Tinui Hotel cleared to go to Greytown as dwelling

A fight to keep the Tinui Hotel from being sold and moved to Greytown to become a private home has been lost.
An Environment Court ruling made public yesterday gives Barbara webster and Duncan Galletly, both of Wellington, the nod to shift the 76-year-old hotel to a 1ha site in Jellicoe Street, Greytown, to be refurbished and used as their home.
A bid to stop the planned removal of the old pub was made by Tinui resident Neillssen Palmer, who challenged Masterton District Council's decision, made by an independent hearings commissioner, to grant resource consent for moving the building.
At a three-day Environment Court hearing held in Wellington last September Mr Palmer said the hotel was central to the history and culture of Tinui village.
Its removal would greatly diminish the historical and cultural integrity of the township and the community.
The council countered that argument by claiming the building has little architectural or historic merit and had been wrongly listed in the district plan on the strength of a defective registration by Historic Places Trust.
As a building of historic heritage the hotel "simply does not measure very highly up the scale".
Counsel for Ms webster, an architect, and Mr Galletly, an anaesthetist, Paul Withnall asked the court not to equate nostalgia with historic heritage, saying if the hotel previously had heritage value, that had dissipated and the evidence did not establish there were many people who would miss the building if it was moved.
The hotel is not the original one in Tinui, with two previous hotels having been destroyed by fire and the public bar is not situated in the building to be moved, but instead is part of a former roadman's cottage moved on to the site from Blairlogie almost 40 years ago.
There is also another building that will remain on the site that has a kitchen, laundry and bunkrooms.
The two-storey building that can now be shifted has a dining room on the ground floor, nine guest bedrooms, two communal bathrooms and living quarters for the hotel manager.
Several people opposed to the shifting of the hotel gave evidence at the court hearing, including Garry Daniell, chairman of the Wairarapa branch of the Historic Places Trust, who ironically has since been elected Mayor of Masterton.
Mr Daniell said although the hotel may not have been associated with any dramatic, historic events it was nevertheless the source of much local history.
Demand for holiday accommodation was increasing because of the popularity of Mataikona and Riversdale and the "world-class influence" of Castlepoint. Tinui obviously had the potential to benefit from that.
Lynda Feringa said she had researched newspapers and identified the Tinui Hotel as being used for Anzac Day gatherings, a rugby tournament in 1941, yearly pet days, Lions Club meetings and meetings of Plunket and Playcentre.
One of the owners of the hotel, Joanna Bretz, who with the other owners had entered into a written agreement to sell the hotel to Ms webster and Mr Galletly, told the court the accommodation facilities were rarely used and were not viable as a stand-alone business.
There was not the market to justify the investment that would be needed to upgrade them.
In its finding, the court, made up "of a judge and three commissioners, accepted the hotel is part of the personal history of some Tinui people.
"We understand their regret about the prospect of it being moved.
"However, we do not give that subjective sense of regret the same status as opinions on heritage value given by objective expert witnesses."
The court found although the hotel has been used for "routine social occasions" the evidence did not support a finding the building was associated with historic events "of even local significance".
"Architecturally, we accept the building's road frontage was quite handsome before it was modified by an asymmetrical window and emergency escapes, and that overall it is fairly described as utilitarian perhaps due to financial constraints existing in 1931.
"We accept the council's case that it has little architectural merit."
The court found although the building was designed and built as a hotel its use as a family home would not be "inappropriate",
"especially as restoration and refurbishment in co-operation with Historic Places Trust is proposed".
Having disallowed Mr Palmer's appeal, the court has reserved its decision on costs.
Any party seeking an order for costs from another party has 20 working days in which to make a written application.