The Leakiest Home of All?
Here is a frightening thought. Princes Wharf suffers leaky building.
Here is a far more frightening thought. Prince Wharf does not actually suffer leaky building and now already near impossible to sell units are now just impossible to move.
Including the Developers penthouse that he's been trying to sell since some three girlfriend/wives ago.
I was one of the more original tenants down at the Wharf. I lived in two apartments at varying times in Shed 22 and then again I frequently stay at the Hilton Apartments when I am back in New Zealand. Especially in summer as it's nice down there in summer and very central to the magic triangle of Soul v Kermadec v Euro.
From day one I thought the apartments down there were exceptionally good.....to rent. Owning them didn't seem to be much sense. The numbers didn't add up for an "investor". I've been offered plenty to purchase, apparently I fit the required demographic. Well, apart from the fact I'm not a complete idiot.
The first apartment I lived in was situated directly over the crease in the carpark such that whenever any car drove over it there would be a loud ker-clunk. My protests went ignored until I wrote a very sarcy letter to David Henderson, accusing the building of being utter shite. Funnily enough I got an equally unequivocal letter back but within two weeks the problem was fixed.
The complex is 10 years old now. The leases are for 50 or 99 years.
On more recent trips I noticed that when the cruise ships berth (which they do almost every morning to block out your seaview) they invariably bump the wharf as well. These are not small cruise ships.
But while I don't consider buying one a quick way to capital-gains heaven, I've never noticed anything down there that can be classed as "leaky building".
Which of course doesn't mean that there isn't leaky building syndrome, but it also could mean that the Wharf is being incorrectly categorised in the sensationalistic "leaky building" syndrome when all that is required is general maintenance on a building now a decade old that has to withstand some of the harshest conditions in Auckland, wind, rain and bumps from cruise ships.
But the architect Colin Leuschke has a "leaky building history", so why not make a story out of it?
And if there is anything wrong, chuck it on the Ratepayers ever increasing bill for repairs.
Here is a far more frightening thought. Prince Wharf does not actually suffer leaky building and now already near impossible to sell units are now just impossible to move.
Including the Developers penthouse that he's been trying to sell since some three girlfriend/wives ago.
I was one of the more original tenants down at the Wharf. I lived in two apartments at varying times in Shed 22 and then again I frequently stay at the Hilton Apartments when I am back in New Zealand. Especially in summer as it's nice down there in summer and very central to the magic triangle of Soul v Kermadec v Euro.
From day one I thought the apartments down there were exceptionally good.....to rent. Owning them didn't seem to be much sense. The numbers didn't add up for an "investor". I've been offered plenty to purchase, apparently I fit the required demographic. Well, apart from the fact I'm not a complete idiot.
The first apartment I lived in was situated directly over the crease in the carpark such that whenever any car drove over it there would be a loud ker-clunk. My protests went ignored until I wrote a very sarcy letter to David Henderson, accusing the building of being utter shite. Funnily enough I got an equally unequivocal letter back but within two weeks the problem was fixed.
The complex is 10 years old now. The leases are for 50 or 99 years.
On more recent trips I noticed that when the cruise ships berth (which they do almost every morning to block out your seaview) they invariably bump the wharf as well. These are not small cruise ships.
But while I don't consider buying one a quick way to capital-gains heaven, I've never noticed anything down there that can be classed as "leaky building".
Which of course doesn't mean that there isn't leaky building syndrome, but it also could mean that the Wharf is being incorrectly categorised in the sensationalistic "leaky building" syndrome when all that is required is general maintenance on a building now a decade old that has to withstand some of the harshest conditions in Auckland, wind, rain and bumps from cruise ships.
But the architect Colin Leuschke has a "leaky building history", so why not make a story out of it?
And if there is anything wrong, chuck it on the Ratepayers ever increasing bill for repairs.
posted by Cactus Kate at 10:36 PM
2 Comments:
Funny I read it as maintenance issues as well. Is the aluminium joinery regularly washed out with fresh water or has it just been left to build up salt internally, then cause effervescence on the inside of aluminium which blocks up the drainholes? Likewise parapet flashings?
As someone invloved in recladding buildings it astounds me how often after a damning report from one of the big name companies (usually a re-formation of the same private inspectors who were lax in the first place), the cladding is ripped off but the framing found to be dry and sound.
Things are then covered up, literally, very quickly by the construction company and certifying extensions of the outfits who wrote the original report.
Huge money is being made by an inner circle exploiting this sad issue, with estimated, and actual, repair costs inflated way beyond what they should be.
A NZ Standard should be written to allow any good builder to repair these buildings under, at a realistic and competitive price.
But does the Herald bang on about this ugly side to the business? Nooo....
good post Kate
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home