9 (2) (a)
9 (2) (a)
From:
Pippa Coom (Waitemata Local Board) <[email address]>
Sent:
Wednesday, 31 July 2019 4:48 PM
To:
Sarah Ingram; Brodie Stubbs
Subject:
FW: Erebus memorial
FYI
From: 9 (2) (a)
@heritage.org.nz>
Sent: Wednesday, 31 July 2019 3:57 PM
To: Pippa Coom (Waitemata Local Board) <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Erebus memorial
Hel o Pippa
Yes, there are stil some Parnel ites who aren’t happy. I was bailed up on Tues morning and said I wasn’t real y the
appropriate person to comment as obviously biased towards TEAL/Air NZ.
Yes, feel free to pass onto Ministry.
Thanks
9 (2) (a)
From: Pippa Coom (Waitemata Local Board) [mailto:[email address]]
Sent: Monday, 29 July 2019 1:44 p.m.
To: 9 (2) (a)
Subject: RE: Erebus memorial
Dear 9 (2) (a)
Thank you for your email and sharing your views with me. It is very helpful to be in the loop.
Your article is real y informative.
I was sceptical original y about the location too but do think the memorial is going to be striking as you say. I hope
we get to a point where the whole community wil welcome it 9 (2) (g) (i)
.
Let me know if you would like me to forward on your email to the Ministry as an FYI
Best wishes
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT 1982
Ngā mihi | Regards
Pippa Coom
Chair
Waitematā Local Board | Auckland Council
Phone: 9 (2) (a)
Board office: 52 Swanson Street, Auckland Central, Auckland City 1010
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Facebook: www.facebook.com/waitemata
1
From: 9 (2) (a)
@heritage.org.nz>
Sent: Saturday, 20 July 2019 3:55 PM
To: Pippa Coom (Waitemata Local Board) <[email address]>
Subject: FW: Erebus memorial
Hel o Pippa
Further to Bernard Orsman’s article in last Saturday’s Herald re above, please note that members of Parnel Heritage
were not consulted by the executive committee if they wished to object or support the planned work being sited at
the Rose Gardens.
I was surprised to read the article as it was the first time that I/other members were aware that Parnel Heritage was
even considering objecting to the placement.
As below I have been in touch with 9 (2) (a)
and had a reply confirming that the executive members made the
decision and with no consultation with myself and other members of the organisation. Because it is such a sensitive
and personal matter I am uncertain how many of the members would be for or against the site. As below, I have a
strong personal connection/interest in the memorial. I know that they cc you and Mike in on the letter to the Min of
Culture.
I am uncertain if anyone approached Ports of Auckland to check if TEAL Park would/could be the site for the
memorial? That would have been a very appropriate location due to the significance of Air New Zealand having its
origins there, via TEAL flying boats, and it would be easy access for people.
The decision to place the work in the Rose Gardens was made without any consultation with local residents or
effected parties.
As per my accompanying article on the Rose Gardens, there has not been the due recognition to either the early
Maori or European owners or Sir James Parr, who encouraged rate payers to buy the ten acres in 1914 and create a
“lung” for future generations to enjoy. Over the years there have been monuments or names attached to the park
even though they had no prior association or owned the land eg Korean War and resistance fighters and Dove Myer
Robinson. Sadly there is no acknowledgement to Sir James for his/others efforts in securing the land or to the
historical personalities that owned the land.
If you are dealing with the media/Parnel Heritage or effected outlets please keep in mind the below and above
observations and that some members of Parnel Heritage are supportive of the site. I think it is going to be a striking
artwork facing “out to the horizon” as though TEAL flights were leaving along with the wooden piles in the harbour
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT 1982
reflecting the link back to the pioneering TEAL days.
I know that you weren’t aware of the synergy of the site to early TEAL days until I told you. Uncertain if the
Ministry officials did either?
Just to keep you in the loop.
Best wishes
2
9 (2) (a)
9 (2) (a)
From: 9 (2) (a)
Sent: Sunday, 14 July 2019 9:00 a.m.
To: 9 (2) (a)
'
Cc: 9 (2) (a)
9 (2) (a)
Subject: RE: Erebus memorial
Hel o again
Another day, another thought. I haven’t seen anything sent to PH members about your letter/approach to the
Ministry - on behalf of PH. Was it just an executive decision? In which case that needs to be spelt out until you get
approval/non approval from members.
Can you please clarify who made the decision.
Thanks
9 (2) (a)
From: 9 (2) (a)
Sent: Saturday, 13 July 2019 10:36 a.m.
To: 9 (2) (a)
Cc: 9 (2) (a)
9 (2) (a)
Subject: Erebus memorial
Morning
Interesting to see coverage in today’s paper of PH/memorial at Rose Gardens.
9 (2) (a)has been covering same and I
have been in two minds about the placement. Though as the Govt has already decreed it is going to being
constructed there I don’t think anyone/anything is going to change their stance.
Initial y I was not for it, as already there hasn’t been any monument for Waiohua, Ngati Whatua (via conquest
rights), Mrs Hobson, Mr Swainson, J L Campbel and Gil ies family having ownership of that piece of land.
9 (2) (a)
is strongly against it being located there - as classed it as a monument/shouldn’t be taking up space in a
public area – yet there are other monuments/artworks in the park which relate to people/incidents which had
nothing to do with that piece of land eg Korean war, Dutch fighters, Dove Myer Robinson. To my knowledge there
has never been a strategy/management plan for the park. Over the years items/plants have just been added without
any appropriate long term planning. I was involved with others to stop the Chinese monument going up on top of
where J L Campbel had his house and that work eventual y/fittingly ended up in grove of palms near Museum/Glass
house – as more appropriately linked there to nearby Chinese involvement with early settlement/managing market
gardens along Stanley St.
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT 1982
The more I thought about it the more I realised it is a fitting location. As I explained to Pippa after the news came
out – it is perfect in being near where Air New Zealand had its origins, via TEAL, and you can stil see the marker
poles in the harbour which crew taking off/landing in the flying boats used as guidance as no radar in early days.
Ports of AKL would probably never al ow the monument to be on TEAL Park, which real y would/should be an
appropriate site so for it to be to be located nearby/sculpture facing out to the horizon/marker poles, like so many
flying boats did in the early days, then it is ideal in recal ing not only those lost at Erebus but linking to airline’s early
days being based nearby.
3
9 (2) (a)
It was a horrible period for everyone
in the country. Both of us were down in WLG for the Air New Zealand Shel Golf Open and had to carry on managing
that while Morrie Davis flew back to front media and later investigations. The worst day of my life knowing that
people 9 (2) (a)
, and staff and inflight crew 9 (2) (a) , had died. Hence I am delighted that at long last there
wil be a suitable monument/artwork and very happy that the site has a “nod” towards TEAL. When I mentioned this
fact to Pippa she had no idea about the TEAL link and possibly others don’t as wel .
That is why I am in support of the artwork being at that particular site, rather than any other in the country. Even
though it clashed with my earlier thoughts on there not being recognition to other historic personalities associated
with the ownership of the land.
Just a thought for you.
Regards
9 (2) (a)
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.
Auckland’s
future in
progress. See
what people
think about
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are
not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email
message in error please notify us immediately and erase al copies of the message and attachments. We do not accept responsibility for any
viruses or similar carried with our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in
this email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT 1982
4
