There’s a depressing familiarity with the news of the destruction by fire of the sawtooth roofed buildings at Shelly Bay. It is the classic “accident” that so often happens to heritage buildings – the building is carefully preserved for years, the building gradually deteriorates, and just when something was going to be done, the building mysteriously burns down. Except in this case, perhaps not quite so mysteriously. Without an extensive police investigation completed, I think that it is fairly obvious what happened, and the real question is not How? but instead it is by Who?
As Dorothy Hulme says over on Scoop: “That building was situated above water and rocks. It had broken windows and a roof that leaked badly. There has been some very heavy rain. That building was waterlogged. How does a waterlogged building with no power catch fire in the middle of winter in the middle of the night? A historic building gone. A building that stood for a hundred years built out of beautiful solid native timbers. How many roosting penguins were killed that lived underneath the building? And a developer who yet again through lack of care has lost Wellington another historic building along with Erskine College’s beautiful old building. Demolition by neglect needs to be a chargeable offence for developers. Absolutely disgusted at the loss of the iconic Sawtooth building.”
You’ve hit the nail firmly on the head Dorothy, in that there is virtually no way this has spontaneously caught fire, but instead it is obvious that someone has been there with a packet of matches – and maybe a can of petrol. It is, to be sure, the classic old skool way that a “developer” would get rid of a problem building that was due for either heritage listing or was sitting in their way – to give a few “street kids” access to a building and let them do their worst, while the developer was conspicuously away at some public fundraising dinner. Plausible deniability and all that. How many buildings have gone that way over the years? “Regrets, I’ve had a few, but then again, too few to mention…”
The true tragedy of this is not so much the loss of the buildings, as they were shot and buggered from age and neglect, but the loss of so much heritage native timber. That’s a true crime right there. Dorothy Hulme’s concerns about the penguins is probably misplaced, as the one thing that penguins can do when faced with a building on fire, suspended above rocks and water, is to simply take to the water. I don’t think they will have been egg-laying or roosting just yet – that’s a few months away I reckon, as the penguins get frisky and all matey in the spring, not mid-winter, But the loss of the timber is irreplaceable. Hundreds and hundreds of big scantlings of timber – rimu, totara, and other species that grew for hundreds or even thousands of years and gave their lives so that the Defence Force could build some storage sheds down by the waterfront. Big chunky members for warehouse roof trusses, that will never be found again – probably in the process of being decommissioned and dismantled, ready for storage – and now they are gone for good. Truly sad. What an absolute waste of precious material.
So many questions have already been asked of Wellington’s favourite developer – love him or hate him, he’s used to both – Ian Cassells. At the NZIA Awards in Wellington just a couple of weeks ago, he gave a short thank you speech in which he made the comment to the effect of: “I know I’m not going to be popular for saying this, but Wellington needs to densify urgently, and to build, fast, more houses for people.” Something like that. Not the actions of a man who plans to burn down a building, it would appear, but certainly he wants to get a move on. Now the site will be locked down while Police and FENZ sift through the ashes, and that causes delays.
Are there other possible options for an origin to the destruction? Well, sure. In time-honoured Auckland Convention Centre fashion, it could have been a worker who left a machine on while working on the roof, or the more common, “sparks caused by a grinder while cutting through material during demolition” as has happened so often. Wasn’t that the reason that Notre Dame burned in Paris a few years back? Sparks from a scaffolder during erection? Indeed, over there, some 1200 oak trees have been felled in France to provide material for their rebuild, and are currently being hand-adzed into place in a reproduction par excellence. Over here, mon cheri, je ne regrette rien and all that. Tout le monde, destroyed, toute suite! The former artist occupiers have all been moved on and out, so it wasn’t an Act of Art, gone awry. And as predicted during the proposed Shelley Bay occupation, the water infrastructure on the point was insufficient, and so the Firemen had to put the flames out with seawater instead.
The next question, I guess, is what to replace it with? Should the Council force the developer to construct a facsimile of the old Sawtooth building? It would seem only fair and just, but is that really the best use of the site? It certainly won’t be being built with big bits of timber rescued from the old building, unless charred embers are your thing. But neither really, is this the right site for an old windowless storage shed. Surely a chance now exists for a new structure, a mass housing monument for all Wellingtonians to enjoy? A tower par excellence, reaching up, housing Wellingtonians in the most extreme and invigorating location at the edge of the harbour? An Eiffel Tower? A Tower sans finis? What say you?
Post-script: Wellington’s Scoop has republished this article in full over on Scoop, and included some photos of the interiors and the timber beams etc inside. Also, please note, I am NOT accusing Cassells of Arson. Why would he? He has a lot to gain from the building staying there and being steadily demolished. This way he has nothing except an awful mess. But yes, someone has clearly set it off, and the reason remains Why? Is it just local addicts lighting a fire to keep warm in their drug-addled brains? Is it disgruntled former employees of Defence, or very gruntled former occupiers of the site for 400plus days? Was it a secret canoeist who snuck over under cover of darkness to escape the security and set fire just for the hell of it? One thing is for sure – It certainly wasn’t the Penguins!
Who if anyone held an insurance policy over the building?
Good question. But a related question: would insurance pay out if it was arson? Even if it was arson by other persons unknown?
There’s a lot in here.
1. Not sure this building is comparable to Notre Dame.
2. Don’t think the developer is the only owner who has neglected this building. Previously Crown owned, and also maybe Council or Iwi?
3. At no point has a campaign to demolish the building and save the timber been happening. That may have been more successful than the presrve everything crowd. Though given potential asbestos, maybe not.
Spot on, Conor. You’re absolutely right – probably way too much in one article, but that’s what happens when you wake at 3am and can’t get back to sleep…. So, in answer to your points:
1 Correct, and in no way was I making a comparison, just making a completely out of context comment.
2 Agreed. Defense Force and then the Crown Property Disposal Services more likely to blame, BUT, this is a widely known tactic, used by developers, government, councils, and currently rather prominently by the University. You will note that I am very careful NOT to say that Cassells is implicated in the burning down of the building. I don’t think he is. But someone certainly is. And we need to figure out why.
3 Knowing the Wellington construction scene as I do – as all architects do – there is a company keen to take apart old buildings and salvage the heritage timber. And Fire is always a risk in that process, which is why they are so careful. My guess, completely unfounded by any actual knowledge, is that Cassells would have loved to have restored the old Sawtooth sheds, but that the below floor structure was probably shot, the above floor structure certainly was in a state of ruin, and so he sought a demolition license. Given the examples he has left behind in Cuba’s Left Bank, I reckon he would have been keen to build something there with the rustic old timbers much the same way that his brother has in Christchurch. Like the Cassells old Tannery down there, it would be largely rebuilt / completely Re-fabricated. But hugely popular with the public.
Harder to get that same effect with a brand new building I would have thought.
I haven’t been out that way for years.
Out of idle curiosity, what’s happened to the crypto-brutalist Sergeant’s Mess building that used to front the road to the north?
I’m sorry, I haven’t a clue. But I think it is safe to say that to all intents and purposes, the site is now completely empty, except for the one big building they were going to move across the road. I’m pretty sure that all the rest has been demolished.
Its been demo’d and removed…
Looking at this photo , there is no building left to the north of the Chocolate Fish..
https://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=152880
I think it is worth noting Cassells’ comments as reported over on the Radio NZ website:
“Cassels said he was awaiting the outcome of the investigation.
Significant investment had gone into architectural plans, landscape plans, urban design plans, and engineering, he said. The fire caused delays to the project, bringing additional costs, loss of equipment, significant health and safety risk, and environmental impacts.
The loss of any heritage materials that could have been reused was a “shameful waste, for all of Wellington”, Cassels said.
While the outcome of the investigation was yet to be determined, he asked people to “please pause before making insinuations online” and said some had been “deeply hurtful”.
I should have referenced that:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/491736/shelly-bay-blaze-a-shameful-waste-says-developer
And just to make it clear, as I’ve noted a few comments above, No, I don’t think that he would have done this himself, or hired others to do it, but I was just pointing out that this has, for hundreds of years, been a method that unscrupulous developers have used to be rid of unwanted buildings. That’s not his style.
The Chocolate Fish building is still there, too, visible from Evans Bay Parade
Hooray ! Although, given that the site is closed off for access from each end, how on earth will that last, seeing as presumably their main access route has been closed off?
According to their Facebook page “We now have the official word and won’t be open for up to 2 weeks if not more depending on decontamination of the site”.