Has the Invercargill Central development shone a spotlight on other untidy buildings?
“The majority of commercial building owners in our city centre are motivated to have a tidy building in order to help attract and retain quality tenants."
Are neglected inner city commercial buildings becoming a problem?
Are they detracting from the multi-million dollar Invercargill Central development, and other recent work?
And if so, what can be done to get commercial building owners to tidy up their properties?
The Invercargill City Council says concerns have been raised in regard to “untidy/neglected” commercial buildings in the inner city following recent work that has been carried including Invercargill Central.
Elected members have asked council staff to investigate local authority practices around New Zealand in regard to what can be done.
In a report prepared by council staffer Shannon Baxter, she says other local authorities suggest taking an ‘enabling’ approach, rather than ‘enforcement’ with commercial building owners.
“The majority of commercial building owners in our city centre are motivated to have a tidy building in order to help attract and retain quality tenants.
“However, there are cases where achieving this can be more challenging for building owners due to the rising costs of maintenance as well as the ability to engage trades.”
This can lead to prolonged periods where buildings are untenanted, Baxter says in the report.
“Lack of new commercial space in the past 10-15 years has provided a more favourable climate for building owners without having to heavily invest in building maintenance to the levels seen in more competitive markets. Evidence suggests that there is less incentive to upgrade property unless the demand to do so is driven with pressure from a lease.”
Three potential options will be outlined at a council meeting on Tuesday.
One is to employ a regulatory enforcement approach, although that will require additional costs for increased in-house compliance and enforcement of the Building Act. An additional full-time employee would be required within Building Compliance team.
Staff have strongly recommended against taking this approach because of the significant costs attached.
At the same time, it has been acknowledged that the council itself is the owner of a number of commercial properties that could fall into the category being discussed.
“It is difficult for Council to encourage/enforce private owners to better maintain their city centre assets when Council could be seen as not leading by example,” the report says.
The report also points out that the Council’s holding company was involved in establishing Invercargill Central, which has led to several building owners losing tenants.
“Council then asking those owners to spend money on their buildings could be viewed as inconsiderate and ill-timed.”
Another option floated as part of the report is for an “incentive fund” to be established with an annual budget of $200,000 for four years.
The eligibility would be based on location and at the end of that four-year period it would be reviewed whether ongoing support is required.
The third option that will be put to elected members will be to employ a variety of enabling measures “that make building owner’s part of the solution (rather the problem).”
It may include the launching of social media campaign focused on keeping the city centre tidy and fostering civic pride. A direct correspondence between elected members and building owners explaining the issue and its link to community pride. Establishing connections with owners of targeted buildings to get an understanding of their situation and discuss owner responsibilities. As well as exploring current funding avenues available to building owners.