Heritage has become a dirty word in Wellington and it cannot be allowed to remain so. In 2021 I wrote a post that explored my view of how heritage can be defined and how it can be used.
To me heritage is using physical items to anchor and communicate the stories we wish to pass to our successors. What we restrict from changing must serve this aim or it instead shows our succesors that we are pretending that nothing changes.
As a councilor I would drive council to adopt a clearer policy of what the intent of heritage recognition is. It cannot continue to be used to hobble any changes.
Council must be willing to accept the demolition of heritage buildings if it helps create a more affordable and liveable city. It has to be for a strong benefit however, it cannot just be rubber stamping demolition because it's easy.
I would push for council to adopt heritage policies that place accessibilty and safety ahead of appearence. Just because our ancestors pretended that less abled people existed does not mean we should accept it now. The main entrance of heritage buildings must be accessible to all people, even if it means we have to replace doors and steps. To balance this we should require that any alterations are done in a sympathetic style. Installing shiny sliding doors in a building from the late 1800s should not be acceptable.
I would work with Heritage NZ to identify opportunities to invest in research and development of new restoration and maintenance techniques. Processes like additive manufacturing should be examined to see if they can reduce the cost of maintaining heritage items.
I would push for council to adopt a policy that at least half of all heritage items recognized by the council to have been independently identified by local iwi and hapu. Our current heritage listing effectively hide the contribution of anyone but European immigrants. This must change.
Authorised by James Sullivan. James@TFG.nz