can the mayor/council/government not demand action on the cathedral tidy up? where exactly is it at now? what are we waiting for??? surely there comes a time when it must be declared environmentally a risk? what about health/rats/squattors/vandels etc You wouldnt be allowed to dump a pile of bricks in the middle of queen street in AUCKland so why is this situation allowed to exist...
Well I have exactly the opposite view (and perhaps my post was unclear).
In my view, pretty much all hope for Cathedral Square is lost unless the cathedral is restored. I'm glad it is still there in the shape it is, because that's the only hope for the Square as I see it. If the anglicans build their modest town-hall equivalent, then goodbye any prospect for serious investment in the Square. We'll get a few modest gap fillers populating the edges with time I suppose. My perception and some anecdotal evidence is that the reason we haven't had serious investment in the Square is because serious investors are holding off to see if the cathedral will be restored. If it won't they'll go somewhere else; to the new heart of the city.
Let's demolish it and move on doesn't work in my book. We get the demolition, and then moving on is a paddock or, worse, some cheap tilt-slab concoction.
I don't want to see the Square become a soul-less waste land. I'd honestly support using it for parking to support vibrancy elsewhere in the city if a half-arsed effort of a church hall with anything that follows that ends up getting built. I'm concerned that the convention centre is leading down that path because, although the renders look attractive, a convention centre is the diametric opposite of "vibrancy".
I may be a dreamer, but I still live in hope that the cathedral is going to be saved!
