Southerly: Tower Insurance Have Some Bad News For You
899 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 32 33 34 35 36 Newer→ Last
-
Sacha, in reply to
over and above
?
-
Sacha, in reply to
Please explain the relationship between insured Chch buildings and Chinese dairy investors, because I can't see one.
-
The word on the wire is that Christchurch Investment is the trade off for allowing massive Chinese Investment in NZ Dairy. Labour & National agree here as they do over the Kaiapoi development.
_Over and above_ would be paying out insurance, repair or replacement value when the building didn't need to be demolished. That it was demolished was a CERA call & not peer reviewed as would be normal practice to get a payout.
-
Russell - your first paper has picked up this story.
http://www.starcanterbury.co.nz/news/cathedral-demolition-fear/1150822/
-
-
Sacha, in reply to
Yeah, I still don't see any evidence of a linkage that makes sense.
-
Hebe, in reply to
Antony Gough, who owns most of the Strip in this morning's Press: The rebuild would be expensive, with the sandy riverside land requiring 16 metre-deep pile foundations for even a one-storey building, he said.
Implying that a good slice of the central city will have the same building constraints and expense. So then where are the profits that any savvy investor would be looking for?
That's why I think a "rebuild" of the CBD is not going to happen, rather a reinvention and reimagining of that area of Christchurch is called for because in the great game of property poker the big investors will not come until there is a customer base to support them, and the customers won't come until there are reasons to come to the central city. Ballantynes, Scorpio and few shoe and dress shops are not enough.
I notice around the city that we still have the trees and big sky, and they go a long way to keeping the "feel" of the place -- Risingholme Park is my local and its as Christchurch as it ever was, ditto Riccarton Bush. I'm concerned about retaining and improving the "feel" of the whole city. Kevin McCloud of Grand Designs put it better than I can in Sacha's link to Campbell Live interview when he spoke of Hausmann's Paris and the seven-storey human scale being important.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
I notice around the city that we still have the trees and big sky, and they go a long way to keeping the “feel” of the place . . .
I think we kind of knew back in February that most of the iconic human-made stuff was gone forever. The Arts Centre’s still there, but even those who loved the place from the years they worked there admit that they’d be reluctant to return, now that we know what can happen. I think most of us also know that there are no guaranteed methods of proofing massive masonry structures against the inevitable strange days.
We still have the most gorgeous human construction of all, the vast park and botanic gardens. People cope pretty well considering, but some things need to be broken gently.
-
linger, in reply to
(Yeah. That particular "word on the wire" is perhaps being spit-roasted.)
-
Hebe, in reply to
That your work Joe? Great but sad.
-
Islander, in reply to
That your work Joe? Great but sad.
It is extremely effective, whosoever's work it is-
-
Hebe, in reply to
Good point that about human construction; I really really miss the natural assets like the Port Hills walks and the clean wild beaches like Southshore. Now they are stinking wild beaches.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
I really really miss the natural assets like the Port Hills walks . . .
You’ve reminded me of the words of Harry Ell, onetime Postmaster-General, muscular christian and the driving force behind the summit road and it’s romantic constructions. His idea was to open the Port Hills to inspire the benighted flatlanders, as they were “the same hills that Mountfort walked” – Benjamin Mountfort being his hero.
Now so much of Mountfort’s work is gone, even the Avonside church where he’s buried. I can get over the cathedral, though I’ll never forget climbing the spiral stone staircase as a child. Like a real-life fairytale. In some ways I’m glad that people I remember who really loved those things in a way that I never could aren’t around to deal with the loss. Thanks for the kind words re. the picture, just venting.
-
I first climbed that stone spiral as an 18yr old law student - it, and the more quadral one in Larnach's Castle made indelible impressions...
I knew 'my' Chchch had died a long time ago -but, stupidly I'd thought stone buildings = lasting forever.
Forgetting that my first ancestors here knew about working stone - but ALWAYS built in wood...
-
Hebe, in reply to
I regret that I never pushed along my children to go up the Anglican Cathedral spire; there was always "another day" because it had "always" been there for me. I loved tthe inside of that church though, it was just beautiful and worn in and kind of Arts and Crafts-y. I did get to run loose in the Basilica with a camera a few years ago, and I found that building impressive rather than uplifting. (the basilica in picture above because we were talking of spiral staircases)
It's not those big landmarks that are the most important to me, one was the dome on the old Regent Theatre, and Java coffee shop (gone) and the Curator's House in the gardens (still there) where I spent many days of my childhood with close rellies.
-
Islander, in reply to
It’s not those big landmarks that are the most important to me
Chancery Lane.
The Whitcomb&Tombs mall ( anyone remember Mary Gray's?)(And, peppermint cakes? Vassars?) -
Hebe, in reply to
Vassars were, for some reason, For Grown-Ups. Pink mice with pinched ears and angelica tails and cinnamon bars and acid drops were Mary Gray for me.
Chancery Lane with that coffee shop; speaking of which the Albatross, the Victorian, the Mousetrap building in Oxford Terrace and the place in High Street that sent the orders on a wire out to the kitchen, and the coffee shop with the big red roaster in Cashel Street, and the DIC and and and...moving on into the 70s Mollett St, the Mykonos, the first Dux, Smiths bookshop, the Hong Kong Cafe, and the real Hop Yip Chong (spelling?)
Time for a lie-down.
-
Islander, in reply to
O fuck, you’ve nearly made me cry Hebe-
I could only afford Vassars when I got – not a paper-run, but a collecting run for paper monies (courtsey my mother’s second husband, whom all her children hated.)
We were all so very proud of her when she divorced him when she was 72!) -
Just thinking, in reply to
Respect Joe, but I beg to differ.
The Arts Centre visable 1980s strengthening worked. The 2000s super fancy and expensive strengthening worked.
The parts put off and not yet worked on had some failure.Not one building in the world is built to with stand what we went through, a 2G upthrust and a 1.5G side kick.
Visible strengtening is a must, for trust and my own asthetic appeal. A Punk-Gothic look as we engineer NZ-Gothic as it never was in England, but as it must be if it's to be here.
I see it as the colonial crossover with brutalism.
Keep in mind the total failure of our Christchurch Brutalists Warren & Mahony and Peter Bevan architectual demise (along with their lesser works).
Architects are egotists. How painful it must be to see your dreams realised laid low by nature.
This is what can be done if the will is there. All of this was laid waste by the Nazis and rebuilt by the Poles. I can see my hotel room and I drank Żywiec at every bar in the square and down the street towards UW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Warsaw_-_Royal_Castle_Square.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bramauw.jpg
Public space too.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Visible strengtening is a must, for trust and my own asthetic appeal. A Punk-Gothic look as we engineer NZ-Gothic as it never was in England
Imagine weaving some distinctive Maori design into the structural lattice.
-
Islander, in reply to
So - we can do wood & wooden & enhanced wooden - we have the knowledge and the abilities-
why are we enslaved by concrete?
-
Hebe, in reply to
One hope I have is that Christchurch might just begin to reflect the pre-Pakeha 800 years or so years of settlement in some small ways. I'm not holding my breath though. While we're at it, we could call some of these new subdivisions by names that reflect the Maori heritage rather than the repulsively anodyne Stepford-type names we get at present down here.
-
Hebe, in reply to
Investors rather than owner-occupiers.
-
Islander, in reply to
weaving some distinctive Maori design into the structural lattice.
We dont need that: we need is what the olds did - small, congruent with land, a slight burden on Papatua-nuku -why do we need fucking concrete? It has failed-
-
Islander, in reply to
Not wrong-
Post your response…
This topic is closed.