City's heritage under threat

Plans to demolish Hamilton's Church College buildings and the destruction of a red brick wall have sparked controversy in the city.

CASE 1 - POLL: KEEP BUILDINGS

Mormon church leaders are not budging on plans to demolish Church College buildings despite a new poll showing widespread community support for keeping some of the buildings intact.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints plans to demolish the college and return it to farmland when the school closes this year. However, a poll released to the Times indicated 85 per cent of respondents believed certain buildings at the site had historic significance and should be retained.

Seventy-five per cent of respondents wanted Hamilton City Council to call for submissions on the planned demolition before resource consent is granted.

A source within the church said of the 401 people who responded to the poll compiled by a Temple View resident 96 per cent were members of the Mormon Church. The source said a row was brewing within the church community over the future of the Church College buildings, with some Mormon families divided over whether the demolition should go ahead.

The source was not surprised by the level of support for retaining the buildings, and their future had become a major talking point in the church community.

"People have been talking to us about it for quite a while. The church depends a lot on obedience to directives from the (church hierarchy), so when the community comes out this strong against what could be interpreted as a directive from the prophet, that could be a worry for the church."

The source said some of the people who responded to the poll were senior members of the church community, and some church members felt church leaders would be making a mistake if they pressed ahead with demolition plans.

Church member Robert Cammock said there was a clear indication in the local Mormon community that "some people want some of the buildings kept". It had been suggested Koromatua School "could fit perfectly into the library complex".

"The thought is `if you're going to pull it down, why not give it to the local school?'."

However, Anthony Wilson, the church's national director of public affairs, placed little weight on the survey and its results.

Church leaders maintain the cost of upkeep on the campus would be too high, and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

Hamilton West MP Tim Macindoe agreed it would seem wasteful for the buildings to be demolished from next year.

CASE 2 - MEMO TELLS WALL STORY

A "gentlemen's agreement" was supposed to protect a prominent red brick wall in Hamilton East, leaked Hamilton City Council papers show.

Developer Barry Livingston has infuriated opponents of his proposed shopping centre by destroying the old brick wall on the corner of Grey St and Clyde St in darkness last Thursday morning.

The same tactic was used in the destruction of trees on the site last year. Opponents are today taking the case to the Environment Court.

The Waikato Times has obtained a memo from council's planning guidance unit, which gives fresh details of what happened last week.

At 6.59am on Thursday the council received an email from Mr Livingston stating: "Sorry to give you such short notice, however, due to a recent lull in our workload we have decided to press on and clean up the Grey St site and remove the wall. We will retain the necessary amount of bricks for the wall extension as per the heritage architect's report."

Witnesses say they heard the diggers start up at 5am.

The Times spoke to Mr Livingston this morning. He said: "I've got nothing to say. Goodbye."

The council's planning guidance manager, Gulab Bilimoria, said on Friday no resource consent was required to demolish the wall.

"While the Hamilton City Council cannot stop the developer demolishing the wall, the developer is required to apply for a building consent as the wall is over two metres high."

He said this had been done. But, in a council internal memo, Mr Bilimoria said there was a March 22 "gentlemen's agreement" with the developer that he would not demolish the wall until an appeal was sorted out.

The Historic Places Trust had "indicated some interest in the wall" but as it was not listed in the proposed district plan, it was not protected.

Meanwhile, Lois Livingston, chairwoman of the Hamilton East Community Trust, is adamant Mr Livingston did not have the necessary consent to demolish the wall.

"The resource consent for the wall is null and void, and under appeal to the Environment Court," she said.

- © Fairfax NZ News