Brian Rudman: Backroom handshakes ward off demolition

This heritage-friendly Auckland City Council is starting to canonise old buildings even faster than the late pope created new saints. Last month, seven central area edifices were nominated to the schedule of heritage buildings.

Then a few days ago, another four were added, including the old McLaren Service Station in Remuera Rd.

But curiously, the heritage building most under threat, the Jean Batten Building, Shortland St, was on neither list.

Even though, by the city's own heritage department scoring, it is more worthy of saving than at least four of the 11 named.

Auckland City, after a long tussle with the Art Deco Society and campaigner Allan Matson, upgraded its scoring of Jean Batten Building to 59, entitling it to B category protection. But four of the buildings named last month scored lower, ranging from 53 for the Imperial Building, 44 Queen St, to 58 for Hotel Cargen - now Trans Tasman Building, in Eden Cres.

In selecting these central area buildings for scheduling, the city declared the proposed plan change seeks "to ensure that their heritage values are protected from inappropriate use and development and to ensure the integrity of Auckland City's heritage resources are maintained".

The benefits of scheduling "are quite clear". It would provide protection "on an ongoing basis" and "is the most effective and efficient way of ensuring the continuing protection of the city's built heritage".

But instead of taking "the most effective and efficient" route to save Jean Batten Building, the city council is relying on backroom handshakes with its Australian owner, Bank of New Zealand, that the bankers won't, for now at least, go ahead with their plans to demolish.

This month a spokeswoman for Mayor Dick Hubbard said that he understood there may be some anxiety, but that he had an "absolute assurance from the very top of the BNZ" that the bank would keep its side of the moratorium it struck with the city, not to demolish while the city and BNZ jointly reviewed the bank's redevelopment plans.

Now I'm willing to accept that BNZ is not going to creep on to the site with the wrecking equipment until this review is over. But who decides exactly when the review is over, the bank or the city? And what happens the day after that?

The "moratorium" was agreed to in March when the council's environment and heritage committee agreed with a BNZ proposal to defer any activity on Jean Batten Building while a draft urban design framework and design brief for the site was prepared.

The deal was initially for a month, but it continues to be extended.

Casting a shadow over the "review" is the demolition order granted to BNZ more than four years ago, at a time when the council had a different view of the building's heritage status.

On paper, the order expired last December, but BNZ argues that a 2003 amendment to the Resource Management Act has extended its life.

Tomorrow the Environment Court will be asked to rule whether this demolition permit remains valid.

Backing BNZ is construction company Multiplex, Crown Law, on behalf of Minister of the Environment, Marian Hobbs, and, would you believe, the Auckland City Council.

On the side of the angels - and the building - are the Art Deco Society and heritage campaigner Allan Matson.

Whatever the outcome of tomorrow's hearing, the historic Jean Batten Building will remain unprotected, except for that old boys' agreement not to bowl it over for the time being.

The politicians say that to have proceeded with scheduling while the handshake was in place would have been to publicly doubt the good faith of the BNZ.

To me, it would have been more like taking out precautionary life insurance. Something any banker would recommend before a big deal.

If the demolition permit is ruled invalid, having the building listed for scheduling would spike any attempt by BNZ to rush through an application for a new one. And if the existing one still lives, the move to schedule would at least signal the city's intention to put up a fight for what it says it believes in.