16 May 2013

Heritage and Tree “Protection” is in name only and not in fact

0 Comment

 
Written by: Paul Waite

The disused Carlton Bowling Club, in the foreground, is the largest site for sale of six prime blocks.

The disused Carlton Bowling Club, in the foreground, is the largest site for sale of six prime blocks.

After much pushing on my part, the Auckland Council commissioned a heritagereport on an area in Epsom/Newmarket that they had decided to re-zone intensively. Despite that report coming out in mid 2011 and recommending that the Moodabe house, the Edgerley homestead, the Carlton bowling club clubhouse and the Carlton bowling club greenkeepers house be all listed at grade B, they gave permission for the subsequent demolition of the Carlton bowling club and allowed the demolition orders to stand for the greenkeepers house and the Edgerley homestead, then issued a demolition order on the Moodabe house. So the Auckland Council commissioned a document and ignored its findings.

Last year we worked very hard to try to preserve the trees in the former garden of our Grade B listed house, that was subdivided before our ownership. The trees were listed but now the Chinese offshore owners have put forward plans for a highly intensive development over this area, which means removing some of the trees that were only listed in October last year. So the Auckland Council held a highly selective process to list new trees (of the 2800 trees, or groups of trees, put up by Aucklanders, the Council accepted 373) and ignore that as well.

Is it not surprising that I get the feeling that Heritage and Tree “Protection” is in name only and not in fact?

Click here to help or Support the Character Coalition

Facebooktwitter
[top]

Leave a Reply