Multipurpose sports facility meeting draws a good crowd and healthy dialogue
More than 60 people met at the Takaka Rugby clubrooms at the recreation park on Monday night to discuss the possibility of a shared sporting facility.
Meeting organiser Peter Blasdale described the turnout as “amazing” and suggested that if a shared facility was not built, there could be “lots of little sheds for different sporting groups scattered around.”
At the end of the meeting, representatives of a wide range of sporting interests agreed to take the idea further under the auspices of the recreation park committee.
Dr Bjarne Vandeskog’s company, Vandeskog Research, conducted a survey last year trying to establish whether the people of Golden Bay wanted to build a new multi-purpose facility. The results of that survey suggested that a covered pool was a high priority for many people, but no other sporting facility was mentioned. About half of the people then surveyed said they did not support the building of a new multi-purpose facility of any kind, instead favouring the renovation of some of the Bay’s 44 halls and other venues.
“Many of these existing venues are old, cold, uninsulated and underutilised, but the survey showed there are still some undermet needs in the community,” Dr Vandeskog said.
He also expressed surprise that support for a sports facility at the recreation park had not come through in the survey results. At Monday’s meeting, representatives of some sports wondered whether they had been consulted sufficiently, but Dr Vandeskog defended the survey’s methodology.
The Golden Bay Workcentre sponsored the Vandeskog survey. On the Workcentre’s behalf Alli Gardener said that the dialogue occurring amongst sporting representatives at the meeting was an exciting new development in the community’s process of working out what to do.
TDC community services manager Lloyd Kennedy explained that a Golden Bay community facility is on the council’s books for the year of 2012-13, but that the community was not obliged to take up the offer.
“You people have to know what you want and you have to drive it,” said Mr Kennedy. “There’s about 3.4 million earmarked for a project. The community must raise at least 20% of the capital cost of any project, so you could be looking at a $4.25 million facility. There are a lot of different ways of raising the community component. The people of Murchison raised over a million for their facility.”
Golden Bay’s recreation co-ordinator Dave Myall explained that no one building could hope to meet the needs of the myriad of recreational groups that operate in our community. He also asked whether the money actually existed or whether it would be borrowed. Mr Kennedy explained that the normal business model was for the council to borrow the money as the general rate would not cover major expenditure of this kind.
Mr Kennedy spoke about a range of community projects in Tasman that had been supported by the facilities rate, which is a flat $41 per household across the district. The new Moutere Hills complex has 40-50 bookings a week, he said, and its existence had galvanised the local community in a lot of areas.
At Monday’s meeting continued support for an all-year swimming pool was clear. People spoke in favour of that possibility, noting the sporting and therapeutic values of a year-round pool. Mr Kennedy said that it cost a lot of money to maintain a pool.
“For example, the running costs of the ASB Aquatic Centre in Richmond are about $1 million annually.”
Golden Bay High School principal Roger File said that the school was not particularly interested in having a year-round pool. He also stressed that, while the school was grateful for the council’s assistance towards the upkeep of the gym and the pool, for example, it had other priorities than providing recreation facilities for the community.
Golden Bay Community Board chair Joe Bell said that the board believed any facility had to be “needs-based rather than wants-based. Just because the money is in the council’s plan doesn’t mean we have to do something. We’ve had two recent approaches from groups interested in building a new facility, but in each case they decided not to proceed. ”
Mr Bell also cautioned that, as facilities age their upkeep costs increase.
Football club supporter Bernie Kelly has done an informal survey of sporting groups, the venues they use and the facilities at those venues. He found that many groups were operating with limited or non-existent facilities.
“Why aren’t we looking at a combined sport and recreation facility to serve the needs of lots of different groups?” he asked.
Recreation Park committee chair Roger Tait spoke about the diverse nature of the groups involved at or near the park. They include scouts, St John, tennis, drama, the A&P Association, the toy library, the collectible vehicle club, rugby, soccer, league, cricket, touch and squash. He asked, “What do we need up here? My committee aims to get as many groups involved as possible. The soccer club has got heaps of members and no facilities. Do we need something bigger and bolder that meets the needs of all the groups who want to be up here?”
Mr Tait also floated the idea of the park itself being extended. “The ground does exist and it could be leased or bought to provide a decent facility and all the parking that would be required.”
Peter Blasdale said that the original idea had come from the Recreation Park committee and that the next step was to investigate further options with that committee and with representatives of groups that do not currently use the recreation park.
“Lloyd Kennedy’s input was excellent. He’s recommended that we meet with one of the key people from the Moutere Hills complex, and Lloyd himself has said that if we form a committee and arrange the meetings for the evening before the community board meetings, he’ll come to all of them. He’s really very constructive and helpful.”
Neil Wilson
