Support for Peel St loos

Peel Street toilets

The historical value of the Edwardian architecture that houses the public toilets in Peel Street was enough to sway a slim majority of respondents to this week’s web poll question: “Should the Peel St toilets be developed or demolished?”

Out of the 433 respondents, 42 percent (182 people) said demolish the building. But 54 percent want to keep it.

That figure is made up of 36 percent (158 people) wanting the toilet facility upgraded and 18 percent (78 people) wanting it upgraded for new use.

“Might be old but sure isn’t great architecture,” said one respondent.

“They are an eyesore and it is a waste of money to keep upgrading them,” was another response.

“They are also in a bad location in the middle of a road.”

Taking an ecological stance one respondent said the phosphates that have leached into the concrete over the years should make a solid case to demolish this sad relic.

Among those who said “demolish” though was the respondent who said a complete rebuild, “with an Art Deco theme would be refreshing instead of this concrete cesspit”. Similarly, someone else who voted for demolition said the “heritage classification” was the reason the building still stands. And yet another in the demolition corner said “either demolish or turn them into a bar”.

Upgrade and maintain the facility as public toilets, said one person from the 36 percent. John Key’s toilet-tourism budget, if it still existed, should pay for the upgrade of the toilets, said another.

One respondent who wanted to see the building upgraded said it was historic from the outside and only needed to be upgraded for a modern interior.

“The Peel Street facilities are in much need of an upgrade,” said another.

“Perhaps a good use for them would be to open as a tenancy after being fully renovated. The building itself is quite interesting and shouldn’t be demolished.”

Another eco-argument was put forward, this time from the upgrade supporters.

“Upgrade into community sauna powered by biomass boiler.”

One supporter said they were sick of seeing the town’s historic buildings torn down because “it’s not economic” to repair or restore.

“It shouldn’t always be about the bottom line. Respect our heritage and restore please.”

Among the 15 people, or 4 percent, who said they didn’t know was the respondent who suggested demolition of the building could free up space for a U-turn area or a bike park.