The Cathedral options

The Press details the three options for Christchurch Cathedral:

Option 1: Restoration
Cost $104m-$221m
Time 6.5 – 22 years
A complete restoration of the original cathedral.

Option 2: Traditional
$85m-$181m
Time 5-22 years
A re-interpretation of the original Gothic revival building in modern materials.

Option 3: Contemporary
Cost: $56m-$74m
Time: 4.5 – 9.5 years
A contemporary new building with a sculptural spire.

Worth following the link to look at the design sketches.

I called the consultation a bit of a sham, on radio last night. This is because it is obvious what the preferred option and inevitable decision will be.

Two of the three options will cost around $200 million and take up to 22 years to build. The third will cost less than half of the others, and can be completed within a decade, maybe even half a decade.

Not hard to work out the likely winner.

As it happens my preference is the contemporary one anyway.

Not that I get a vote. I am not a member of the local Anglician parish. This is not a public building – it is their building. God knows why prominent Catholic Jim Anderton is trying to impose his views on the Anglician Church as to their building. Jim – the Anglicians left you guys in 1534. You don’t get to decide.

UPDATE: It gets worse. The Labour MP for Wellington Central is saying the Anglician Church should go with the traditional restorations option as “the traditional restoration option may well be more expensive than the alternatives, the cultural, historic and heritage values of the building warrant those costs being met”.

What the fuck has it got to do with a Wellington Labour MP?

But tell you what, Labour. If you think the extra $145 million cost is worth it, then why don’t you pay for it? Start organising the sausage sizzles. Labour has around 6,000 members so if each member can fund-raise $24,000 they can cover the cost.