Appendix A: Record of CLG, IPR and Auckland Council Comments

A1. CLG Comments

A Mt Eden CLG meeting was held on 8 October to discuss the enabling works and for the CLG to provide comments / feedback on the CEMP and sub-plans, including this HC DWP (Built Heritage Section).

No comments were received from the CLG on this DWP.

A2. Independent Peer Review Comments

An Independent Peer Review of the draft Historic Character Delivery Work Plan (Built Heritage Section) was undertaken by Jeremy Salmond from Salmond Reed Architects with peer review comments received on 30 October 2019. The comments received are as follows:

Section of DWP / condition Comment Response

3.1 Correct reference to Table 4.1 Corrected

4.1.1 Spelling- construction Corrected

4.1.4 Building record strategy Clarify whether there are no heritage buildings affected, or whether the three buildings listed in Appendix D are listed as being adjacent, although outside the works area Change made in 4.1.4 and in section 3.1

Clarified that no heritage buildings are directly impacted by the Mt Eden enabling works. The three buildings listed are outside the works area. Building condition surveys recommended for these to provide baseline information.

A3. Auckland Council Comments

Mr Dan Windwood, Senior Specialist in Historic Character –Built Heritage, has reviewed and provided comment on the draft Historic Character –Built Heritage DWP as follows (email communication 13 November 2019):

Section of DWP / condition

4.0 Comment Response

While not identified at risk from vibration or settlement damage, the former Grafton Library at 2 Mount Eden Road and the adjacent Pumphouse face 1-25 Mount Eden Road and are both Category B scheduled historic heritage places in the AUP. While modelling currently indicates that these are considered safe from damage, care needs to be taken to avoid any unforeseen issues spreading unnoticed to two sites of heritage significance reasonably close to the site. Baseline data and monitoring as set out in the CNV DWP and GSMCP will be used to verify the design analyses and respond appropriately.

Comments with regards to dwellings to be removed as part of the authorised demolition works;

6 Flower Street (villa): can temporary removal of the main section of the villa be considered, with long-term return to a location within the wider site?

19 Shaddock Street (bungalow) and 31 Shaddock Street (Simplified English Cottage Bungalow)

Can a process of deconstruction rather than demolition be used to minimise the level of waste and allow for the reuse of native timber building materials elsewhere? Yes; the house at 6 Flower Street has been removed for potential reuse in a new location.

It is not possible for it to be relocated back to the CRL site.

Yes; materials have been salvaged as far as practicable during the removal of these houses including floor boards, weatherboards, and joinery.