Tahunanui Beach facilities Debate

Economic Benefits - Costs

Option 1

The majority of residents express concerns about the financial implications of constructing new facilities for the Nelson Surf Lifesaving Club, emphasizing that the project is not essential and could lead to unnecessary increases in debt and rates. Many suggest that the existing facilities are adequate and underutilized, questioning the justification for significant expenditure on what they perceive as enhancements for a small user group. Others propose that any necessary improvements should be economically managed, advocating for cost-effective solutions or suggesting that the club should raise a substantial portion of the funding independently to alleviate the financial burden on the council and taxpayers.

Table of comments:

Point No	Comment
67.5	This (new Surf LS building) is a daft idea given sea level/risk and from a "life" saving perspective is not needed.  Note: If the Club wish to spend their own money and their development poses no liability risk or cost to Council then I have less objection.
75.7	Its a nice to have versus a must have....this is a nice to have
77.7	A surf club is not the responsibility of the council, let them fundraise if they want one.
87.7	I have nothing against upgrading the surf life savers facilities but at this current time I don't think it's appropriate.
122.4	It's a "nice to have" not a "need to have"
171.7	I go to the beach most days in summer and the surf patrol is hardly ever there.  Why add facilities when the current ones appear barely used?
172.7	Not essential at this time in these economic circumstances. Save our money, keep rates down!
182.7	Assigning public space and funds to such a small, special interest group is inappropriate. They could set up at Rabbit Island and be just as effectual as they are now.
190.6	Tahunanui isn't a surf beach. It seems a very strange, possibly legacy type issue to be considering major spending to upgrade the club's facilities when the beach isn't a surf beach.
275.7	Not against it just think in times where finances are limited,  money could spent better elsewhere....there may be better times to build this in the future
441.7	Not a core responsibility - no extra spending.
450.7	private investors or national organisations can assist with this, why should it be a nelsonian burden to carry
464.7	Whats wrong with the current set up?
626.7	This has never been in any long term plan and as such a buisness / use case needs to be developed first
641.7	without wasting hundreds of thousands on new facilities can't we upgrade what we got. Ie...toilets at Tahuna...nice. over cost in building
666.7	New toilets at the playing fields but don’t think we need a surf live saving club as there is no surf and monimal risk of drowning.
749.7	Surf life saving doesn't play enough of a role for the rate payers to build them facilities. What is existing works fine unless you were to put/ rent out private hospitality venues at it
806.7	the nelson surf life saving club seem to have enough funding and they are reckless in summer with their inflatables, disregarding the 5 knot limit and ironically making it unsafe for swimmers.
807.7	Surf life saving is unnecessary and often dangerous at Tāhunanui beach. The front beach is safe for swimmers and people rarely need saving. surf life savers often practice in dangerous ways by speeding in areas where people are swimming. The facilities are perfectly adequate
841.7	If any money was to be spent, I think just the the toilets connected to the Beach Cafe could be replaced. Apart from that I think the building itself is totally fine for now - maybe some volunteers could give them a creative paint job or something. We need to focus spending on absolutely critical matters like sustainability, alternative transport and key infrastructure.
939.6	If Surf Lifesaving Club need new facilities, ask BP or KFC to front up. I have neevr seen a life guard at Tahuna beach and would not expect to - it is a very safe beach. What do they do? Changing facilities?! What's there is fine, there is no money for this type of work. Ive never heard anyone complain about the facilities on offer. Save the money for the needs, this is a 'want'.
959.7	OPTION 1 must be agreed. It is NOT essential expenditure so should be deferred      for consideration in the 4- 10 years LTP time frame.
987.7	We are in an incredibly difficult funding environment for Nelson Surf Lifesaving Club to raise this level of funding. Increases in debt which do not have a plan for income generation or job creation do not seem worth it in the current financial environment.
1055.7	Building a surf life saving club is a huge ammount of money for a very small user group of rate payers
1093.7	What is wrong with what we have?  Stop incessant spending.
1108.7	I may be incorrect but I believe Tahunanui is one of the safest beaches in New Zealand and I don't think we need to spend so much money on a new surf lifesaving club. This is not Bondi beach and we don't have massive waves. Its usually quite a duck pond.
1181.7	spend less - focus on core services
1216.7	The cost of the new toilet block at Nelson was absurd therefore I only support construction of a simple structure for the surf life saving club - perhaps using containers or other cost efficient construction method. The surf club must be tasked with raising 50% of the cost or council sets up fund matching rule whereby it matches the funds raised by the community up to a specified limit. Rates are blowing out and creating severe stress in many households. This is not the time for any excessive spending.
1216.7	The cost of the new toilet block at Nelson was absurd therefore I only support construction of a simple structure for the surf life saving club - perhaps using containers or other cost efficient construction method. The surf club must be tasked with raising 50% of the cost or council sets up fund matching rule whereby it matches the funds raised by the community up to a specified limit. Rates are blowing out and creating severe stress in many households. This is not the time for any excessive spending.
1221.7	As much as this sounds a great thing to do, I can't support this when it's more debt and/or more rates.  We need to cut our cloth to suit and this seems a nice to have.
1225.7	My comments include- Is it suggested that the Club will have raised $1.65m (external to NCC funds) before the project is confirmed;- whenever Council does any capital project the costs always exceed the estimates, and citizens currently have no confidence that Council can control costs- will the Club be asked to fund half of any shortfall between $3.3m and the total cost;- how much in operating expenses will Council be asked to fund on an annual basis- it’s suggested cost of well over $3 million is too much for the minimum that would be appropriate; andIt was surprising that the photo (p 36) had nothing to do with the ClubI add (only half in jest) that when one looks at the speed of the “retreat” on the Back Beach; and Council’s decision not to try to slow down the loss of sand and trees; if one waits a few years, there will probably be no “Tahuna Beach” as such - instead the then Council will be considering how it should respond to the Blind Channel reverting to its position of 130 years ago running alongside Beach Road
1225.7	My comments include- Is it suggested that the Club will have raised $1.65m (external to NCC funds) before the project is confirmed;- whenever Council does any capital project the costs always exceed the estimates, and citizens currently have no confidence that Council can control costs- will the Club be asked to fund half of any shortfall between $3.3m and the total cost;- how much in operating expenses will Council be asked to fund on an annual basis- it’s suggested cost of well over $3 million is too much for the minimum that would be appropriate; andIt was surprising that the photo (p 36) had nothing to do with the ClubI add (only half in jest) that when one looks at the speed of the “retreat” on the Back Beach; and Council’s decision not to try to slow down the loss of sand and trees; if one waits a few years, there will probably be no “Tahuna Beach” as such - instead the then Council will be considering how it should respond to the Blind Channel reverting to its position of 130 years ago running alongside Beach Road
1225.7	My comments include- Is it suggested that the Club will have raised $1.65m (external to NCC funds) before the project is confirmed;- whenever Council does any capital project the costs always exceed the estimates, and citizens currently have no confidence that Council can control costs- will the Club be asked to fund half of any shortfall between $3.3m and the total cost;- how much in operating expenses will Council be asked to fund on an annual basis- it’s suggested cost of well over $3 million is too much for the minimum that would be appropriate; andIt was surprising that the photo (p 36) had nothing to do with the ClubI add (only half in jest) that when one looks at the speed of the “retreat” on the Back Beach; and Council’s decision not to try to slow down the loss of sand and trees; if one waits a few years, there will probably be no “Tahuna Beach” as such - instead the then Council will be considering how it should respond to the Blind Channel reverting to its position of 130 years ago running alongside Beach Road
1225.7	My comments include- Is it suggested that the Club will have raised $1.65m (external to NCC funds) before the project is confirmed;- whenever Council does any capital project the costs always exceed the estimates, and citizens currently have no confidence that Council can control costs- will the Club be asked to fund half of any shortfall between $3.3m and the total cost;- how much in operating expenses will Council be asked to fund on an annual basis- it’s suggested cost of well over $3 million is too much for the minimum that would be appropriate; andIt was surprising that the photo (p 36) had nothing to do with the ClubI add (only half in jest) that when one looks at the speed of the “retreat” on the Back Beach; and Council’s decision not to try to slow down the loss of sand and trees; if one waits a few years, there will probably be no “Tahuna Beach” as such - instead the then Council will be considering how it should respond to the Blind Channel reverting to its position of 130 years ago running alongside Beach Road
1373.7	defer until we can afford