Golden Bay Community Board Meeting Date: 12 July 2011 Report Author Carolyn McLellan

3. Multi Purpose Facility

This proposed facility for Golden Bay is engendering opinions on both sides of the debate.

When this proposal was first presented to the previous Community Board the agreement was to support this project in principle in order to allow the supporters to gain more information and support, and we requested that the Community Board be kept informed. This they have done, with Tasman District Council subsequently delegating responsibility to the Board as lead agency to oversee the initial planning of the proposed facility.

The project committee needs to have tangible plans to present to the public of Golden Bay for their consideration. The Committee hopes to attract funding from Lotteries for this phase however if this is insufficient the Golden Bay Community Board has recommended that Council’s Community Services funds the balance necessary, to enable this work to proceed to concept plan stage.

Presentation to Community Board Meeting 6th June 2011

PRESENTATION TO

GOLDEN BAY COMMUNITY BOARD

6^TH JUNE 2011

“PROPOSED GOLDEN BAY COMMUNITY RECREATION, LEISURE & CULTURAL CENTRE”

GOLDEN BAY RECREATION PARK

-2-

BACKGROUND

• Group Interested in promoting and facilitating the development of a “multi-use” recreation, leisure & cultural facility at the Golden Bay Recreation Park

• Numerous public meetings conducted since October 2010, to gauge interest and formulate what is desired

• 30 individual groups (leisure, sport & cultural) have expressed interest and support for this project. “Wish lists” from each group have been obtained.

• Approximately 1,300 members are represented by the 30 individual groups

• Group presented update to the Golden Bay Community Board 8 March 2011 (refer presentation dated 8.3.11)

THE PROPOSED FACILITY

We use the word ‘facility’ to represent not only a ‘building’ but also the surrounding facilities and environment (sports fields, car parking, A&P arena’s etc.)

In summary the “Proposed Facility” would encompass:-

Refer appendix for further detail.

6 playing fields (soccer, rugby, hockey)

4 tennis courts (existing)

3 netball courts

1 warm up area

2 squash courts

1 dance room (dance, yoga, tap-dancing, aerobics)

1 athletics track (and long jump, discus, shot put)

1 cricket field/pitch

1 large hall (netball, basketball, volleyball, badminton, climbing wall, aikido)

Weight Training & Gym Room

6 changing rooms

2 sets communal showers

Individual showers

3 sets of toilets (including disabled)

8 storage areas (accessible from outside)

-3-

2 cupboards / office storage (indoor)

5 storage areas off main hall

Manager’s office

Commercial kitchen

3 meeting rooms

1 youth room

Baby change / breast feeding room

Bar

2 Social areas (200 seat)

Shop (take-aways)

Pool (indoor 25m 8 lane)

Pool (learners)

Parking

Grandstand/Viewing Area

Refer presentation dated 8^th March 2011 for detail of diversity of users from Bridge Club, youth groups, sports organisations to Search & Rescue/Civil Defence.

PROGRESS SINCE 8^TH MARCH 2011

• Group ‘Wish Lists” have been prioritised, in order to determine ‘cross-overs’ and base facility/requirements desired. (Detailed in summary above.)

• A Bank Account has been opened and an initial donation of $750 has been received which will be used for advertising and small administrative type expenditure.

• Public Feedback and Responses sought, via Golden Bay Weekly and Nelson Mail articles, survey and Letters to the Editor.

• Feedback has been both positive and negative:-

1. GB Weekly Survey: Total Responses 76

Positive 53 (70%)

Negative 21 (27%)

Other 2 (3%)

2. Letters to Editor: Only 3 individuals have publicly opposed the proposal

• Negative Feedback - appear to relate to 2 main issues:-

1. Need (this particular facility or anything at all)
2. Rates

-4-

• Our Group feels that the individuals opposing the “Facility” are not totally familiar with what is actually being proposed (a misunderstanding of what they are actually opposing).
• We have invited detractors to our ‘Public Meetings” to gain a better knowledge of the proposal and to air their concerns – attendance by these people at any of our meetings has not been noted.

• We believe we will be in a better position to address any concerns by greater public awareness and knowledge of what is actually being proposed. In order to achieve this we need to move to the “Next Phase” – refer summary below.

• As to the issue around Rates – we believe 2 factors are at play here. Firstly, the perception by the individuals of a general dislike of rates, ie relating to rates as a whole not in respect to the facility proposed. Secondly, an understanding of what the actual impact is likely to be and what we will get for our money.

• In respect to the second issue and as mentioned above we believe we can only address and clarify the issue around rates by moving to the “Next Phase” – refer summary below.

PROPOSED NEXT PHASE

In order for the following to be achieved:-

1. Scoping of the proposed project
2. Assessment of feasibility
3. To provide detailed information to the public thus enabling a thorough understanding of the proposal
4. Address and gain further public feedback on the proposal

We believe we now need to take the following steps:-

1. To consider engaging a Project Manager to manage the organisational aspects of the proposal.

2. Engage a suitably qualified Architect Group to commence working with the group to initially complete sketch plans, modelling and feasibility analysis of the proposal.

-5-

3. Feasibility Analysis to include but not limited to issues and information around:-

1. cost of construction,
2. cost of additional land
3. operational budgets
4. funding of project

In moving to these next steps we will then be in a position to take tangible drawings, models and numbers behind the proposal to the public in order for the general public to gain a full understanding of the project and thus enable informed feedback.

Why A Project Manager?

• Provide qualified and experienced advice and management of the project
• Time, skills and relationships to ensure best possible outcome

Why An Architect/Group of Architects?

• We believe it is desirable that we engage and work with a group of people from the outset with the resources and expertise to see this project to its conclusion.
• It is imperative that understanding, planning and groundwork be thorough from the outset in order to save money at later stages of the project.
• Well-designed buildings:

1. Enhance and enrich the user’s activities and lives.
2. Living or working in a well-designed building can change the way we think and feel; it inspires us, uplifts us, brings us together in new ways, and promotes well-being and health.

• Make a positive contribution to the urban or rural landscape.
• Sustain and protect the environment.
• Provide an opportunity for sound investment.
• Leave a legacy for future generations to enjoy
• A skilled architect can;

1. Help clarify what we want.
2. Bring vision, design skill, and creativity to the project.
3. Maximise potential and create value by taking the project beyond the ordinary.
4. Avoid predictable responses to a site or brief, and offer practical solutions to problems.

-6-

5. Offer a broad range of skills, including; design, cost analysis, contract management and project supervision.
6. Liaise and consult with other professionals including engineers, quantity surveyors and building contractors.

Every architectural project follows a series of clear stages and an architect's professional expertise brings consistency and quality to each step in the building process.

The Project Brief is the first stage of sharing information and describing the vision we have for our site & project. The Project Brief should clearly articulate our needs and vision.

Concept Design is the second phase of the project. At this point, the architect considers all the options and will present us with several solutions, through a series of drawings, perspective sketches, computer rendering or physical models.

Developed Design is the third phase of the project. When a concept has been agreed, the architect will test the ideas and refine the details to shape the final design of the building. At this stage the budget will be discussed and priorities will be set in terms of cost, time, and quality.

Planning Approval is necessary before the final, detailed or working drawings can be finalised. Once all the consents for the project have been finalised, working drawings allow a construction contractor to assess the full scope of the project prior to the Tender Process.

Building Consent is crucial to the actual construction or renovation and your architect is the best person to understand the relevant codes and to apply for this consent.

Choosing a builder and contractors is another important role the architect can help with. The architect is well-placed to help co-ordinate and integrate the contribution of all building professionals (engineers, quantity surveyors, building contractors etc.) into the building process.

Throughout the construction of the building, the architect can manage the contractual and financial transactions as well as oversee the construction phase of the project to ensure that best building practice is maintained and that the building is one of quality.

Once the building is completed, the architect will assess the construction for quality and provide a detailed list of remaining work. The architect will collect all trade warranties from

-7-

the main contractor, secure a Code of Compliance Certificate, administer the final payment and issue the main contractor with a Defects Liability Certificate.

We have the opportunity here to design and construct a facility that we will still be proud of in 50-100 years and which remains fit for purpose.

It is proposed that any actions/work undertaken by these people/groups would be at the sole recommendation and approval of the Committee proposing this project.

Action Plan

1. Existing ‘working group’ behind the Recreation Park Facility is restructured into the following (or something similar):-

1. An Incorporated Society is formed
2. Executive Committee consisting of up to 6 members and chairperson
3. Full Committee consisting of representatives of all potential facility users

2. Expressions of Interest to be sought for the role of Project Manager (role and job description to be confirmed)
3. Expressions of Interest to be sought for the role of Architect (role and job description to be confirmed). Initial scope of this role would be limited to the “Brief” and “Concept Design” Phases of the process, however with the view that the appointed Architect would continue to the end of this project in the event that it proceeds.

In the likely event that we have more than 1 applicant for either of these roles it would be suggested that:-

1. The applicants are then short listed by the Executive Committee in consultation with Tasman District Council,
2. Short-listed applicants then asked to make a presentation to the Executive Committee and a Council representative
3. As a result of the interview and presentations, a successful candidate will be appointed

-8-

REQUEST

On behalf of the Group of citizens behind making this proposal happen for the good of all residents in Golden Bay, I now request the Golden Bay Community Board:-

1. Supports our proposal, as detailed in the Action Plan above.
2. Recommends to the Tasman District Council that funding is made available to undertake:-

1. The appointment of a Project Manager
2. The appointment of an Architect
3. The Initial Design (to concept stage only) and Feasibility Study, including costing, of the project
4. Further public consultation

Dean Lund Peter Blasdale Jenny Pomeroy

Facility Project Meeting

Facility Project Meeting. 11.a,m. 1^st June 2011.

Those attending:Peter Blasdale (mountain biking etc), Jenny Pomeroy (bridge), Jenny Cooper ( project skills), Sally-Ann Neal (rugby, swimming), Glenn Thorn (TDC), Lloyd Kennedy (TDC), Mik Symmons GBCB, Carolyn McLellan GBCB, Karen Brookes GBCB, Leigh Gamby GBCB, Martine Boullier, Councillor.

Jenny P: We represent different groups. There are still some approaching us, e.g. roller derby.

They would like to include recreation and leisure and community groups in Recreation Park plans. A list is to be sent in.

Money ($750.00) in bank account to cover articles, publicity.

The GBW survey resulted in 76 contacts. 53 (70%) were positive, 21 (27%) were negative. 2 (3%) were neutral.

Also 6 letters have been received. 3 were opposed and 3 supported the project.

The negatives mentioned were related to whether there is need for a new facility, or to rates concerns.

These concerns can be addressed through public knowledge.

Scoping of projects is wanted. Knock-on effects of existing facilities needs consideration and education. A professional project manager and architect are needed from the outset for help with feasibility, costs and fund raising to save costs. Then results will be put to the public.

It is hoped that this project will bring the community together.

It’s an opportunity for sound investment. An architect will be needed to consult with building professionals for quality outcome.

Concept design

Develop design. Cost, time quality.

Planning approval. Building consent.

Action plan: existing group to be incorporated into a society with a full committee and would like Community Board support.

Lloyd: re funding. TDC can fund through facilities rate$20 to 25,000 for this. The Motueka pool project employed for their decision an architect who was offered a set price for a concept drawing only. This could be brought to the Community Board to apply to TDCfor money. It doesn’t trigger the facilities operation rate.

Glenn: offer to help architect.

Carolyn: There’s extra land that can be contracted for in reserves. You need to get to concept planning stage. Some things are already budgeted for. Don’t do the operation costs. That’s the project manager’s job.

Jenny C: Different phases to be discussed. We want work brought to budget. The concept is for toddlers to 90 year olds.

Mik: Ideal application for lotteries re Communities Facilities Feasibility funding. But is that now usable. There have already been previous Van Der Skog applications for this project. Only one is granted. My concern is whether our pot has been used up.

Carolyn: Investigate that option first . Nothing will be wasted you can still be getting other quotes Mik will talk with Kay Latham of Internal Affairs in Nelson

Lloyd: The TDC application isto be reduced by any Lotteries funding amount

Carolyn: Have preliminary talks with Kay Latham then go out to the community with “ This is the ideas and these are the add-ons and take offs” Pool is a huge cost. Look at viability.Duplications. Are you planning new squash courts?

No decisions on anything have been made at this stage, but the list we have includes new and existing things.

Lloyd: Look long term, 20 years for swimming pool.

Carolyn: Figures will speak for themselves

Mik: A way to spread funding e.g. lotteries grants, great.

Carolyn: If Lotteries are applied to and approve, you are then known.

What is the impact on rates of $3.4 million?

Peter: .79 cents per household per week.

Carolyn: $16.80 extra on rates and a further $30 for facilities operations rate.

Lloyd: TDC could change their policy to charging communities rates they don’t yet pay even if those communities don’t yet have a facility.

Carolyn: When do you plan to start fund raising?

Jenny P: Next year maybe. In 18 months.

Peter: It will be slower.

Carolyn: There will be 1 million having to be raised in this community shortly re other projects.

Lloyd: Canterbury earthquake will take up a lot of available money. Canterbury Trust will now put more into Christchurch.

Mik: Steve Mitchell of Moutere Hills can advise you. At the moment there are lots of groups and ideas. As it shakes down less will be possible. How do you see the common vision?

Jenny P: lots of crossover. Not much specific, some alternatives. Moutere Hills made$20,000 in their 1^st year. They are making $120,000 now.

Mik:High school students are keen because of parent non-engagement at present because of venues on different sites.

Carolyn: There are other interests asking too. Arts, museum. We’ll see how this pans out.

Lloyd: We need concrete plans for the public. Ask through the Community Board for TDC seeding funding.

Petr to Glen: The work done re layout of pitches was to see if they would fit.

Glen; A building in the middle avoids cold and dark issues re the fields. Some sports wanting summer play too, which can compromise fields.

Peter: More parking is needed. Some of the new parking could be used by the Playhouse.

Jenny C: Individual clubs fund-raised separatelyin Picton for extras to improve their own particular needs.

Meeting ended 12. 15 p.m.

Minutes taken by Karen Brookes.

Meeting of 28 April 2011

Golden Bay Shared Facility

Notes of Meeting 28 April – 7pm Rugby Club

Present

John Byrne, Faye Turnbull, Roger Tait, Dean Lund, Arlun Wells, Wayne Packard, Graham Pomeroy, Ricky Ward, Emma Trethewey, Tony Cunningham, Jean Wedderburn, Shane Johnston, Marguerite Dooley, Fleur Murray, Jenny Cooper, Dave Myall, Ann Jones, Jenny Pomeroy.

Apologies

Mik Symmons, Peter Blasdale and Kevin Winter

Community Board Presentation

Dean, Peter and Jenny P attended the Community Board meeting in Collingwood on Tuesday 8 March where Dean gave a presentation of our vision, target groups and progress to date for the Shared Facility. A copy of his presentation is on the blog www.goldenbayfacility.blogspot.com They felt that there was a positive response to the project, particularly from the public gallery (drew applause!) Stuart Borlase spoke to the Community Board about the Museum’s idea for a facility.

Carolyn McLellan, Community Board Chair has written to Dean thanking him for his presentation. Attached.

Concept Plan

Fleur has drawn a concept plan to scale of the project which has been on display in the library for the last 4 weeks. She stressed that this was just an idea not set in stone and really just an experiment to check that it fits on the site.

Arlun / Fleur both said that concept had to include some room for expansion both in the building and field space.

Feedback

The publicity (community board presentation, article in GB Weekly and concept plan) have drawn some feedback, both positive and negative. If the negative letters continue, it would be a good idea to invite these people to one of our meetings. If it carries on ask TDC to respond.

We now need some more concrete ideas and a plan with specifics before we seek more public opinion. (Roger, Jenny C).

A&P Show

Jean Wedderburn attended the meeting as she wants us to be mindful that the area created could still host the A&P Show – would still need enough space for horse events, be able to put pegs in the ground, somewhere for the cattle section etc.

There was some discussion about the Booth. Jean made it clear that a display area the size of Booth needed to be maintained.

Dean stressed that every group that was involved in the project should be going forward. No one should be taking a backward step. The group can work with the A&P Assoc.

Other Groups

There are several other groups in the Bay also looking at creating a facility – a swimming pool near the High School possibly using waste hot water from Fonterra; Museum and Arts Council.

Next Steps

Small group (Fleur, Dave, Ann, Jean, Marguerite, Wayne and Jenny P(Peter to be invited)) to meet on Weds 4 May to condense and rationalise wish lists

Dean to talk to Lloyd Kennedy to get some idea of costs (building and running) for big ticket items – building, pool, squash courts, astroturf. Also to ask Lloyd for some help with the next step – feasibility study.

Dean will set up a bank account (GB Facility Account) with Roger and Ann as signatories to pay for incidental expenses being incurred by individuals at present eg GB Weekly ads.

Visiting other facilities – would be a good idea for the same (consistency of information) members of the group to visit some of the other facilities in the area.

Ann to get hold of rules and regulations for indoor pools

Next Meeting Monday 30^th May, 7pm Rugby Club.

Check out Pictons project website at   www.endeavourparkpicton.co.nz

Presentation to Community Board Meeting in Collingwood 8-3-2011

PRESENTATION TO

GOLDEN BAY COMMUNITY BOARD

8^TH MARCH 2011

“PROPOSED GOLDEN BAY COMMUNITY RECREATION, LEISURE & CULTURAL CENTRE”

GOLDEN BAY RECREATION PARK

Proposed New Community Shared Facility

Vision Statement

To build a new Community Recreation/Leisure/Cultural Facility at the Golden Bay Recreation Ground, which will provide a central hub for community activities in Golden Bay. In so doing, encouraging and enhancing participation, health, social and economic benefits to the residents of Golden Bay.

By having many activities on a central site it encourages greater interaction of the community. Our target user groups cover the entire population of Golden Bay from aged 1 to 90 years plus. We firmly believe the health benefits across all age groups have significant physical, mental and community benefits which translates into an overall healthier and more interactive community.

We are wanting to future-proof the provision of Sport, Recreation, Leisure and Cultural activities in Golden Bay for the generations to follow.

Who Are We?

Our combined group of like-minded sport, leisure, cultural and community groups has developed over the past 9 months.

There have been 5 open public meetings since 14 October 2010, when Peter Blasdale first introduced the idea of a combined shared facility in Golden Bay. These meetings have been advertised via the Golden Bay Weekly, an Internet based blog and word of mouth. Initially in excess of 60 people from all walks of life attended the first two meetings, with a core group of approximately 20 now attending and speaking for their individual groups

Interested parties include, as anticipated, many sporting groups, but of equal importance is the appeal of this facility to a far wider representation of the community, including youth groups, bridge, search and rescue, tap dancing, and others.

Who Are We Targeting?

While it is acknowledged that there is some crossover between the groups/participation, with members involved in more than one activity, even allowing for this, the provision of the facility will immediately benefit in excess of 30 individual groups totalling in excess of 1300 members, these being the groups and members that have already expressed a desire to see this proposal succeed and that would like to be included.

In addition to the above number there are others in our community who are not formally members of the identified groups who will benefit, eg youth activities, school holiday programmes. As well as increased participation rates across all groups due to having superior facilities.

Furthermore, we are not only wanting to encompass existing participants but actually increase participation rates across all activities, attract external use of the facilities by people from outside of Golden Bay.

Support

Hearteningly there has been interest and enthusiasm for this project from across the whole of Golden Bay. Groups include clubs with a long history in the Bay and some more recently formed. Happily this project will reach the full spectrum of interests and ages in our community.

The initial numbers (30 individual groups covering in excess of 1,300 people) are immediately in support of this proposed concept.

Why A Centralised/Amalgamated Facility?

Facilities currently available across Golden Bay are scattered on several sites. They are not dedicated facilities and, in particular, fail to provide adequate toilet, showers and changing rooms.

A number of groups do not have homes let alone facilities to cater for their demands. An excellent example of this is the Golden Bay Football Club with playing venues currently split between Golden Bay High School and the Golden Bay Recreation Park. Neither venue has a clubhouse, while no facilities are available at the Recreation Park for changing and showering, an issue when hosting visiting teams.

A central facility such as proposed will improve family life and prevent parents dashing from one place to another ferrying their children. They will be able to spend more time watching their offspring, maybe partaking in sport themselves and definitely improving social interaction. Parents will become better roles models to their children by either directly participating in their childrens activities or participating themselves.

Currently all nonsporting activities are also in scattered sites, again with variable suitability for purpose. This limits exposure of those groups to the broader social interaction of a community. By having a central facility all groups are exposed to new ideas. The more people participate in community social activities, the more a community bonds and strengthens. This contributes to its overall wellbeing and is to be strongly encouraged.

The provision of modern, up to date facilities would engender pride in the community when hosting tournaments and invitation events – be it sporting or otherwise. For sporting events in particular the absence of shower and changing facilities reflects days that are now gone.

A combined/shared facility will produce efficiencies and cost savings across the board, in effect rather than spreading the available resources thinly across the community, these valuable resources would be pooled in order to provide enhanced facilities for all.

Promoting Golden Bay

By including a suitable kitchen and social area able to seat 200 people, at a fresh and desirable location additional external benefits accrue. These include but are not limited to weddings and conferences, which in turn promote Golden Bay and the many activities it offers, thereby enhancing local tourism, employment and overall growth to the wellbeing of all residents.

Reasons For This To Succeed

Things very much on our side are:

• Available site with promise of room for expansion and the good will for this
• Enthusiastic and committed team involved in this project
• Leadership to get it up and running
• Enthusiastic response to the idea by the community - over 30 disparate groups have already expressed interest

Benefits to the community:

• Enhanced sporting facilities
• Enhanced community facilities
• A meeting place big enough for individual and community events
• Reaching all ages enhances mutual respect and understanding
• Increased opportunities for participation in new activities
• General improvement in mental and physical health
• Unquantifiable but economic benefit across the Bay as a consequence of visitors coming to events (tournaments, conferences etc) with overnight stays. Such participants often return to a previously unknown area on holiday.

Community spirit is understood but intangible – this facility will provide a focus for harnessing the good in a community which is beneficial for the health and wellbeing of all.

The Moutere Hills Recreation Centre is a similar facility to what is being proposed. It has been running for 5 years. Income from users of this facility has increased 6 fold over this time. There is a permanent member of staff running Moutere Hills. Golden Bay can emulate this.

We have an excellent existing site for this proposal, however with a few changes we can truly make it first class and for the entire community.

While the existing facilities at the Recreation Park have catered for their intended purpose over the past 50 or so years, the community has out-grown what is currently available and there is a real need to be forward-looking and take the bold next step to meet the combined needs of the community for the ensuing 50 plus years.

Where Are We At?

To date our Group has completed the following:-

1. Conducted 5 public meetings to gauge interest in the concept.
2. Concept fully supported by 30 user groups (sport, leisure & community)
3. Obtained ‘wish-lists’ from these user groups to determine what is actually desired and ascertain the level of crossover of facilities
4. Met with Sport Tasman to discuss general concept and how the likes of Moutere Hills and Murchison proceeded with their developments.
5. Met with Lloyd Kennedy (Tasman District Council) to discuss councils view of the concept and seek advice as to process to follow.
6. Meeting with Golden Bay Community Board 8 March 2011 to update them on the proposal

Next Steps

Dependent upon response from the Golden Bay Community Board, the following is proposed:-

1. Prioritise Group “Wish Lists”
2. Put a general concept plan out for public debate
3. Seek Council funding to assist with a feasibility study
4. Formalise our Group and together work jointly with a ‘consultant’ to complete the feasibility study.

It must be stressed that at all stages in the development of the concept and formalising of the project we welcome input from all sectors of the community. We have no pre-conceived plans and are solely motivated by the provision of a facility that will ultimately benefit the whole of the Golden Bay Community.

Groups who have expressed an interest:

Sporting

Aikido 25 members

Athletics 85 members

Basketball

Boxing

Cricket

Hockey 75 members

Mountain Bike 120 members

Netball 180 players

Rugby 140 members

Soccer 172 members

Squash 70 members

Swimming Club 110 members

Tennis 140 members

Women’s Football 20 members

Leisure

Aerobics

Aqua Aerobics

Bridge Club 43 members

Indoor Climbing Club 20-30 members

Conference Centre

Swimming Generally

Tap Dancing 100 members

Community

Arts Council

Community Workers (recreation, youth)

Search and Rescue 35 actual members but serves the whole community

Impact Youth Trust 25 involved and growing

Dean Lund               Jenny Pomeroy          Peter Blasdale

First Meeting of 2011-Taking the Next Step

Golden Bay Shared Facility

Notes of Meeting 21 February – 7pm Rugby Club

Present

Peter Blasdale, Dean Lund, Kevin Winter, Wouter de Maat, Graham Pomeroy, Jenny Pomeroy, Fleur Murray, Dave Myall, Ann Jones, Roger Tait, Nikita Buys, Carol Baker, Duncan MacKenzie, Mik Symmons, Jenny Cooper, Faye Turnbull, Pauline Arndt

Apologies

Wayne Packard, Dave Lewis, Graham Ball, Angela Berkett

Dean reported back on the meetings he had with Steve Mitchell (Chairman of Moutere Hills) and Dave Tippett (Sport Tasman) and Lloyd Kennedy (TDC)

Points from Steve Mitchell and Dave Tippett Meeting

• 2 clear stages to project, first to build and second to operate. Once the build is finished a new group will be set up to run the project, could be the same people
• A feasibility study needs to include feasibility of operations
• Feasibility study needs to be done externally so that it is impartial but much of the leg work could be done by the group
• Wish lists need to be prioritised using a number of factors including: combined spaces; how long a group has been operating; whether a group is affiliated to a national body; finances of group
• A constitution needs to be formalised
• Committee running project needs to be a mix across all user groups
• Draw up a skills matrix of the people involved and work out where outside help is needed

Points from Meeting with Lloyd Kennedy

• Group needs to take the lead – has to be community driven and have the support of the community
• Recommend that group presents to community board (arranged for 8 March)
• If the project makes sense there is separate money available for the feasibility study - a lot of work to be done to get this grant, but it is there
• Funding is available for 2012-2013, but can be pushed out. The amount set aside is inflation adjusted
• Keep whole community informed

Pool

Ann Jones reported on some information she has found on pools. Len Irving of Buller Recreation Centre is willing to come and talk to our group. Ann to send costing spread sheet through to Jenny P so that all information held in one place.

Carol Baker – Impact Youth Trust

Carol reported that at present the group are meeting at her home, but up to 25 young people and so need a dedicated space.

Land

Roger Tait has talked to A&P Assoc who are willing to lease their land to TDC. Has also spoken to Philip and Rose Windle who are also happy for TDC to purchase some of their land. Both blocks will “square off” the area and give room for more playing fields.

Community Board Presentation

Jenny P to write a vision statement and ideas for a presentation for the meeting on 8 March.