Regulatory Committee Agenda - Waipa District Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

180 3 THE PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposal is to demolish/remove the heritage building from the site. A copy of the resource consent application is contained in Appendix 2. The application was supported by an archaeological assessment undertaken by Matthew Campbell and Peter Holmes- CFG Heritage. 3.2 The proposal does not include the seeking of consent to relocate the building to a different site within the District nor does it relate to the future development of the site. Either of these two proposals would be subject to an assessment of their merits at the time of such applications. This application is solely for the demolition and/or removal of the building. 4 NGA IWI TOOPU 0 WAIPA (NITOW) CONSULTATION 4.1 NITOW was given an opportunity to provide their comments on the application. NITOW responded on the 16th of July 2012 advising that they have no concerns in relation to the proposed application. 5 NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS 5.1 Due to the nature of the application it was determined by Council staff that the application was one that required full public notification. The application was publicly notified on 1 August 2012 in the Cambridge Edition. 5.2 Seven (7) submissions were received during the statutory submission period of which six (6) opposed the proposal while one (1) is neutral. Four submitters sought the relocation of the building or part of it and one suggested signage or a plague acknowledging the significance of the site and building. Only two submitters indicated that they wish to be heard. 5.3 Enclosed in Appendix 6 are full copies of the submissions received. A summary of the submissions is also included in this appendix. 5.4 The key submission points can be summarised as follows: • Cambridge is known for beautiful trees and old buildings which make the town different from others. This building is the second oldest building with much history and has a prominent street frontage on an elevated site. • Demolition is for individual gain. It removal will be a loss to town which cannot be reclaimed. • It's a landmark and part of the town's heritage and history. Report to Regulatory Committee Meeting - (19 November 2012) To demolish a Herltase Item- Cambridge RSA Pase6 LU/0096/12
• Heritage buildings should be conserved and history maintained along with architectural pleasure relating to Cambridge. Should not be throwing away another significant building for the sake of money. • Although building was altered over the years, its appearance is still a fine example of early local colonial architecture and has most of its original exterior features worth of preserving. • Built of hard timbers in 1877. It's perfectly sound and has a future life for a range of purposes. It has been rewired, re-plumbed ad re-piled. • RSA members voted to sell in 2003 based on the assurance that the 'historic significance of the building be maintained' (Waikato Times 10 Dec 2003) . Demolition of the building is not in keeping with that. • Demolishing the RSA goes against all principles of Waipa Heritage Council and is a major departure from WDC's heritage protection regulations/policy. Heritage buildings need to be protected and not destroyed. • Building has been given protection by WDC for its value as an early character structure of significance to the town and therefore needs to be preserved. • It is situated in the CBD 'character zone'- one of the few remaining examples of its type. • It is not up to NZHPT to determine whether heritage buildings in Waipa can go or not. It's the decision of the Waipa Community. NZHPT deal with national buildings. • Total demolition of the building with no attempt of any salvage would go down as a sad chapter in Cambridge's history. 5.5 The key decisions/outcomes sought by the submitters include the following: • The building needs to be saved from demolition or removal. • Council have a duty to stand by our principles and uphold the protection of our heritage buildings. • Relocate the building within the CBD or nearby. • Council has to insist that it is offered for removal. • Building not to be removed from the site as building and site go hand in hand from historical point of view. • The assurances given to the RSA upon its sale should be respected . • If building is demolished, a plague be erected on site to acknowledge the early significance of the site. • No commercial housing or cafes to be built on the site- if building is removed. Report to Regulatory Committee Meeting- (19 November 2012) To demolish a Heritage Item- Cambridge RSA Page 7 LU/0096/12 181
Page 4:
LIJ Waipa DISTRICT COUNCIL Regulato
Page 7:
LLI Waipa DISTRICT COUNCIL Regulato
Page 10:
LIJ ""aipa DISTRICT COUNCIL Regulat
Page 14 and 15:
14 LIJ Waip a DISTRICT COUNCIL Regu
Page 16 and 17:
16 LLI Waipa DISTRICT COUNCIL Regul
Page 18:
18 Certificate AWAMUTU Renewal 016J
Page 23:
Planning Regulatory Report Landuse
Page 29:
TeAwamutu Decision Waste Storm AppN
Page 33:
TeAwamutu Decision Waste Storm AppN
Page 37:
KEY SLCA Special Landscape Characte
Page 41:
5 REPORT 5.1 Complaints 5.2 The tot
Page 44 and 45:
44 Staff responded to 20 nuisance c
Page 49 and 50:
LLI Waipa To: DISTRICT COUNCIL From
Page 51:
l Figure 3: Proposed District Plan,
Page 60:
60 On the basis that approximately
Page 64 and 65:
64 1.2 The property is adjacent to
Page 67 and 68:
{2) Repealed. (a) the holder of a s
Page 69:
consent authority considers relevan
Page 73 and 74:
7.3.4 Weighting of District Plans T
Page 76:
76 Appendix 1 Site location Map Rep
Page 80:
80 Appendix 3 SP/0106/11 Decision R
Page 83 and 84:
Where telephone cables serving any
Page 85 and 86:
i) All earthworks must be carried o
Page 87:
Appendix 4 Section 127 Application
Page 94:
94 1.2 The topography of the land i
Page 100 and 101:
100 There will be no adverse visual
Page 102 and 103:
102 plans, and future settlement pa
Page 104:
104 and subject to those costs whic
Page 109:
Appendix 2 SP/0113/12 Approved Subd
Page 114:
114 C4 That Lot 3 hereon be transfe
Page 117 and 118:
Schedule 2 Reasons for Decision Res
Page 120:
120 With our proposed new tubdivisi
Page 128:
128 waste water disposal system. Re
Page 132 and 133: 132
Page 134 and 135: 134 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 A previous ap
Page 137 and 138: 7.2 A copy of the application was f
Page 139 and 140: Rural Residential Density and Varie
Page 145 and 146: Objective- Giving effect to the Wai
Page 148 and 149: 148 defines the Waikato River as: "
Page 154 and 155: 154 Such Consent Notice must be eit
Page 156 and 157: 156 b) that all water supply pipeli
Page 159 and 160: Appendix 1 Amended Scheme Plan Repo
Page 162: 162
Page 169 and 170: Appendix 3 Consultation with Submit
Page 171 and 172: Tanya Running From: Sent: To: Phil
Page 173 and 174: condition) along their Northern bou
Page 176 and 177: 176 1 THE SITE 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF T
Page 178 and 179: 178 Figure 3: Zoning and Overlay- P
Page 182 and 183: 182 5.6 The majority of the above i
Page 184 and 185: 184 7.2.3 The application was publi
Page 186: 186 8.1.5 It is acknowledged that t
Page 189 and 190: 8.2.4 Objectives and Polices Assess
Page 191 and 192: 11 RECOMMENDATION That a) The repor
Page 193 and 194: List of Appendices Appendix 1 Site
Page 219: Rgure 9 (top left}. Detail of the g
Page 227 and 228: archaeological sites dwi.ng earthwo
Page 230 and 231:
230 Appendix 4 Comments from Cambri
Page 233 and 234:
From: John Bishop Sent: Wednesday,
Page 235:
-------- AppendixS Assessment of th
Page 238 and 239:
238 reuse or relocated either withi
Page 241 and 242:
and educational value, and its pote
Page 249:
HN1rin1: - ------ - [] I do wish to
Page 264:
264 Appendix 7 Assessment undertake
Page 268 and 269:
268 • The objectives and polices
Page 270:
270 I MrsV 43 Burns Street, Not Ind
Page 274:
274 5.2 Waikato Campaien of the New
Page 277 and 278:
Club-house- "The contractor is gett
Page 279 and 280:
and serviceable. Frequently the fro
Page 282:
282 Figure 8 Floor boards 5 3/81nch
Page 285 and 286:
5.4.2.4 Ceiling Investigations Nort
Page 287:
5.4.3 Summary Cambridge Farmers Clu
Page 292 and 293:
292 Historical: "The extent to whic
Page 297:
12. Rarity: "The frequency with whi
show all

Regulatory Committee Agenda - Waipa District Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?