Site Feasibility Report
Old Art School Precinct
JOHN FLAVELL
Site Feasibility Report
Proposed
Extension
JOHN FLAVELL
Feasibility Report Overview
There are two competing points of view, my task is to evaluate both and to present the information that allows my client to
make an informed choice based on their criteria, whatever that may be.
The first : whether to refurbish the existing building, finding value in retaining the old and upcycle
The second: to demolish and rebuild a new, purpose built building, in line with current educational requirements
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.1a Existing Building Condition
The existing building is past its prime:
The exterior is in average condition, with timber weatherboards and single glazed windows.
The roof is a mix of concrete tile and corrugate, with the tiles showing their age.
The foundation and floor, are timber bearers on concrete piles, with T&G flooring over timber joists.
The interior rooms are small, with inadequate room for current use.
The interior walls are old 3/8” gib.
The interior ceiling is a retrofitted suspended tile.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.1a Existing Building Condition
In its present state, the building does not meet the requirements for an identified earthquake prone building. (it is a singl e
storied building)
It is not registered on the Governments list of Earthquake Prone Buildings.
It is not listed with Heritage New Zealand.
It would be prudent to engage a structural engineer for a seismic assessment, although it is likely this building has already
been assessed under the Priority Buildings Category.
Section 133AB of the Building Amendment Act defines Earthquake Proneness.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.1b Upgrades required under 112-115 NZ Building Act
2004
Any refurbishment would require that the current Building Code is adhered to i.e. Section 112 to 115 of the Building Act;
112: alterations to existing buildings will comply with the code, will improve the attributes etc.
Alterations would have to comply with this.
113: building are supposed to have a 50 year life span, 113 allows the TA to sidestep this requirement
What is the client requirement here?
114: Owner must give notice of change of use, extension of life, or subdivision of buildings
No change envisaged but need to check as life period affected.
115: Change of use requirements
No change of use, but need to check.
At this point it would be prudent submit concepts or plans to Council for an opinion on requirements, any application for a
resource or building consent would trigger any concerns.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.2 Heritage New Zealand Implications
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.2 Heritage New Zealand Implications
As stated in 1.1a, It is not listed with Heritage New Zealand, either as a site or as an historic building.
Being on the list doesn’t necessarily mean a building cannot be demolished or altered, that comes down to the District Plan.
There are Heritage Precincts that have rules regarding maintain a look or façade.
The DCC has on its books:
• 763 Scheduled Heritage Buildings
• 922 Character-Contributing Buildings
• 43 Heritage Structures
• 18 Heritage Sites
• 41 Archaeological Sites
Pre 1900 sites require investigation, so if you have earthworks, trenching, quarrying, building alteration or demolition or a
shipwreck, you are required to check.
At this point it would be prudent submit concepts or plans to Council for an opinion on requirements, any application for a
resource or building consent would trigger any concerns.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.2 Heritage New Zealand Implications
Heritage NZ Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Building Act 2004 are all bound by the
State Owned Enterprises Act 1986 s9 , to adhere to the principals of the Treaty of Waitangi, and to safeguard historical and
cultural heritage.
It is an offence to not follow the guidelines and an investigation must be carried out.
As previously stated, this building is not registered, but if earthworks were to take place, and the site was
deemed to be of interest, an Archaeological Survey would need to be conducted while excavation was underway.
There is nothing impeding demolition of this building.
Again, submit concepts or plans to Council for an opinion on requirements, any application for a resource or building consent
would trigger any concerns.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.2 Heritage New Zealand Implications
To summarise, refurbishment is allowed, considerations of intended use and life of the building need to be determined.
A new build is allowed, no historic impediment is foreseen.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.3 District Plan Implications
The development falls in the campus zone
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.3 District Plan Implications
The campus zone is its own section of the District Plan, comprising of the University of Otago, Otago Polytechnic and the
Dunedin College of Education, the Campus Constituent Institutions.
Meeting its needs are a focus for the DCC, with physical resources, activities and their adjacent land use and the effects on
the surroundings kept in mind. (The Uni and co have a lot of latitude from the DCC and I have yet to see pushback on
anything.)
Under the District Plan, Refurbishment is allowed as of right.
But a new footprint, new heights, greater capacity etc require Building Consent and Resource Consent
▪
Extend the
2010 O Block
Building to
the South and
West.
▪
New space
for
Architecture,
Ceramics,
Clay works,
Kilns, and a
post-graduate
area.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.3 District Plan Implications
Artist impression.
Stolen from Icons Presentation
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.3 District Plan Implications
Permitted Activities include:
Campus Educational and Research Activity 12.5.1.1
Campus Service Activity 12.5.1.2
Restaurant Activities on ground floors 12.5.1.4
40m height restriction except at boundaries/road frontage where HTB is 2m and 40degrees
12.5.2.ii.a.i
Parking protocol in place. 12.5.2.iii.a
Loading and Access per regs 12.5.2.iiii.a
Campus Open Space per Anzac Avenue rules:
(v) (a) Within that part of the zone bounded by Anzac Avenue, Union Street and the Stadium Zone
[Inserted by Plan Change 8, 30/3/09]; (i) No less than 3000m² of contiguous Campus Open Space
shall be provided (ii) Campus Open Space shall have frontage to Anzac Avenue (iii) Campus Open
Space shall be capable of containing a 50 metre diameter circle.
There are restricted discretionary activities, the council has pedestrian concerns with access
and egress foremost. 12.5.4
There are unrestricted discretionarys like childcare and joint venture. Basically they can do
anything. 12.5.5.
Non-complying activities. Can still be applied for. 12.5.6
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.3 District Plan Implications
The refurbishment does not breach the District Plan as long as it stays within its confines.
The new build will, with boundary restrictions and enlarged footprint, breach the District Plan, and an application for a
Resource Consent will have to be applied for, but will be approved.
Any change of use would be acceptable, as long as the focus was educational.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.4 Sustainability Considerations
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.4 Sustainability Considerations
Cultural Sustainability:
There is no real cultural significance attributed to this area, but as part of the consent applications,
Ngaitahu will be consulted.
Ngaitahu have significant interest in using Otago University and the Otago Polytechnic for its people.
There are WW1 memorials from the trees planted along Anzac Avenue (hence the name) to the plaque
onsite.
Keeping these builds a bridge from the old to the new.
There is nothing on the register for Historic Places.
Does the Client have a particular desire to be in keeping with the old?
There is nothing of value other than the voices of the past.
With todays technology, images and sounds can be contained in a memorial..
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.4 Sustainability Considerations
Economic Sustainability:
Old Building:
New Building:
Pokey Spaces
HVAC to extract fumes
Refurbishing costs more.
Energy efficiency
What to keep?
Reuse any of the structure?
Timber Treatments have changed.
Asbestos?
Modification will require strengthening.
The building has to be brought up to current standards.
Windows need double glazed.
The Greek façade is not significant.
Design from scratch best suited to purpose
New building services best suited
Building life cycle increased
Clean Slate
Allows for 2 floors
Specific use
Fit for purpose
Less Maintenance
The current building does not meet todays needs.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.4 Sustainability Considerations
Environmental Sustainability
Old materials hard to reuse
New materials meet code.
Old materials could be used for finishing.
New materials still not environmental
Energy efficient design could incorporate thermal modelling and new technologies
Reuse water/tanks etc
Water saving devices?
Solar use?
Low power lighting?
Double glazing.
New Technology always brings savings.
Building and construction are not Sustainable Enterprises.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 1.4 Sustainability Considerations
The evidence clearly leans me towards recommending a new build over a refurbishment taking into consideration
Sustainability.
There are things that could be kept, but I want the client to have a building fit for purpose.
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 2.0 Conclusions
JOHN FLAVELL
Task 2.0 Conclusions
The old building has passed its use by date.
There are no materials or significance in the building that would lead me to recommend refurbishing.
There is a significant drawback with the current configuration not allowing full use of space.
There is risk in keeping an older building with older fire controls.
However, there are a multitude of reasons to recommend a new build.
Fit for purpose.
Build something that suits the needs of the end user/users.
Build something that saves water/power.
Twice the building on the same footprint.
The client has the end decision, I hope the Report helps.
JOHN FLAVELL
References
NZ State Owned Enterprises Act 1986:
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0124/latest/whole.html#DLM98028
NZ Building Act 2004
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2004/0072/latest/DLM306874.html
NZ Resource Management Act 1991
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html
Heritage NZ:
https://hnzpt-rpod-assets.azureedge.net/tyddhlnw/hnz-advocacy-policy-2015-v3.pdf
https://www.heritage.org.nz/
https://www.heritage.org.nz/places#thelist
Earthquake Prone Buildings Methodology:
https://www.building.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/building-code-compliance/b-stability/b1-structure/epb-methodology.pdf
NZ EQPB Register:
https://epbr.building.govt.nz/
JOHN FLAVELL
References
DCC Campus Zone District Plan Rules:
https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/149504/Chapter-12-Campus-_March-2009_.pdf
DCC A1.1
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/pages/plan/Book.aspx?exhibit=DCC2GP&hid=41390
DCC Rates:
https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/rates-information/rates?ratingID=357623
JOHN FLAVELL