Margot McRae: House-proud of our heritage

Opinion

So, at last, the Auckland City Council has moved to protect its heritage buildings. Finally, large numbers of endangered old villas, cottages and bungalows will receive protection from the bulldozers.

But if the proposed changes to the district plan go through, it doesn't mean the battle to protect heritage has been won. It means, in fact, that the battle has only just begun.

In Devonport, our old buildings have been protected under the North Shore City's district plan residential 3 zone since 1996.

The rules are similar to those proposed by Auckland City - no demolition of pre-1930s buildings without resource consent, renovations of old buildings to be sympathetic to heritage, and new houses to fit in with older housing stock.

It is fair to say these provisions put a stop to the demolition and removal of many old houses and also raised the awareness and respect for heritage in Devonport.

But not totally, and not without constant vigilance and lobbying from Devonport Heritage, a group of locals who care deeply about the unique history and character of Devonport.

We predict the first salvos in the heritage battle in Auckland City will come from architects. To the more precious and arrogant of the profession, the new rules will be like a red rag to a bull. They will view the planning rules as a block to their creative impulses by ignorant laymen who are incapable of understanding an architect's vision.

Some will deliberately challenge the rules because they believe everything new is good and worthy, and everything old is not. Others will argue vigorously that their idea of "sympathetic to heritage" is totally correct, even if it is a plaster and glass extension to a wooden villa.

The next obstacle will be council planners who have the unenviable job of dealing with architects and their clients who are hell-bent on proving that an old house is beyond saving and must be demolished.

They will hire experts to say the house is a health risk, and dangerously full of rot, conveniently ignoring the fact it is still being lived in.

They will argue it will cost more to renovate than to rebuild, and that their rights as owners are more important than the community's desire to retain heritage.

Too often under this relentless pressure and threats of appeals to the Environment Court, the planners will give in and demolition will occur. This scenario still occurs in Devonport despite a high degree of respect and affection for heritage.

It is a daily battle for the planners who are at the coal face of heritage protection. Unfortunately, many are new to the job and inexperienced in heritage matters.

There is a danger that unsuspecting planners can be manipulated by stubborn applicants and their clever planning consultants.

There is a huge demand for planners who have heritage or architectural design skills, as well as the backbone required to face up to developers and owners determined to exploit ways to get around the rules.

The other frontline troops in the battle for heritage protection are the planning commissioners, the councillors and community board members who make the final planning decisions. They can make the difference between paying lip-service to heritage protection or actually meaning it.

These people must have a clear understanding of the heritage rules and know them backwards. They must know the difference between gables and dormers and bay windows, between bungalows and villas.

And they must have a commitment to heritage and the political will to stick to the rules despite aggressive opposition, because that is what they can expect in Auckland City if these new heritage protection rules are approved.

The great challenge for protection is that the rights of the property owner are still considered to be paramount.

The attitude that nothing should stand in the way of owners' rights to do what they want with their houses is still prevalent. As a society we don't much like rules, and heartily embrace the idea of bending them a little.

Faced with strong planning rules that limit what they can do to their homes, some owners will rebel and do everything they can to find a way around them.

Auckland City must work hard to convince these owners that heritage protection enhances property value and is also good for the community as a whole.

But there will always be people who resist. The North Shore City Council is working to plug loopholes in its heritage rules because two recent demolitions of Devonport heritage houses were cunningly classed as renovations.

Heritage protection is still an uphill battle because too many New Zealanders subscribe to the theory that we don't have much history in this country. People compare us with Britain, France and Italy and say compared with them we have nothing of real age or value.

Yes, in terms of European settlement, we are a young country - some of our land forms are younger than the cities and monuments of Europe. But it is this very youth that makes what we have so precious.

Protection of our heritage buildings, our houses and our archaelogical sites is all about recognising and valuing our history.

Our heritage landscape, the streets of old wooden houses, tell us about us as a people, where we came from, how Pakeha New Zealanders redefined themselves in this land and made it their own.

Maori have a deep understanding of the importance of their past, and so should Pakeha.

Our old houses are worth saving for another good reason - they are beautiful. They are well made with great materials and have created low-scale, people-friendly neighbourhoods. They are part of our urban and mental landscape and define us as much as our mountains and lakes.

We have a built heritage that is unique: Napier's art deco buildings that arose from the wreckage of an earthquake, the Oamaru stone buildings, our seaside bach culture, the kauri workers' cottages of Ponsonby and the wooden mansions of Parnell.

These are found nowhere else. These houses and buildings are filled with our stories, of the men and women who built them with love and hope, and a vision.

We will grow up as a nation only if we can respect and value our history, and recognise that heritage buildings personify our past.

* Margot McRae is a spokeswoman for Devonport Heritage.