dunedin City Council may back away from trialling any ban or restriction on vehicles in the lower Octagon and lower Stuart St. Council staff are concerned rushing any “pedestrianisation” trial in the area could be costly and potentially have negative effects if it goes ahead without proper investigation.
Read more

—

Related Posts and Comments:
19.10.14 Dunedin: Randoms from inside warehouse precinct 18.10.14
● 3.10.14 DCC: Octagon entrée to more spending
● 28.9.14 “DCC entitlement” about to ramrod change at CBD #manipulation
24.9.14 Dunedin old boys, councillors & staff collude on 5-star accommodation
● 5.8.14 DCC staff-led CBD projects that impact ratepayers…
4.8.14 Cr Wilson’s integrity ‘in tatters’
23.6.14 DCC Annual Plan 2014/15 + Rugby and Rates
● 22.6.14 Vogel Street Heritage Precinct (TH13)
22.5.14 DCC Transportation Planning —ANOTHER consultation disaster
7.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 hearings
6.5.14 Roading network screwed by council staff
● 30.4.14 Octagon mud
21.4.14 Dunedin economic development strategy — low flying Year 1
1.4.14 HOTEL Town Hall… Daaave’s pals from… [April Fool’s?]
14.1.14 DCC: Hospital area parking changes #cyclelanes
24.12.13 Daaave’s $47 million Christmas present to Jinty. We’re paying.
4.12.13 Dunedin cycleways: Calvin Oaten greeted by DCC silence
17.11.13 Dunedin cycleways: Calvin Oaten’s alternative route
11.11.13 DCC: Councillors delegated street furniture decisions to staff
8.11.13 Dunedin Separated Cycle Lane Proposal
5.11.13 DCC, NZTA: Cycle lanes controversy
● 21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin…
24.9.13 Mediocrity and lack of critical awareness at DCC
4.9.13 Draft Dunedin City Transport Strategy
8.3.13 Stupid bid for two-way highway ditched for now #DCC
31.10.12 Cull’s council takes business away from retailers
● 26.10.11 Dunedin Harbourside: DCC “caved”

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images: etourism.co.nz – Octagon aerial; pxm-tut.com – cherry

Emerson’s Brewery #Dunedin

Founder Richard Emerson (via stoppress.co.nz)

█ Premium Craft Beer | Emerson’s Brewery Dunedin http://www.emersons.co.nz/

—

### NZ Herald Online 11:08 AM Wednesday Apr 10, 2013
Lion paid $8m for Emerson’s brewery
By Christopher Adams
Brewing giant Lion paid $8 million for Dunedin craft beer maker Emerson’s last year, according to documents filed with the Companies Office. At the time of the November takeover the Auckland-based company did not disclose the multi-million dollar price tag it paid for the South Island firm, which was founded in 1992, making it one of the most established and well-known craft brands in the country. But Lion is required to file its financial statements with the Companies Office due to its foreign ownership by Japanese brewer Kirin.
Read more

****

Emerson’s Brewery On The Move
Monday, 20 October 2014, 3:22 pm
Press Release: Emerson’s

Dunedin, New Zealand – Emerson’s, with support from Lion, has today purchased a new site in Anzac Ave, Dunedin where they plan to build a brand new spiritual home for this iconic New Zealand craft brewery. The new site will allow Emerson’s to meet increasing demand for its high quality beers whilst continuing to bring new and interesting beers to beer lovers. This is the fourth move in the Emerson’s journey and Founder Richard Emerson says the new site will be a vast improvement on the place they currently call home.
“Moving brewhouses and tanks is not new to us but this time, we want to create a place where people can touch, smell, taste and experience more about Emerson’s and its story,” says Emerson.
Emerson’s, supported by Beca who will be project managing the development locally, are progressing well with the plans for the site which will house a new brewery, warehousing, retail store and bar area where visitors can enjoy a beer matched with good food. Improved staff facilities are also a key consideration for the new development.
Lion’s Managing Director, Rory Glass says today marks the start of another exciting chapter in Emerson’s history and Lion is delighted to be able to help them reach their full potential.
“We stand by our commitment of allowing Emerson’s to continue doing what they do well – experimenting and brewing great beer and we are genuinely excited about helping Emerson’s to build a new home in which they can realise their growth aspirations now and in the future” says Glass.
Work is expected to get under way on the site in December 2014 with a target completion date for the new Emerson’s Brewery in early 2016. Final plans for the site will be shared more widely in due course but Emerson’s have extended their current lease at Wickliffe Street to cover them until the new site is fully operational.
For now however, it is business as usual for Emerson’s and the team remain focused on creating great beers for Emerson’s fans to enjoy.
Link to Scoop

****

DCC Webmap [click to enlarge]

Cr Hall had been in dispute with the council over access to his land for three years, after realignment of State Highway 88 during Forsyth Barr Stadium’s construction.

### ODT Online Tue, 21 Oct 2014
Brewery’s big plans revealed
By Vaughan Elder
An expanding Emerson’s Brewery is set to become a ”world-class” tourist destination now an agreement has been reached to buy a new site. The development – expected to cost in the millions – will be open for tours and house a new brewery, warehousing, retail store plus a bar and restaurant. The 22-year-old Dunedin brewery’s purchase of two adjacent pieces of land in Anzac Ave, belonging to the Dunedin City Council and Cr Doug Hall, also resolves a long-running access dispute over the land.
Read more

****

The global environment in which we operate has always meant swings and roundabouts for New Zealand goods and services.

### ODT Online Mon, 27 Oct 2014
Editorial: Swings and roundabouts
It has been a tale of two fortunes for city businesses this month. […] And as one door closes [Donaghys], another opens. Dunedin’s Emerson’s Brewery last week announced it had bought land on Anzac Ave, and would move from its nearby Wickliffe St site to build a multimillion-dollar expanded operation with a new brewery, warehousing, retail store, bar and restaurant. The company envisaged it would become a “world-class” tourist destination and the expansion would create jobs.
Read more

Image via 3news.co.nz

—

Related Posts and Comments:
2.9.13 SH88 realignment: decision to Environment Court?
3.8.13 SH88 notice of requirement [more maps]
30.4.13 DCC governance = management ?
20.11.12 DCC vs Anzide Properties decision: The road “has no legal basis”
27.5.12 SH88 realignment – information
25.5.12 SH88 realignment costs (injunction)
27.2.12 Bringing DCC, related entities and individuals to account…
23.8.11 Stadium project tangles
4.11.10 SH88 realignment for stadium disrupts traffic
21.7.10 SH88 realignment – update
7.7.10 Goodbye to great store buildings in Parry St
21.4.10 SH88 realignment – update
31.3.10 SH88 realignment
24.2.10 SH88 realignment: Are ratepayers buying the land twice?
20.11.09 Interesting. SH88 realignment.
2.9.09 SH88 realignment past stadium

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —what ESCO said!

Land Use Consent: LUC-2014-259
31-33 Thomas Burns Street, Dunedin
NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building

█ Application LUC-2014-259 (PDF, 4.0 MB)

—

[see related posts below] The consent hearing reconvened on Monday 22 September at 9:30 AM to hear closings of the city planners and right of reply for applicant Russell Lund. The hearing is now closed; commissioners Andrew Noone (chair), David Benson-Pope and Lee Vandervis are considering their decision.

Background to this post:
Following the initial hearing held on Tuesday 19 August, it is What if? Dunedin’s contention that Debbie Porteous, for the Otago Daily Times, provided news stories which failed to give appropriate weight and balance to submissions and evidence from supporting and opposing submitters, the applicant, and experts for the parties.

ODT stories:
█ 20.8.14 Demolition threatened; job loss possibility raised
Esco Dunedin site manager Dean Taig told the panel if the apartments were allowed next door he would have “grave concerns” for the future of the foundry which employed 39 people and had plans to employ 100 people.
[negative writerly tone]

█ 21.8.14 Businesses fear being driven out of area
It is a choice between buildings and jobs, a panel considering whether to allow apartments in a heritage building in Dunedin’s waterfront industrial area has been told. The district plan had already made the choice for them, lawyer Phil Page also said, because it said there could not be incompatible activities in the same area.
[negative writerly tone becomes shrill, no right of reply for applicant]

█ 29.8.14 DCC to foot apartments consent bill
The development is opposed by nearby industrial businesses, which are concerned about reverse sensitivity issues such as noise and smell and the effect of gentrification of the area on their future enterprises.
[stirring, ends with a negative, no right of reply for applicant]

What on earth had ESCO put to hearing?
● Evidence of Counsel for ESCO Dunedin Pty Ltd – D R Clay (Minter Ellison Rudd Watts Lawyers – Auckland) (PDF, 704 KB)
● Evidence of Dean Taig, site manager of ESCO Dunedin Pty Ltd Dunedin foundry (PDF, 246 KB)
● Evidence of Michael Smith, independent traffic engineering expert (Traffic Design Group) (PDF, 531 KB)
● Evidence of Shane Roberts, independent planning expert (Opus International Consultants) (PDF, 1.82 MB)

—

█ These snivellings from Ms Porteous ran counter to a supportive comment by editor Murray Kirkness on Saturday 6 September:

“It is certainly encouraging that another local developer is prepared to foot the bill to preserve a distinctive piece of the city’s heritage. It is to be hoped his plans go more smoothly than those for Russell Lund’s restoration and apartment conversion of the Loan and Mercantile building. That proposal is complicated by the fact it is in the wharf area and has been opposed by neighbouring industrial businesses. The council hearing into Mr Lund’s consent application resumes this month.” (ODT)

█ On Tuesday 9 September, reporter Chris Morris also cleared the biased air of Ms Porteous, with last sentences:

“Last month, building owner Russell Lund criticised a council planner’s decision to recommend declining consent for his planned redevelopment of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Building. That proposal, which has attracted more support than opposition, is still being considered, with an adjourned hearing set to resume later this month.” (ODT)

Heritage advocates are awaiting something/anything in print from Ms Porteous about the applicant’s technically fulsome right of reply given on 22 September. Why the delay, we ask?

It’s pleasing to learn Murray Kirkness kindly phoned Russell Lund this evening to say a story appears in tomorrow’s newspaper.
THANK YOU MURRAY !!
We look forward to reading this, we hope….

—

Related Posts and Comments:
30.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: wikimedia.org – NZ Loan and Mercantile Building by Ben C Hill for Heritage New Zealand [NZHPT]

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential

Updated post Wed, 3 Mar 2015 at 2:39 p.m.

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building, built in stages between 1872 and 1885. Historical building and harbour views (1925) before the addition of the concrete top storey with saw-tooth roof in 1929, the space now proposed for residential use. Details from photographs reproduced in Trapeznik’s book Dunedin’s Warehouse Precinct, pp 34 & 68 [Hocken Collections]

31-33 Wharf Street, proximity to Steamer Basin and Chinese Garden
[Google Streetview 2013]

—

ODT 29.8.14 (page 12)

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building with forecourt of Chinese Garden, from Rattray Street. [Elizabeth Kerr]

—

### ODT Online Fri, 29 Aug 2014
DCC to foot apartments consent bill
By Debbie Porteous
The Dunedin City Council is footing the bill to process the consent required for the development of the former Loan and Mercantile Building in the harbourside area. But the chairman of the panel deciding whether to grant consent to convert the building to apartments says the historic agreement has no bearing on the decision. The no fee arrangement is the result of a council resolution dated September 2011, in which the council agreed any resource consent required for the development and use of the building at 33 Thomas Burns St should be processed at no cost to the applicant. The resolution was part of a suite of agreements resulting from the mediation process that resolved appeals to Plan Change 7: Dunedin Harbourside.
Read more

—

Building details [Google Streetview 2013] – The NZ Loan and Mercantile Building, originally known as the Otago Wool Stores, was built in 1872 for stock and station agents Driver Stewart and Co. Heritage New Zealand lists the construction professionals as Walter Bell, Robert Arthur Lawson, and Mason & Wales Architects Ltd. According to Trapeznik, William Mason was the architect responsible for the plainer part of the complex in the early 1870s. RA Lawson designed the right-hand corner extension in 1880, with additions in 1883 and 1885.

█ More photos here.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing

█ For more on Dunedin’s Harbourside and Plan Change 7, enter the term *harbourside* in the search box at right.

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (b. 1872-85), next to the former W. Gregg & Co. coffee factory (b. 1878) and the Wharf Hotel established circa 1880
[Google Streetview 2013]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

● NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co. Ltd Building – mention by Alexander Trapeznik in Dunedin’s Warehouse Precinct at http://www.genrebooks.co.nz/ebooks/DunedinsWarehousePrecinct.pdf (2014) pp66-71

● W. Gregg & Co. coffee factory and store, Fryatt St – mention by blogger David Murray at http://builtindunedin.com/2014/02/17/thomas-bedford-cameron-architect/

● Wharf Hotel – mention by Frank Tod in Pubs Galore: History of Dunedin Hotels 1848-1984 (Dunedin: Historical Publications, 1984) p61

█ Peter Entwisle recently researched the history and significance of the NZ Loan and Mercantile Building, and presented his findings in evidence to hearing for the application (scanned):
LUC-2014-259 History and Heritage Significance of the NZL&MA Building 19.8.14 (PDF, 2 MB)

—

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix

Updated post 19.8.14 at 9:21 p.m.

Land Use Consent: LUC-2014-259
31 & 33 Thomas Burns Street, Dunedin
New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building

█ Consent Hearing reconvenes — Wednesday 20 Aug at 2:00 PM
ALL WELCOME | Edinburgh Room, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon

—

Related Posts and Comments:
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building…
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Post and images by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images: Public site tour held on Monday afternoon, 18 August 2014 – hosted by building owner Russell Lund in association with Stewart Hansen of the Wharf Hotel (50 participants)

Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #SiteTour #ConsentHearing

Land Use Consent: LUC-2014-259
31 & 33 Thomas Burns Street, Dunedin
New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building

█ Consent Hearing — Tuesday 19 August at 9:00 AM
Edinburgh Room, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon

█ DCC Planner’s Report (PDF, 4 MB)

—

Related Posts and Comments:
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: wikimedia.org – NZ Loan and Mercantile Building by Ben C Hill for New Zealand Historic Places Trust

Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage

Peter McIntyre and John Christie from the Otago Chamber of Commerce had lots to say about the rejuvenation of Dunedin’s heritage fabric and the city’s “vibrancy” after their trip to Portland, Oregon in 2011. What they said then is directly contradicted by the Chamber’s submission on the application for resource consent to redevelop the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Building (31-33 Thomas Burns Street) for residential use.

—

█ Full annotated copy | CoC Own Goals – Heritage (PDF 1.51 MB)

Related Posts and Comments:
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

NZ Loan and Mercantile Building

### radionz.co.nz Mon, 11 Aug 2014
Radio New Zealand National – Jim Mora with The Panel
The Panel with Michael Deaker and Sue Wells (Part 1) ( 23′ 8″ )
16:07 Topics – we’ve heard from the doctors union the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists that 42 per cent of our senior doctors now qualified overseas. [discussion starts at 14:50 minutes in] The grand old New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Building in downtown Dunedin, developer Russell Lund wants to restore this category two building dating from 1872 and create a 24-unit apartment complex but there is significant opposition due to noise concerns.
Audio | Downloads: Ogg MP3

█ http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/thepanel

—

Land Use Consent: LUC-2014-259
31 & 33 Thomas Burns Street, Dunedin
New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building

█ DCC Planner’s Report (PDF, 4 MB)

Related Post and Comments:
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: wikimedia.org – NZ Loan and Mercantile Building by Ben C Hill for New Zealand Historic Places Trust (now Heritage New Zealand)

NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building, 31-33 Thomas Burns Street

Updated Post 11.8.14

█ (audio) http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/thepanel

█ LUC-2014-259 DCC Planner’s Report (PDF, 4 MB)

DCC Hearings Committee:
Andrew Noone (Chairman), Kate Wilson and Lee Vandervis.

Look out for more in the news… see Comments on this thread.
DCC Planner (name): Darryl Sycamore
Points at issue in the report will be raised at this site, independently.

Disclaimer: Elizabeth Kerr is not a submitter on the application.

—

NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building [Photo: Ben C Hill for NZ Historic Places Trust via wikimedia.org]

█ Heritage New Zealand – Registration report and history (List no. 4755)

█ The well-loved building is one of a group of significant structures listed in Heritage New Zealand’s Dunedin Harbourside Historic Area (List no. 7767)

█ District Plan: Located in the Queens Gardens Heritage Precinct (TH12) and the entire external building envelope is listed for protection in Schedule 25.1 (item B106)

ODT 16.7.14 Plans for landmark building outlined [see ODT photos]
ODT 21.7.14 Excellent proposal to renew building Opinion by Peter Entwisle

—

### ODT Online Wed, 6 Aug 2014
Chamber resists apartment units
By Timothy Brown
The Otago Chamber of Commerce opposes residential development of a historic Dunedin building – arguing the proposal has shades of the costly and largely aborted harbourside rezoning. But building owner Russell Lund has struck back, accusing the chamber of ”knee-jerk nimbyism”.
Thirteen submissions supported the proposed redevelopment of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd building, while four were opposed and one was neutral.
Read more

—

DCC Residential conversion 31 & 33 Thomas Burns Street – LUC-2014-259
Closed: 30/07/2014

Notification of Application for a Resource Consent – Under Section 93(2) of the Resource Management Act 1991.
The proposal is to convert and utilise the second (top) floor of the former NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building for residential activity. There will be eleven three-bedroom apartments and twelve one-bedroom apartments established within the existing building. The exterior of the existing building will have new glazing, windows, balconies, doors, entry and south light modifications. There will be ten on-site parking spaces at the corner of Willis Street and Thomas Burns Street for residents’ use. […] The proposed residential activity within the Port 2 zone is considered to be a non-complying activity pursuant to Rule 11.6.4. The modification of the building is considered to be a restricted discretionary activity pursuant to Rules 13.7.3(i) and 13.7.3(ii).

A detailed set of location maps, plans and an assessment of effects are provided with the application. The application has been submitted with an acoustics report.

█ Read more, including application documents at the DCC webpage

NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building (render signed by HNZ 30.5.14)

█ For more, enter the terms *loan and mercantile* or *harbourside* in the search box at right.

—

Posted By Elizabeth Kerr

Hotel: Rosemary McQueen on consent decision LUC 2012-212 (41 Wharf St)

41 Wharf Street, Dunedin (DCC WebMap)

—

Copy supplied.
Also published at Otago Daily Times (page 17).

### ODT Online Wed, 26 Feb 2014
Opinion
Hotel decision was legal, not political
By Rosemary McQueen
Two related misapprehensions run through nearly all the comment on the application to build a 27-storey residential building in the industrial zone.

The first is that the reason the development was rejected was that a minority of noisy nay-sayers objected to the proposal. Yet, had 500 supporters put in submissions and only 4 or 5 naysayers, the decision would have been the same. The decision was not made on the basis of counting heads (though no doubt the planners were gratified that the District Plan’s provisions were so whole-heartedly supported by the populace) but on the basis of law. The developers want to build their accommodation block in an industrial area. Residential activity is specifically excluded from this area and only allowed at the discretion of the court hearing the application. Discretionary treatment can only be accorded if the effects of the variation to what is allowed are minor and the general intention accords with the aims and objectives of the district plan. The applicants’ arguments to this effect were rejected at law – not by counting heads. Until that decision is found to be wrong, or those aspects of the proposal change, it can not proceed.

There is also a view that the the city council could and should have found a way of overturning – or at least of getting round – the planning committee’s decision. This is a misapprehension because the decision is a legal one that can only be overturned by a higher court and the council is not a court. The negotiations that have been taking place have been around trying to find a site and design that complies with the city’s district plan and the developers’ needs. By describing the setback to the development as “red tape” the ODT implied that the development’s lack of progress since being rejected by the planning committee is caused by overweening bureaucracy. But Ms Song has made clear that the site and design are not negotiable. How can the lack of progress be the fault of red tape when the impediment is so clearly the developers’ intransigence, despite having had their application for that site and design turned down because it doesn’t meet the law?

By insisting the proposal is non-negotiable during their discussion with the city, the developers appear to believe that overturning the planning decision is on the discussion’s agenda and within the council’s power. Instead of dismissing any such suggestion, the ODT and the Chamber of Commerce have encouraged them in the view that the council can change or flout the law in order to allow the development to go ahead. Fostering these misapprehensions has led to unnecessary division in the city. It’s time to stop accusing bureaucrats and antis of holding up progress and start explaining why changes to our built environment are not effected by political whim, but are, and need to be, conducted by rule of law that has undergone full democratic process.

ODT Link

—

Related Posts and Comments:
14.2.14 Hotel: The height of arrogance
25.6.13 Hotel/Apartment Tower decision to be appealed

For more, enter *hotel* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Hotel: The height of arrogance

Don’t care how much you’ve spent on slapping Dunedin’s face, chook.
GO AWAY —give your ‘Swarovski crystal’ to some other place.

Bored housewife syndrome:
If you’ve spent a million already your consultants are out of control.

—

### ODT Online Fri, 14 Feb 2014
Harbour hotel now ‘a long shot’
By Chris Morris
The woman behind the plan to build a $100 million waterfront hotel in Dunedin says the proposal is now “a long shot”. Betterways Advisory Ltd director Jing Song, of Queenstown, told the Otago Daily Times she was frustrated by the delays and cost involved, after spending more than $1 million so far on pursuing the project at 41 Wharf St.
Read more

DEPLORABLY, Mayor Cull has held several meetings with the developers in Auckland “to try to advance the project”. The Mayor deliberately mixes HIS politics with a resource management matter, SHAME.

*Mr Rodgers is Mr Cull’s personal solicitor.

—

Related Post and Comments:
25.6.13 Hotel/Apartment Tower decision to be appealed

For more, enter *hotel* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

‘Hotel’ Hucksters wanna spend $60M at Dunedin

That’s the news or THE MONEY on tonight’s Channel 39 as ODT sprayed saliva over what’s in the newspaper tomorrow. You got it. The Jing-Song-Pings, post-teenagers from hell. HONEY, THEY’RE BACK.

Updated post.

THAT was the fear. Please, not the tasteless cardboard box crew again! Their idea of architecture is merely ‘building’ and gross affrontery to Dunedin’s cultural heritage landscape, not SYMPATHETIC CONTEXTUAL DESIGN.

So, yeah maybe it’s another anonymous bunch who are too conniving or stupid to front to the good people of this small town. Obviously, they’re known to DCC and the Chamber and those who share their pillows, as it turns out. Lovely! Dunedin’s public treated with ignore by our civic leaders and their honkies yet again. Look how that turned with the stadium project. And why the media release ahead of faces, why do that? Why be so crass, desperate and manipulative? —it feeds directly into the deep distrust held for Dunedin City Council by this community. This is no democracy. Where is the openness and transparency we’ve been promised for SO LONG, and not had delivered ??!!

The (blind) Channel 39 announcement came on the heels of a good number of searches at this site lately, in both Jing Song’s, Cao Ping’s and her father’s name — a man known to Michael Hill of Eiontown — no wonder we’re completely off the scent, or was it MISINFORMED.

Chinese plans for Dunedin school
Chinese investors with plans for a $60 million international school have chosen Dunedin as their preferred location, and hope to open a facility within three years.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/290486/chinese-plans-school

But let’s refresh on the horrific notification and resource consenting process followed by the Jing-Song-Pings for the proposed waterfront hotel (via posts and comments) as a check on what happens for the proposed “school” with Daaave and Ali’s (Jinty got bounced) lack of red tape. Carpet, anyone?

—

Related Posts and Comments:
12.1.14 Dunedin (apartments) Hotel: Better ways to lipstick a pig
7.1.14 Dunedin Hotel (apartments): Who ARE the developers?
27.8.13 41 Wharf Street —DCC ends debacle
24.7.13 Tauranga: Office leases to cover potential losses from hotel
25.6.13 Hotel/Apartment Tower decision to be appealed
18.6.13 Hotel: COC’s greasy spoon race. Ugh!
5.6.13 Hotel decision . . . (the vacuum)
4.6.13 WATERFRONT HOTEL #DUNEDIN
24.5.13 41 Wharf Street —consent renewed, with HOTEL decision pending
18.5.13 Waterfront hotel investigation II
18.4.13 ‘Heartbreak Hotel’ —Grahame Sydney
18.4.13 Hotel: Grahame Sydney on tenants for 164 apartments
15.4.13 University buys LivingSpace Dunedin
15.4.13 Shane McGrath —Gelber LuftBallon (Dunedin Research Project)
14.4.13 Ballooning! —playing off Betterways
12.4.13 Christchurch: HOTELS with Chinese investment pending
4.4.13 Towering inferno: Fire engulfs luxury apartments and 5-star hotel
16.3.13 Hotel: COC jollies and sweet cherry pie
23.1.13 Proposed hotel: Council and submitters await detailed information
28.12.12 ‘Low-rises are great for the community and the residents’
24.12.12 A Christmas Tale
21.12.12 Proposed hotel – ODT graphic indicates building height
19.12.12 Hearing for proposed hotel – competencies, conflicts of interest?
16.12.12 Proposed Dunedin Hotel #height
10.12.12 Proposed hotel, 41 Wharf St – “LEARNING FROM LAS VEGAS”
7.12.12 Proposed hotel – Truescape shenanigans
6.12.12 Dunedin Hotel – revised design
2.12.12 Roy Rogers and Trigger photographed recently at Dunedin
26.11.12 Proposed hotel, 41 Wharf Street – indicative landscape effects
20.11.12 City planner’s report recommends against consent for hotel
10.11.12 Dunedin Hotel, 41 Wharf Street (LUC 2012-212)
4.10.12 DUNEDIN: We’re short(!) but here is some UK nous…
8.9.12 Waterfront Hotel #Dunedin (Applicant names?)
7.9.12 Waterfront hotel: DCC to notify resource consent application
23.6.12 Mis(t)apprehension: website visits, not bookings?
16.5.12 Dunedin Hotel

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

41 Wharf Street —DCC ends debacle

Fear not! More costly settlement is due.
There’s the perplexing State Highway 88 Realignment Project for Council to conclude with affected parties damaged by foul-play planning activity, and the new round of ‘proper’ designation! This will make Mr Barnett’s cheque seem like a 4% discount fuel voucher ripped from a mile-long supermarket receipt for your best ever, most hair-raising Christmas shop!

### ODT Online Tue, 27 Aug 2013
Apology, payout to developer
By Debbie Porteous
Dunedin developer Tim Barnett has received a public apology and a $200,000 payout following a lengthy battle to recover his costs after the Dunedin City Council restricted his ability to develop his harbourside property. The property, at 41 Wharf St, has since been sold to developers who are hoping to build a 27-storey hotel on it.

41 Wharf Street, Dunedin [DCC WebMap]

DCC chief executive Paul Orders yesterday apologised to Mr Barnett, of Arthur Barnett Properties, for the inconvenience caused by the council’s decision-making since 2008. The formal apology, issued by Mr Orders yesterday, read:

”Council apologises for the inconvenience, and also thanks Mr Barnett for working with council in good faith as the parties explored options over some years. Mr Barnett has a long history of commitment to the city of Dunedin. Council trusts that the good working relationship that has developed between Mr Barnett and the council over the years will continue.”

The $200,000 covers Mr Barnett’s out-of-pocket costs (just under $118,000), the interest on his costs ($41,000) and a contribution to his legal fees during his lengthy attempt to first remove the restrictions on developing the site and then recover from the council the cost of those restrictions.
Read more

For more on 41 Wharf Street, enter *hotel* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr