• Full Story

No last minute chance for Christchurch Cathedral

Email
Print

No last minute chance for Chch Cathedral

3News NZ

There will be no last minute reprieve for the Christchurch cathedral (file)

There will be no last minute reprieve for the Christchurch cathedral (file)

The Anglican Church has announced there will be no last minute reprieve for the Christchurch Cathedral. 

In July the Great Christchurch Building Trust produced a report with a set of alternatives to demolishing the Cathedral, in the hope they could save the iconic building. 

This put the deconstruction of the Cathedral on hold, while the Church considered its findings.

However Bishop Victoria Matthews says the options in the report are too expensive.

“Difference in cost would probably be about $15 million, and it’s very interesting in post-earthquake Christchurch we talk about millions like we once talked about hundreds. But when you think about $15 million could do a great deal of good in other places.”

She says the suggestions didn't provide any greater protection to the heritage of the building.

Meanwhile, the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority says it's now waiting to hear from the church on what steps it wishes to take next in order to make the building safe.

RadioLIVE

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

3/08/2012 8:43:37 a.m.

JC wrote:

Why the repeated references to "deconstruction". That is nothing more than a euphemism for demolition. It is the worst form of euphemism, for it implies that the building is to be carefully dismantled. There is nothing careful about using a wrecking ball!

The cathedral is damaged - lets be frank - only slightly damaged. The bishop (who is an apparently nihilistic Canadian) and minister (who hates old buildings) wanted an excuse to destroy this iconic centrepience of Christchurch's built heritage. They couldn't claim it was destroyed, or beyond repair - for those would be too obviously lies. So they claim it would unsafe to repair. A weaker argument for an illegal and immoral destruction of a heritage building would be harder to find.