Summary of Arguments from Comments for 'None of the Above'

The comments from residents regarding the proposed changes to the Tāhunanui Beach facilities reveal a variety of concerns and suggestions that do not align neatly with either of the proposed options (Option 1: Retain current facilities, Option 2: Construct new facilities and upgrade existing ones). Here’s a breakdown of the key arguments presented:

Questioning the Necessity and Priority:
Several comments question the necessity of a new surf lifesaving facility at Tāhunanui Beach, citing the beach's safety and the limited number of users who would benefit from such a facility. Residents are concerned about the allocation of funds to this project given other potential infrastructure priorities.
Cost Concerns:
The cost of the new facility ($3.3 million) is seen as excessive by many, especially given the perceived safety of the beach. There are suggestions for more cost-effective solutions, such as using portable changing rooms or a more modest facility.
Alternative Uses and Multi-Functionality:
Some residents propose that any new facilities should be multi-functional and possibly shared with other community groups like the Civil Defence Response Team or multiple water sports clubs. This approach would maximize the utility and justify the expenditure better.
Impact on Local Environment and Community:
There is a call for a broader redevelopment of the area that includes not just the lifesaving club but also enhancements to public spaces, cafes, and retail developments to make the beach a more attractive destination.
Transparency and Planning:
Concerns about transparency in the use of allocated funds and the need for a clear, detailed plan that ensures value for money were also highlighted.

Debate Argument in Support of 'None of the Above'

Given the diversity of views and concerns expressed by the residents, it is clear that neither of the proposed options fully addresses the community's needs and expectations for the Tāhunanui Beach facilities. Here is a structured argument supporting a 'None of the Above' stance:

Introduction: - Acknowledge the importance of community facilities and the role they play in safety and recreation at Tāhunanui Beach.

Point 1: Community Needs and Priorities - Emphasize that the proposed changes should reflect a broader range of community needs. The current options do not consider the potential for multi-use facilities that could serve larger segments of the community, including other sports and emergency response teams.

Point 2: Cost-Effectiveness - Argue that the significant financial outlay proposed under Option 2 is not justified given the beach's safety record. Alternative, more cost-effective solutions should be explored that meet the community's needs without imposing a substantial financial burden.

Point 3: Inclusive Planning and Transparency - Stress the need for greater transparency in how funds are allocated and spent. The community deserves a clear, detailed plan that shows how the proposed facilities will provide value for money and how they will be maintained and utilized in the long term.

Point 4: Holistic Development - Advocate for a comprehensive redevelopment plan for Tāhunanui Beach that goes beyond just upgrading the lifesaving facilities. This plan should include enhancements to public amenities, access to retail and food services, and better integration with the natural environment.

Conclusion: - Conclude by stating that a new, more inclusive option should be developed that addresses these points, ensuring that any investment in the beach facilities brings the maximum possible benefit to the entire community. This approach would likely gain broader support and better meet the diverse needs of Tāhunanui Beach users.

Comments

ID	Comment
14.1	Kia ora,I'm for
40.7	Not convinced its a priority given the number of people who would benefit for it (only a very small subset of the community) and other infrastructure priorities, but not adverse to it either. Our beach is our big asset to the town so making it first class is a good thing I guess.
56.7	Too expensive for current context. Can we augment the current amenities more affordably with portable changing rooms in shipping containers for at least five to ten years
72.7	I do not have a strong view on this issue except to note that Tanhuna is a comparatively safe beach with virtually no regular swell and a comparatively low risk. I query the value of upgrading the facilities from a safety point of view, but appreciate that surf life saving also carries a recreational and sporting benefit that is relevant to their facilities too.
109.2	The council is to be commended for the upgrades to the wider beach precinct in the past 15 years, making it a safer and more attractive place to spend time and hold events. I also acknowledge the value of a surf life saving for the training and development it can, and does, offer to young people.However, as to the need for regular life-saving patrols on the comparatively very safe Tahunanui Beach, I struggle to see justification for the cost. As a resident overlooking the beach since 2006 I have watched the sandbar extending from the back beach progress relentlessly closer to the Haulashore Island breakwater. It is difficult to come to any conclusion other than that what is now the main swimming beach will within a few years be a semi-enclosed lagoon. I would support this proposal only if the new facilities are to be relocatable and available for wider community use.
330.7	I don't understand the need for surf life saving club at the Nelson Beach. Tasman Bay is basically a bit lake and it's a safe gently sloping sandy beach and it's well populated by other users that can whip out and rescue anybody that might need rescuing swimming adjacent to them. I've never seen the sift of an operation down there I go there twice a week but that's midweek in the mornings so I guess I'm not up with the needs that are perceived to be.
631.7	Upgrade the changing room facilities for users of the grounds but defer a new facility for the surf life saving club
695.6	While the women's toilets and changing facility at the Tahuna playing fields desperately need updating I do not think it is essential that the Nelson Surf Life Saving Club facilities are improved. While I believe they do good work, Tahuna beach is not a dangerous beach to swim at. Parents need to take responsibility for the supervision of their children while swimming. I think council money would be better spent on other projects.
732.7	Would it be possible to include space for NZRT2 - Nelson Tasman's Civil Defence Response Team - to share a base with the new Surf Life Saving facility?This could be a good opportunity to allow a purpose-built base for our civil defence team which is more centrally located than our current one in Appleby. It would also encourage greater cross-organisational training between SLS and NZRT2 which will be particularly useful for Nelson during flooding events
828.7	The first question that needs to be answered is what does Council have to show for $100 k allocated 2023/24 ?? where did it go?? $3.3 million for the new facility you must be joking (that amount of money could build at least 10 new houses), so $3.3 would be a totally extravagant facility. even $500k would build an over the top structure. ( the beach is probably one of the safest in NZ, and does not warrant a massive structure like we see in other centers) $200k for 2024/25 would probably put up a "shell" at the beach. A big start $50 for changing rooms OK So Yes a worthwhile project but not at $3.3 mill
1219.7	Again, another fabulous asset for Nelson - Tahunanui Beach. The whole area needs a new approach, one of the best beaches in NZ that needs a major redevelopment. The old library needs to go and cafes and retail development in place of this. The best spot with the greatest dissapointment is what I consider to be the carpark alongside rocks road where the beach begins - a prime waterfront location and its a car park!!!
1243.2	Option 3 - Go with the idea that was mooted a decade ago for a combined watersports facility for the multiple watersports clubs that are desperately crying out for a home and have been attempting to work with council for the last 20 years to get a resolution. This idea was mooted many years ago but Surf Lifesaving didnt want to share a facility and wanted total autonomous control. Its time they learned they need to share and arent the overall controlling entity at the beach. Tahunanui is as safe of a beach as its possible to get in NZ and certainly is never going to be considered a "Surf" beach, so an over elaborate facility is not something that they are going to need in this location. Think sensibly on this one council and dont purpose build a facility as a single use or single user focus. Think of the much bigger picture and the multiple clubs that form the sea-sports alliance that are crying out for any space, and/or larger space so that they can cater for Nelsons growing population and the ever increasing popularity of water based sports.
1255.7	With the amount of debt council foolishly wants to take on all projects must be reviewed for cost vs benefit.
1338.6	My support for this project is predicated on seeing the design options for the facilities to ensure they would achieve value for money. I don't deny its necessity, but I believe this has huge potential for construction bloat/mission-creep, and I would prefer to see the proposal more clearly defined prior to supporting it.
1421.4	A 'nice to have' in these times of austerity
1461.5	We do not need upgraded surf lifesaving facilities. We must have the safest beach in NZ - if not the world.
1468.7	Allow businesses to build cafes and shops along the waterfront of Tahunanui beach. This will then make it a destination worth visiting for everyone - summer and winter. Look at Australian coastal resorts that are super popular and at the areas of these towns that are the most popular. Gold coast, Noosa, Coolum beach, Mooloolaba and many others. Extremely popular and busy. They have the right recipe but Nelson does not. Central nelson is dead. The rates are too high, it is old and decrepit, it is not a beautiful area.The council needs to make more use of the rivers and beaches and extend the business and recreation areas to incorporate these. Not just walking areas that people walk once a year.