The Hutt Voluntary Heritage Group says the ten proposed heritage areas, which will restrict development as part of the Council’s implementation of intensification laws, include a significant number of houses without heritage value.

Voluntary Heritage Group spokesperson Phil Barry says covering whole streets in a heritage blanket is a recipe for urban disaster.

“There’s drastic variation in the quality and type of homes included in the new heritage areas. Many don’t look like heritage at all. Others are unlikely to meet healthy homes standards.

“Homeowners on these streets have had decades to change their homes. Some have kept the original houses in immaculate condition. Other houses have fallen into disrepair, while some properties have demolished the original house and are completely new builds.”

Barry says some of the areas not only have little visible heritage value but seem perfect candidates for intensification.

“Places like the Petone Flats and Hardham Crescent, sites begging for a revamp, will be frozen as ‘heritage areas,’ permanently stamping dilapidation onto the riverside.

“The council needs to justify to homeowners why eyesore flats are saved from intensification under a heritage guise while residential properties are forced into an upwards-building rat race,” says Barry.

Hutt residents have grown increasingly concerned since the Council announced its new plan change, with the Voluntary Heritage Group having its membership numbers double in the last week.

Barry says members reflect the variation in properties covered by the new rules.

“We’ve had people who own a house outside the heritage areas say they’re concerned about their gardened suburbs becoming a long line of towering apartments as neighbours cash in.

“Others own a heritage house and know the costly and arduous task of gaining council consent for every small change. This will only get worse as the Council struggles to deal with a huge volume of resource consent applications from the 700% increase in heritage properties.

“Some members love their house for its heritage values, but don’t want to be locked into rules which take away their full rights over their property. Other people in the area are confused at being scheduled for heritage, since they have now built a modern house on their property, or their house has been so modified over the decades that it bears little or no resemblance to its original state.”

People’s concerns differ, but what they want from Council doesn’t.

“People want a choice. Home-owners should be able to choose whether they want their house to be heritage designated or not.”

© Scoop Media