$2.5m gallery blowout 'appalling'

The roofline on the Auckland Art Gallery addition will preserve views of the original 1887 building (on the right). Photo / Supplied

A scrap over the heritage and landscape merits of the $113 million Auckland Art Gallery upgrade is set to cost Auckland City ratepayers between $2 million and $2.5 million in court-related costs.

Council finance chairman Doug Armstrong is appalled at the costs and delays to the heritage restoration of the 1887 French-style colonial icon combined with a modern addition.

But two of the three opponents battling the council in the Environment Court believe they are fighting a just cause and have achieved significant improvements to the project.

Their efforts have led to the roofline of the addition being lowered to preserve views from Wellesley St of the historic building and there are outstanding matters over landscaping and views through a glass-clad atrium to Albert Park.

The court has also directed the council to engage a Sydney-based independent heritage certifier, Diane Jones, to oversee heritage-related consent conditions given the sensitive nature of changes to the category A listed building and the council's dual roles of developer and regulator.

Mr Armstrong said it was appalling that a project in the city's best interests was facing significant hurdles from a very small minority of people.

"We are not a private property developer trying to make a buck out of the city. We are struggling to pay for one of the most significant public projects the council has ever done with significant private funding and here we are at the wire being faced with a couple of extra million dollars," he said.

The council is contributing $48.1 million of the $113 million cost, the Government is contributing $30 million and the Auckland Art Gallery Foundation has committed to raising the balance.

Audrey van Ryn, who with her husband Chris is one of the appellants, said as neighbours of the gallery they were one of the few groups directly approached by the council on the project. It was right and appropriate, she said, to make a stand on the effect the upgrade would have on the heritage building and Albert Park.

She said the costs needed to be looked at in terms of the cost to the city's heritage and the cost to the environment of taking land from Albert Park for the upgrade.

Remuera resident Coralie van Camp, who has spent $130,000 of her own money on the case, said the appellants had achieved wins to what was a silly design. As well as reducing the roofline of the modern extension, visibility would be improved through the atrium to Albert Park.

A report to the transport committee said court-related costs were estimated at between $2 million and $2.5 million. Between $1.1 million and $1.5 million of the costs would not be known until the court action was fully resolved.

There have been numerous hearings, judicial conferences, expert caucuses and workshops - and three interim decisions - in the past 20 months.

Court action delayed the start of the project from April last year to September, resulting in a payment of $330,162 to the contractor, Hawkins, said the report.

The cost of employing Diane Jones is expected to cost $60,000 to $100,000 and she has ordered preservation of uncovered features costing $585,000.

Glazing changes have been budgeted at $100,000, and new landscaping could cost between $300,000 and $500,000.

INTO THE RED
* $330,162 to Hawkins for delayed start.
* $585,000 to preserve uncovered heritage features.
* $60,000-$100,000 for independent heritage certifier.*
* $100,000 for glazing changes.*
* $300,000-$500,000 for landscape changes.*
* $500,000-$700,000 for lawyers, architects and landscape designers arising from court action.*
*Estimated costs.