Four main contenders for property

Press, 2 July 1985, Page 21

Four main contenders for property

From the submissions received by the committee, four main contenders to be the controlling body for the buildings have emerged. As far as all four are concerned the property’s location and its size are probably the main reasons for wanting it. © Christchurch Polytechnic sees a need for an educational facility in the centre of Christchurch. It would be a “sleeping partner” and oversee the maintenance and running of the building, sub-leasing to various other groups. A work opportunities centre and continuing education courses are two possible uses for the buildings, says one of the Polytechnic’s directors, Dave Kerr. The first would propably be part of a Government training scheme and leased and paid for by the Government. Continuing education courses offered would be those not available through, and not funded by, the Education Department, and so would be self-supporting. A “fame” type school of performing arts is also a possibility, says Mr Kerr. “This is an educational facility — there appeared to be a need for something like this in Christchurch,” he adds. “We were looking for some use that would encompass the public rather than just the’ Polytechnic.” © The Canterbury School of Instrumental Music, which is now working from four different venues around the city, wants a home of its own. All the available space would be used on Saturdays for morning classes. Some space would be needed for mid-week classes and administration, the rest being sub-leased. “The C.S.I.M. has made a contribution towards the artistic and cultural future of the city, particularly for young people,” says the convenor of the building committee, Graeme Wallis. “If we could establish ourselves in the one place it would give a sense of identity to the school and for those who use it.”

Mr Wallis says the centre could well extend beyond just a music school in the future. “It could serve to bring a number of musical activities in the city together and develop into a broad cultural centre, particularly in the performing arts.”

• The Workers’ Educational Association has proposed a volunteer development centre, the first of its kind in New Zealand. All the voluntary agencies in Christchurch could come together, share resources and staff, and have more time for community education. By having all the groups together in one place, they could be far more accessible to the public. “So many of these agencies are having to work so hard for their bread and butter needs, telephone rentals, and offices, they don’t have the energy to follow through on developmental education,” says the W.E.A. president, Katherine Peet.

“The attitudes that manifest themselves in many of society’s problems will only be changed through a lot of public education.” Providing such a centre would be a way in which the community could value the work these agencies do and provide the resources so such agencies can get on with development and educational work. This area of education, although nothing to do with formal training, is an area that has traditionally not been given many resources, says Mrs Peet.

• The Civic Trust has suggested a trust along the lines of the Arts’ Centre, which would call together interested parties and use its experience in similar ventures to run the site effectively. “We have no big ambitions for the property from our point of view, but we know there are sufficient uses for it around Christchurch,” says the Civic Trust chairman, Graeme Robertson. “It’s something that should be for the people of Christchurch. Which group gets it is not the major

problem. The overall management structure is the major problem.” The Civic Trust’s submission is almost a “last resort.” If none of the other groups were quite right, the trust would be very happy to step in, Mr Robertson adds. Other proposals include a National Science Centre, which has the qualified support of the canterbury Promotion Council, and a National Sports Museum. Both these ideas are only in the initial stages of planning and would need a big injection of public money. A community training centre for school leavers, which was recommended in the recent “Scott” report, has the support of Margaret Austin.

Four Avenues School, now in temporary buildings in Madras Street, would like a permanent home in a central location. This suggestion could be combined with a proposed referral and assessment centre for school pupils. A number of the ideas and requests for rooms from smaller groups could be incorporated into

one or other of the four main proposals. On the commercial side, a compputer firm, Adata Software, Ltd, would like to buy the site for a research and development centre. A real estate firm, Prime Real Estate, is interested in buying the netball courts on the corner of Gloucester and Montreal Street.

All of the four main groups, and many of the smaller ones, agree on one thing. The site and its buildings must be kept for the people of Christchurch. An area of this size and with these buildings is too valuable to be lost to commercial development. “The buildings must be saved from both the economic and architectural point of view,” says Graeme Robertson. “The Civic Trust has a long history of involvement in developments such as this, including Mona Vale, the Arts’ Centre, and the Teachers’ College. Our submission is based on the idea of a separate trust very much along these lines.” Four criteria must be met to retain existing buildings such as these, according to the Civic Trust. 1: A reasonable level of structural soundness. 2: A sustainable long-term maintenance programme. 3: An environmental, architectural, and historical importance. 4: A use fully compatible with the building and one that can be self supporting financially. “All these criteria can be met in this case. As a general rule it is better to find a use that does not require very much alteration to the building initially — a ‘change the name on the door’ approach,” says Mr Robertson.

A member of the regional committee of the Historic Places Trust, Dr lan Lockhead, agrees. The Historic Places Trust is not concerned about specific uses as long as it is; compatible with the preservatior of the original sections of the building.

“One wants to see a proposal that is not going to be injurious tc the character of the building. Some proposals anticipate eventual demolition of the existing buildings,” says Dr Lockhead. The historic buildings now have a “C” classification by the Historic Places Trust — buildings which merit preservation because of their historic significance or architectural merit. The “C” classification was made a few years ago and would almost certainly be revised to a higher classification, Dr Lockhead adds.

The Civic Trust has estimated that maintenance of the site and buildings will cost about $BO,OOO a year. It is concerned that any group that may be given control of the site can sustain this maintenance cost long-term

Annual maintenance costs would not include earthquake strengthening work needed on the historic buildings, which are now below the standard accepted by the Government for occupation by children of school age. According to the district architect with the Ministry of Works, Mr Jim Espie, earthquake codes are looked at in terms of the rights of the people inside the building. The less choice people have about whether or not they go into a building, the stricter the code must be. Hospitals, prisons, and school buildings all offer high protection for this reason. Buildings can be strengthened to full earthquake code, two-thirds or half code, depending on the use, he says. Any decision made by the Government must take into account each of these factors and the extent to. which public money would be needed to finance the eventual use of the building. Its choices range from setting up a fully public-funded educational use in the buildings to selling the site off at market rates to subsidise the new school.