Tahunanui Beach facilities Debate

Environmental Benefits - Sustainability

Option 1

Residents supporting Option 1 emphasize the prioritization of environmental sustainability over the construction of new facilities. They suggest reallocating funds towards addressing existing environmental issues, such as toxic material cleanup and beach erosion, and enhancing sustainability practices like composting. Concerns are also raised about the long-term viability of the new facilities due to potential impacts from climate change, including rising sea levels and increased weather events.

Table of comments:

Point No	Comment
155.7	Purchase/shift more sand in and replant eg ToiTois (to stabilise).  (Beach too barren).
673.6	money should instead be spent on the parking, beach at the dog beach end where there is the historic dump of toxic materials. this will cost alot of money and resources should be spent there instead.
785.7	Use the money instead to keep composting!
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.
884.7	Use money for composting instead!
1003.7	The whole area will be underwater by the end of the long-term-plan period, so I wouldn't spend any money on this unless the new facility is on stilts or can float.
1009.7	I'm rather unsure that this is the best thing to spend money on, considering where things are. I would not want the council to skimp on support for social (and accessible) housing, public transport, rewilding initiatives -  and other necessities - before doing this. I am also concerned that the council has not taken full account of how the climate crisis may impact the Tahunanui Beach area. I think it would be better if our funds were put into areas which have a surer chance of holding up through increased weather events and sea level rise.
1074.5	Shouldn't we be prioritising the clean up of the toxic sawdust at the end of the beach first!  Plus with climate change how can you be sure that the changing rooms etc will not be eroded away anyway - has NCC done the modeling for this?
1074.5	Shouldn't we be prioritising the clean up of the toxic sawdust at the end of the beach first!  Plus with climate change how can you be sure that the changing rooms etc will not be eroded away anyway - has NCC done the modeling for this?
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