Future of 125 Grey Street

125 Grey Street is a two-hectare site sitting at the end of Springvale Park, on the corner of London and Grey Streets. It’s a busy area, near sporting facilities, businesses and a major intersection.  

The buildings on the site date back to 1927 and have Class C heritage status in Whanganui’s district plan. St George’s School operated on the site until 2011 and many locals will have memories of the school.

Since 2011, a number of different tenants have used the property, most recently the YMCA which currently leases part of the site. 

The council’s Holdings company bought the property in 2019 to facilitate business opportunities which did not eventuate, mainly because of Covid-19. 

Why we are seeking your views

We need to do something with the property because of the poor state of the buildings on the site. The issues are: 

• the buildings have deteriorated over time due to disuse and parts of them are now structurally unsound – bracing will be required to prevent sections from collapsing
• the buildings are earthquake-prone, well below the national building standards
• the buildings are full of asbestos which is now airborne within some of the structures c people are unable to enter areas without breathing equipment
• the buildings sit on contaminated soil. 

There are a number of options to deal with the buildings, ranging from leaving them as is, fully restoring the buildings, or demolishing the buildings. 

Deciding what to do next involves balancing:

• the heritage of the site – the buildings are almost 100 years old, have many heritage features and many locals have memories of St George’s School
• the cost of protecting or refurbishing the buildings
• the ongoing costs of managing the site and paying down debt
• addressing the safety of the buildings (asbestos, soil contamination and earthquake risks)
• the potential income the site could provide if it was leased or sold
• the potential public uses the site could offer, given it is next to Springvale Park. 

We need to hear your views, to help councillors decide what to do next with the site. 

Options we are considering: 

The council is considering a number of options for the site. 

• Option 1 – do nothing, retain the property and its current use

• Option 2 – retain the site and refurbish the buildings 

• Option 3 – retain the site, deconstruct the existing buildings and keep the site for a future council use 

• Option 4 – sell the property to a private developer 

• Option 5 – deconstruct the existing buildings and lease the site long-term to a private developer

Have your say

The pros and cons of each option are summarised in the following table, with a more detailed explanation below: 

Option 1 – Do nothing, retain the property and its current use

We would leave the buildings as they are and the heritage features of the buildings would continue to deteriorate. The asbestos and contaminated soil would remain and the building would continue to be earthquake prone. This means the asset would not be able to be used. The council does earn some rent for the parts of the site that are tenanted, but overall the site loses $49,000 per year. 

Option 2 – retain the site and refurbish the buildings 

We would restore the buildings so they could be used for some future council use. This would involve earthquake strengthening the building and removing the contaminated soil and asbestos.  This would protect the heritage features of the site and allow for community use in the future, but it would be very expensive, costing at least $12 million. We would also have to service the extra debt that would be needed to restore the buildings, and this would mean a total cost of around $860,000 per year. 

Option 3 – Retain the site, deconstruct the existing buildings and keep the site for a future council use 

We would deconstruct the buildings and decontaminate the site and then use it for a future council use. We could use the site to expand the Splash Centre, make it an open space (such as a sports field, or a playground), or use it for social housing. The buildings would be gone, but we would take some steps to acknowledge the history and heritage of the site. Demolishing the buildings and decontaminating the site would cost a total of $1.255 million, which would cost council around $180,000 a year. 

Option 4 – Sell the property to a private developer

We would sell the site. The site is valued at $6.7 million, but with the state of the buildings a more realistic market value is closer to $2.2 million.  

The council has an agreement with the Whanganui Land Settlement Negotiation Trust (WLSNT) that prevents the council from selling any property while the settlement process is underway without first engaging with WLSNT. WLSNT has confirmed they have an interest in the site and they would not support selling the site, instead preferring a long-term leasing arrangement.  

Selling the site for $2.2 million would reduce annual costs of the site of $97,000. 

Option 5 – Deconstruct the existing buildings and lease the site long-term to a private developer

We would deconstruct the buildings and decontaminate the site. We would then enter a long-term leasing arrangement with a private developer. Although the original buildings would be lost, the council could require the design of any new development to respect the historical and heritage aspects of the site. It would cost the council around $1.25 million to deconstruct the buildings and decontaminate the site, but we could expect to earn $109,000 per annum from leasing the site.  

Springvale Park parking options

125 Grey Street is located at the edge of Springvale Park. A related issue, which we need to take into consideration, is parking for Springvale Park users.  As part of our survey, we are asking a few questions about how easy it is for you to find parking in the area surrounding Springvale Park. 

Read more in the 125 Grey Street Future Use Options Assessment - Decision Report

Have your say

Download a printable survey form(PDF, 109KB)