Debate Argument in Support of Option 1: Retain the Current Facilities at Tāhunanui Beach
Introduction: The proposal to retain the current facilities at Tāhunanui Beach, as outlined in Option 1, has garnered significant support from the community. The feedback from residents highlights a range of concerns and considerations that favor maintaining the status quo over the proposed development of new facilities. Here, we present a consolidated argument based on the sentiments and points raised by the community in their submissions.
1. Financial Prudence and Economic Considerations: A predominant theme in the community feedback is the concern over financial expenditure and economic impact. Many residents feel that the proposed $3.3 million project for a new Surf Lifesaving Club facility is not a justified expense given the current economic climate and other pressing needs. Comments such as "Not essential at this time in these economic circumstances. Save our money, keep rates down!" and "We need to cut our cloth to suit and this seems a nice to have" reflect a strong desire for fiscal responsibility and prioritization of essential services over perceived luxuries.
2. Limited Necessity and Usage of Facilities: Several submissions question the necessity and frequency of use of the existing Surf Lifesaving facilities. Residents point out that Tāhunanui Beach is not a surf beach and generally poses minimal risk to swimmers, which they believe diminishes the need for an extensive lifesaving presence. For instance, one comment notes, "Tahunanui isn't a surf beach...major spending to upgrade the club's facilities when the beach isn't a surf beach seems very strange." This sentiment is echoed in observations about the infrequent presence of surf patrols and the adequacy of current facilities.
3. Community Priorities and Alternative Uses of Funds: Feedback also indicates a strong preference for allocating funds to other community priorities. Residents suggest that instead of investing in new Surf Lifesaving facilities, the council should focus on more pressing issues such as environmental sustainability, public transport, and infrastructure resilience against climate change. Comments like "Use the money for composting instead!" and concerns about the potential impacts of sea-level rise suggest a community-oriented approach to budgeting, emphasizing long-term sustainability and broad-based benefits.
4. Existing Facilities Sufficiency and Potential for Minor Upgrades: Many community members believe that the current facilities, while perhaps not state-of-the-art, are sufficient for the needs of beachgoers and the Surf Lifesaving Club. Suggestions for minor upgrades and better maintenance of existing structures were common, with residents proposing cost-effective improvements rather than complete overhauls. For example, enhancing the toilets or giving the buildings a "creative paint job" were mentioned as feasible alternatives to new construction.
Conclusion: The community feedback overwhelmingly supports Option 1, advocating for retaining the current facilities at Tāhunanui Beach. The primary concerns revolve around the high cost and perceived limited necessity for new facilities, coupled with a preference for directing funds towards more critical community needs and infrastructure. This option aligns with a prudent fiscal approach and reflects the community's priorities for sustainable and responsible governance.
Comments
| Option_Selected | Comment |
|---|---|
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | Its a nice to have versus a must have....this is a nice to have |
| Option 1 | A surf club is not the responsibility of the council, let them fundraise if they want one. |
| Option 1 | I have nothing against upgrading the surf life savers facilities but at this current time I don't think it's appropriate. |
| Option 1 | It's a "nice to have" not a "need to have" |
| Option 1 | Purchase/shift more sand in and replant eg ToiTois (to stabilise). (Beach too barren). |
| Option 1 | 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? |
| Option 1 | Not essential at this time in these economic circumstances. Save our money, keep rates down! |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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 |
| Option 1 | Not a core responsibility - no extra spending. |
| Option 1 | private investors or national organisations can assist with this, why should it be a nelsonian burden to carry |
| Option 1 | Whats wrong with the current set up? |
| Option 1 | You would have to seriously wonder why Nelson requires a Surf Life Saving Club - minimal risk for beach goers. |
| Option 1 | I use Tahunanui beach frequently. We could leverage this asset so much more. I'd like to be able to access food and drink right there on the beach. |
| Option 1 | This has never been in any long term plan and as such a buisness / use case needs to be developed first |
| Option 1 | without wasting hundreds of thousands on new facilities can't we upgrade what we got. Ie...toilets at Tahuna...nice. over cost in building |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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 |
| Option 1 | Address the dog beaches car parking. Loss of car parks. |
| Option 1 | Use the money instead to keep composting! |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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 |
| Option 1 | how many people have drowned at tahunanui Beach? |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | reduce costs and lower rates |
| Option 1 | Use money for composting instead! |
| Option 1 | Use the money for composting! |
| Option 1 | There is no massive rips or surf, a lifesaving club seems irrelevant. Prehaps funds should be directed more to upgrade the marina and boat launching facilities. |
| Option 1 | 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'. |
| Option 1 | Tahunanui beach is very shallow and suitable to kids swimming. it is not a surf beach. if there is high fatality rate, i would have recommended the option 2 but i dont think it is necessary. |
| Option 1 | OPTION 1 must be agreed. It is NOT essential expenditure so should be deferred for consideration in the 4- 10 years LTP time frame. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | Building a surf life saving club is a huge ammount of money for a very small user group of rate payers |
| Option 1 | 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? |
| Option 1 | What is wrong with what we have? Stop incessant spending. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | The facilities at Tahunanui Beach are well utilised and appreciated by our learners as they provide pleasant and free outdoor attractions. |
| Option 1 | spend less - focus on core services |
| Option 1 | No one needs saved at that beach and the facilities are adequate and fit for purpose. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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. |
| Option 1 | 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 |
| Option 1 | defer until we can afford |
| Option 1 | Comment: |
| Option 1 | It works well at the moment |