Visit the NBus pages to find out about public transport services in Nelson
There's always plenty going on in Nelson, find an event to visit this weekend.
Libraries' Shelf Life has been published.
In this issue:
- The Prow
- e-books
- Be a Legend
- New Zealand Book Month
- Staff changes
Read some great case studies on how local businesses saved money and helped the environment.
Visit this section for more information on making earthquake prone buildings safer.
Leisure » Recreation » Parks and reserves » Queens Gardens » Queen's Gardens Landscape Plan
14 people took the opportunity to give their feedback in person to Council. This and the written feedback will help Councillors to make decisions about the management of the Gardens and any effect this might have on the proposed redevelopment of the Suter Gallery, which is being considered as part of the Long Term Plan process.
The Council has recently developed a Landscape Conservation Plan for Queen’s Gardens. The Plan has been drafted to ensure the heritage values of Queen’s Gardens are recognised and preserved. This is a particularly important piece of work at this time as plans are being drawn up for the redevelopment of the Suter Art Gallery on the edge of the Gardens.
The Plan has been written by Landscape Heritage Architect, Louise Beaumont, and covers the history, people, physical environment and development of the Gardens. It makes recommendations about how the Gardens should be looked after into the future.
The plan is a guiding technical document for Council and will not form Council policy or be adopted in itself. Your feedback on the Plan will help us to develop policies and management approaches for Queen’s Gardens as part of the Horticultural Parks Reserve Management Plan which we will be working on in the future.
Download a copy of the Queen's Gardens Landscape Conservation Plan (8.2MB PDF)
An important issue that Council is keen to hear from residents about is whether the two oak trees next to the Gallery should be retained or felled to make room for the redevelopment of the Surer Art Gallery.
The problem is that space to redevelop the Gallery is very limited due to the size and shape of the land available. To make the best use of the space we would need to remove two large oak trees that sit on the Suter Art Gallery grounds.
However, the two oak trees have been identified in the Conservation Plan as making a significant contribution to the heritage value of Queen’s Gardens.
Council is now faced with a difficult decision. A significant redevelopment of the Suter Art Gallery may not be possible if the oak trees remain.
To keep the trees would either compromise the objectives of the redevelopment or require a design that would not be in keeping with its location so close to the Gardens.
According to expert advice new construction should be restricted within the drip line of a tree. This is to protect the root structure and maintain the tree’s access to rainfall, nutrients and sunlight. Trying to work around the trees would add to the cost and create ongoing issues for the maintenance of the buildings as the trees continue to grow.
If the proposed redevelopment does proceed it is possible to retain most of the other trees in the grounds of the Gallery that have been identified in the Conservation Plan as significant.
Download a map of the affected trees in relation to Queen's Gardens (564KB PDF)
At the moment some areas of the Gallery are not up to a suitable standard to store, preserve and exhibit significant artworks. Earthquake risk has been investigated and earthquake strengthening work is also required. If no redevelopment goes ahead this means that the Gallery’s collections will not be preserved and stored appropriately and might need to be moved to other facilities to ensure their preservation.
If the gallery is upgraded to internationally accepted standards it will be able to loan significant artworks and display touring exhibitions. The current issues with universal (disabled) access and flooding risk can also be addressed.
Retain the oak trees and don’t go ahead with redeveloping the Suter Art Gallery until the trees are at a stage where they can be removed (i.e. declining health). Given the current condition of the trees this could be many years.
Remove the oak trees and redevelop the Suter Art Gallery into a facility that will serve Nelson well into the future.
Thanks to everyone who took the time to give us their thoughts and attend the information meetings. There will be a hearing for those who wanted to speak directly to Council about the Plan on Thursday 22 March.
The Suter Art Gallery was founded as a memorial to Andrew Burn Suter, Bishop of Nelson from 1866 to 1891. It opened on 31 May 1899. At the time, there were only two other art galleries in New Zealand.
Bishop Suter was a keen artist and his widow promised his art collection to an art gallery if established in his name.
As one of the first permanent structures built solely for the display of art in New Zealand, The Suter is now the oldest gallery in continuous use in the country.
The Gallery was designated as a Category II Heritage Building by the Historic Places Trust in 2007.
Queen’s Gardens opened in 1892 to commemorate the jubilee of Queen Victoria. The Gardens were designed around a detached residual bend of the Maitai River known as the “Eel Pond’.
The Gardens retain many elements of its Victorian-era character including gates, memorials and planting arrangements.
The Gardens were designated as a Category II Historic Place by the Historic Places Trust in 2007.
The trees are both English Oaks (Quercus robur).
They are thought to have been planted in 1892 to mark the official opening of Queen’s Gardens as part of Nelson’s Jubilee celebrations.
They are on the land belonging to the Suter Art Gallery, not in fact part of the Queen’s Gardens.
A proposal to have them removed in 2010 attracted strong opposition.
Both trees are classified as ‘Local’ trees in the Nelson Resource Management Plan (NRMP). This means they are of noteworthy interest but are not as significant as either Heritage or Landscape Trees. Their retention and protection is encouraged, but their removal is permitted
Posting comments has been disabled.
I prefer Option 2 as I do not regard the Oak trees as significant in relation to the Queens gardens, and I believe it would be a tragedy if the Suter development did not proceed. I love trees and in general hate to see them altered or removed but I am sure the redevelopment and future landscaping will enhance the gardens and the Suter.
Posted by Robin Fullmer, 12/03/2012 3:18pm (2 months ago)
For the safety of the structure, the contents and the people who use the Suter gallery and cafe the oak trees should be lopped at the very least.
As they have grown many trunks the result of lopping would not be pretty.
As they are not in Queens Gardens the decision to remove them should favour the wishes of the Suter Gallery stakeholders rather than the Queens Garden protectors.
I am a great admirer and will circuit the gardens not less than 4 times a week.
I revel in the trees we have around Nelson native and deciduous.
I believe character and beauty can come from a range of natural and constructed environment.
If chopping down 2 trees is considered a disaster then we do not have sufficient trees.
As long as we plant at least one tree for every one that is removed our great grandchildren will be proud of us.
I do hope those that are protecting the oaks in question do not have a guilty conscience in the event of any injuries caused when a trunk falls through the roof of the gallery/cafe!
Posted by Angu McNeill, 12/03/2012 9:49am (2 months ago)
It is sad to see any great trees felled, but we have to be realistic in many cases, and this is one of them. So, option 2 is the corerct one in my opinion.
Posted by Don Grant, 10/03/2012 10:06pm (2 months ago)
We favour Option 2: Remove the oaks and redevelop the Suter Art Gallery into a facility that will serve Nelson well into the future.
Some of our reasons for favouring Option 2 are:
1. Trees are renewable. . They have a limited life span.
2. Oaks are not native trees.
3. Trees soak up (sequester) carbon dioxide, thus helping to reduce climate change. However, they stop doing that when they reach maturity. The oaks on Suter land are mature and have thus stopped sequestering carbon dioxide.
4. When the oaks are removed, they should be replaced by at least two young trees, preferably native ones, in this case in a different locality. Such new trees will be able to sequester carbon dioxide for a long time to come.
5. The carbon sequestered in the old, mature oaks, should be preserved by not burning the wood. The wood should be donated to wood carvers/sculptors in the Nelson area for being converted into works of art. In the future an exhibition could be held of the art works created from the oak trees.
Posted by Dr & Mrs G.J. van der Lingen, 09/03/2012 11:08am (3 months ago)
I have waited so long to see the Suter Gallery upgraded that I would hate to see progress delayed any further. So, if the oak trees have to go that is a price we will have to pay. I would suggest that one be offered to a sculptor to prepare a work to be displayed in the garden and the other passed to the NMIT furniture-making tutors to prepare seating for the gallery. Then two more oak trees from amongst those springing up around the present massive trunks should be planted in a sensible location to mark the jubilees of both Queen Victoria and Elizabeth.
Posted by Christopher A Watson, 08/03/2012 9:40am (3 months ago)
I am not in favour of removing the two oak trees. I am not in favour of taking any more greenery to make way for an extension of building The Suter can be upgraded within the existing dimensions.
Posted by Christine Grove, 06/03/2012 12:18pm (3 months ago)
There is no doubt in my mind that the two oak trees in question have to go. They are both on Suter Gallery land and the gallery which is Internationally recognised and is an iconic part of Nelson's heritage, needs to be urgently re-furbished. Some of the wood from the trees could possibly be utilised in the restored structure, either as flooring or furniture.
Posted by Carl Anson, 06/03/2012 9:59am (3 months ago)
The trees should be removed as the need to upgrade the Suter is now urgent. To leave the development until the trees have decayed and die means the Suter will also decay and die. The alternative of taking land from Albion Square has too many issues, like Iwi claims and DOC lack of interest in the issue, for that to be a timely option.
Posted by Alan Harwood, 05/03/2012 9:31am (3 months ago)
I support the removal of the oak trees to enable the Suter to be developed into a gallery we can be proud of in the future. The wood will be fantastic for some of our talented wood-turners to create something of significance to celebrate the trees for longevity.
Posted by Shayne Boyce, 03/03/2012 1:26pm (3 months ago)
We do not support cutting down the beautiful old oak trees. The design of the Suter should have taken these trees into consideration - what happened? Natural beauty is just as important as man-made beauty. Please keep the trees.
Posted by Debra and Grant Parkins, 02/03/2012 3:31pm (3 months ago)
RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments
Last updated: 27/03/2012 9:08am
Copyright © 2012 Nelson City Council