Christchurch residents fight to keep property from Government

7/08/2012 9:00:44 p.m.

Heather wrote:

This is so CRAZY - this building is absolutely beautiful and there are so few left in this city. CERA seem to simply want to demolish buildings - it is time they stopped and recognized the few beautiful ones that are left (and protect them). Good luck to Roland and Sharon.

7/08/2012 8:54:43 p.m.

paula wrote:

I'm with you CHARLOTTE, it makes me want to have no part in ChCh's future either - so few lovely buildings left. On top of that, the CBD is all that CERA and the 'powers that be' talk about - while people are living with damaged homes, there is something seriously wrong with watching the CBD being rebuilt - not saying it shouldn't, but it would be nice if CERA would get the EQC to start making some decisions for residents (apportionment, land reports, Port Hills land remediation plan, and of course payouts).

2/08/2012 3:44:59 p.m.

Charlotte wrote:

It is just insane to me that in city which has lost so so much ..those responsible for designing the new city would demolish those few heritage building remaining!!! The complete disregard for our history makes me want to have no part in the future of Christchurch!!

2/08/2012 12:25:46 p.m.

theresa wrote:

I was in the madras street precinct to see the art exhibition last saturday tectonicgirl@ http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=yak+films&oq=yak+films&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=3884

1/08/2012 11:04:51 p.m.

Juliet wrote:

Unbelievable. Roland and Sharon's investment has always been for the arts and they had the foresight to strengthen the building so that it survived. If it can't remain then it must be wheeled elsewhere like the old Railway hotel in Wellington was to make way for Te Papa. I say move the stadium. To more industrial land. Living near a stadium is no fun. The green will be mud.

1/08/2012 9:56:32 p.m.

Zum wrote:

It's not just about the business: it's about knocking down a building that has no business being knocked down. We have lost so much. What idiot decides to destroy a strong functional link with the past for a stadium - of dubious value in that spot - when there are sites all over the city where there is nothing left? I will back the stadium IF it is built in such a way so as not to impinge on a good interesting and valuable building, that just happens to contain a vital and exciting set of businesses. It should be able to be done.

1/08/2012 7:18:54 p.m.

anne wrote:

Sharon and Roland are to be congratulated for making a "positive" step to bring some art and culture to Christchurch.. they have worked body and soul to have this magnificent building brought back to life again... I just can't believe that the plan does not take this into consideration....why was their no consultation.... where will this all end.. keep fighting because you know that YOU have BOTH done the right thing.... this whole idea of the a sports stadium is a travesty....

1/08/2012 6:38:10 p.m.

F Vegas wrote:

Not only are they considering tearing down a perfectly fine building in a city full of ruined ones. It is being considered because of a stadium in the middle of the city! People trying to have a drink and enjoy Christchurch night life are going to be crammed into bars with amped up sports fans. No thanks.

1/08/2012 4:14:18 p.m.

Laura wrote:

As much as I love businesses like NG (and trust me, I really do) I'm not sure if putting a stop to a hugely positive step forward for our city just because one business doesn't want to relocate can be justified. I do feel for these guys though, and I hope something positive can come from the whole situation.

1/08/2012 11:58:47 a.m.

Robyn wrote:

NG212 - such a beautiful building, painstaking and lovingly preserved as part of our wonderful heritage in the city centre. How could anyone consider doing anything other than what Sharon and Roland have done, preserved and enhanced it as a shining example of resilience in our city.