| |
"SHAPING OUR NEXT
10 YEARS"
|
|
| |
Presentation hand-out
|
|
| |
on behalf of Manchester House Social Services (Inc)
|
|
| |
Presentation:
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part I presented by Harvey Bell, Board member
|
|
| |
Thank you for the
opportunity to present today. This is the first of three five minute
presentations.
|
|
| |
Introduction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Because we believe it
is critical to Feilding surviving as anything other than a dormitory town in
the medium to long term, we want to start our presentation focusing on the
CBD (“business hub”).
|
|
| |
The other issues we
highlighted in our written submission are important. However, their
deliverability by Council is likely to depend to an extent on the survival of
the business hub and its ability to meet the expectations of the Feilding and
surrounding district residents in relation to retail and service
provision.
|
|
| |
With no business hub,
the adverse social issues are going to explode, hence our advocacy being
focused on a pathway for the CBD to survive and prosper.
|
|
| |
As of today, 2021,
Feilding finds itself in a unique position, unlike any other town in NZ. We
have the opportunity to reconfigure the business hub without a catastrophic
event having taken place.
|
|
| |
While such an event
would result in insurance contributions for damage, we know from past
experience that most property owners are significantly under-insured. And
that was before sky-rocketing building costs!
|
|
| |
If such an event
occurred, it is unlikely that there would be anything like the government
support given to Christchurch, for example. The Wellington response would be,
“Palmerston North is 10 minutes away, your retail hub is not essential”.
|
|
| |
In the aftermath of a
catastrophic event, many property owners would be likely to negotiate cash
settlements and walk away. The business hub would die!
|
|
| |
Happily, we are not
facing reconstruction after a disaster. We have sentiment from the residents
that they like their business hub (not necessarily matched by any enthusiasm
to contribute financially). Furthermore, we have committed business and
property owners wanting to find ways for the town to prosper with the benefit
of earthquake safe buildings.
|
|
| |
Many owners have
started making serious inquiries and some the commitment to invest in their
properties to get them compliant with current building standards.
|
|
| |
In an ideal world,
assistance from Council would be great but we know that anything that looks
like “subsidising” real or perceived value enhancement to private property is
politically untenable when rate-payer or tax-payer funds are involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
CBD Planning for the
future
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There are measures
that can be taken by Council to assist property owners. This involves permitting options to add value to their
properties in addition to the cost of upgrading them to meet building code
compliance. The focus however must continue to be ground-floor retail/service
provider space.
|
|
| |
By way of context in
terms of upgrading a property, the cost we have been quoted for earthquake
strengthening of the Manchester House Op Shop (115 Fergusson St) (not a
character building) is over three times the current rateable value of the
property improvements.
|
|
| |
The revised CBD
District Plan needs to allow for quality residential accommodation (for owner
occupation) to be part of the mix, on
the first and second floors (added if necessary).
|
|
| |
This would add
vitality to the business hub, particularly given that the residents are
likely to be younger professionals.
|
|
| |
Where no retail exists
currently (eg the old WritePrice area) or where warehousing/ supermarket
businesses existed previously on the peripheries of the business hub, a (say)
65% residential mix should be permitted.
|
|
| |
For example, a quality
terraced development on the perimeter of the old WritePrice car park could be
a perfect mobile retiree development, within walking distance of most
essential services.
|
|
| |
Rating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Those property owners
who have made the momentous decision to invest in the future of the CBD by
upgrading their buildings have no idea when their total investment is going
to at least equal the property valuation. Nor do they know how the upgrade is
going to impact their rates.
|
|
| |
We submit that the
rateable value of upgraded properties needs to be based on the pre-upgrade
value for the first ten years and that any increased value as a result of the
upgrade increased proportionally over
the subsequent 10 years, ie out to year 20. [Any additional floors added to
the building as part of the upgrade would not benefit from this
concession.] This suggestion is
fiscally neutral.
|
|
| |
Conclusion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We as Manchester House
have been working on future proofing ourselves. However, in considering the
MDC Ten Year Plan, we realise that the big picture is actually considering
the very survival of Feilding as a fully functional town, with a sustainable
central business hub. That should give everyone pause for thought.
|
|
| |
Thank you again for this opportunity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part 2 presented by Ann Williamson, Executive
Manager
|
|
| |
TEXT
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Part 3 presented by Helen King, Funding Manager
|
|
| |
TEXT
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
19 May 2021
END
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|