Grave news: Container ‘art’ owner reveals new plans
The man behind the controversial container ship deemed to be a public artwork by the Environment Court has revealed future plans for the site – and they’re unlikely to impress some already disgruntled neighbours.
Dave Yzendoorn told the Waikato Times he plans to be buried there. “I would like to have our grave sites there one day so we can forever appreciate the view the neighbours say we will be blocking,” he said.
“Our money is tied up in that land, so we should be able to use it ourselves and enjoy it ourselves. It’s a lovely spot under the trees if it’s allowed.”
Remarkably, according to a Hamilton City Council spokesperson, it might be. “The Burials and Cremations Act 1964 give councils powers and instruction to make provision for cemeteries. It also enables private burial grounds under certain conditions,” the spokesperson said.
“Section 48 of the Act makes provision for burial in a special place, this section is managed by the Ministry of Health. To get permission for a special burial, the minister must be satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances which make the burial in that place appropriate and if the proposed place is within a city the mayor or two members of the governing body must also agree.
“Each application is considered on its merits. Under the Act it is an offence to bury a body in a place in which the burial is not permitted.”
Yzendoorn also declined to flush away rumours the ‘art’ might be embellished with the addition of a toilet.
He also revealed his frustration at the failure to get his original plans for a duplex development on the site.
“Right now we are paying thousands of dollars rates each year which is set to go up, for ‘residential general’ rating that is not zoned residential.”
In addition to its “artistic” merits the container art and Yzendoorn’s threats of a toilet and cemetery likely serve as a symbolic middle finger to the council and neighbours who complained about his plans for a duplex build on the site. Neighbours objected to those plans and the issue is now before the Environment Court.
“Why keep greasing the council’s palm thinking we are getting somewhere when we only hit another brick wall. I feel that any consent application for any structure will always be made to jump through council hoops whereas artworks aren’t.”
The container was installed on a plot owned by David and Barbara Yzendoorn in June last year as a “public art display”, leading to complaints from neighbours and an abatement notice from the council to remove the container. However, according to a decision from the Environment Court, “the abatement notice is cancelled”.
The Environment Court did concede neighbouring residents did regard the container as detracting from their wider neighbourhood’s amenity – and that “it cannot be said to be aesthetically pleasing”, but on an objective basis “its effects do not rise to being offensive or objectionable”.
“In short, even though it may retain the look of a shipping container, it can no longer be considered as such. It has been repurposed as an art installation.”