My Account
| William Fraser Reserve – Omaha Beach: Design & consenting – $111,000 Project management – $26,000 Upgrade of bore water supply – $110,000 Construction – $995,500 Total: $1,242,500 | Wellsford: Design & consenting – $86,600 Project management – $68,000 Construction – $979,600 Total: $1,134,200 |
Ratepayers are paying more than $2 million for two prefab toilet blocks – one in Wellsford and the other at Omaha.
Work has started on the Wellsford facility which will contain five toilets, urinals and a baby change table.
It is expected to be transported to the site, behind the existing brick toilet block on State Highway 1, at the end of this month.
Utilities and fit-out will take a further month, provided there are no Covid-19 or supply chain delays, so the toilets are expected to open late next month. The existing toilet block will be then demolished.
“I am sure everyone is excited to see it underway,” Board chair Phelan Pirrie says.
“Positioning the new facility at the back of the existing toilet block really opens up the site and creates a green space that connects very well with the town centre.”
Better lighting in the carpark has been included as part of the project.
The Omaha toilet block will be installed in the William Fraser Reserve, next to the surf club, and will include seven toilets, urinals, changing rooms and outdoor showers.
Local Board deputy chair Beth Houlbrooke says an Omaha Beach scene will decorate the side of the building.
“The surf club toilets are showing their age, requiring increasing maintenance, and cleaning, and wind-borne sand frequently blocks the drains,” Houlbrooke says.
“While the impact of extreme weather events and potential flooding on the facility has been considered, it is still the best site available.”
She says materials used in the lower portion of the Omaha toilet block will be durable to withstand periodic exposure to flood waters, with all power outlets placed higher up than usual.
Northern Board representatives were asked to comment a) if they were comfortable with the $2m-plus cost for the two toilet blocks; b) did they scrutinise where the money was being spent; and c) did they raise any concerns at Board meetings or workshops? Here are their answers:
Steve Garner
a) No, I am not comfortable with the Board spending this amount on prefabricated anything.
b) Yes, and the repeated messaging we get from Auckland Council staff is that this is the best or only way to achieve what we want for our community.
c) Yes, the cost to Council vs what a private individual would pay for a service or item/structure is abhorrent! This has been the case from day one of Auckland Council and needs to change – from the top! Council needs to enable activity development and progress, and find ways to speed things up rather than slow them down.
Tim Holdgate
a) Yes, I am certainly very uncomfortable, particularly because your … “$2 million on two prefab toilet blocks” is the first I have heard of any fiscal detail relating the likely cost. Such was to have been presented back to the Board following an earlier workshop, which raised some questions on the project.
b) No, simply because no such financial information has been presented at Board level.
c) Yes, I raised some concept concerns after meeting some Omaha residents to listen to their concerns regarding the proposed toilets. This is symptomatic of ineffective Board workshop meetings and lack of collaborative decision-making. Council’s current financial position calls for financial costs to be reviewed with all such projects.
Colin Smith
a) No, these toilets were chosen because they are prefab and easily movable. I would hate to think of what it would cost if they were built onsite. Why build the toilets in Gisborne – what was wrong with local builders?
b) No, there was no cost mentioned. Being prefabbed, we were informed this was the most cost effective way
c) Yes, I did raise concerns about the toilets. This process has taken far too long and Council costs are not cheap. Wellsford needs a toilet at the Gull service station. We were to have three public consultations, to save money we only had two. This is what happens when the Local Board is run by a ticket. I believe the Board workshops should be open to the public to stop this happening.
Beth Houlbrooke (abridged)
I find it incredible that the other northern members are saying that they do not recall debate on this topic, or being kept informed of costs of this project along the way. There have been multiple opportunities for members to avail themselves of all this information through reading the material which contains all the financials, and to ask questions as these projects have progressed:
• Annually, when we approve the Work Programme
• Quarterly, when we receive the Performance Report
• Monthly, when Community Facilities update the local board on current projects
• Anytime, by consulting the Work Programme spreadsheet which we all have a copy of, and by contacting staff.
All of this is public information and can be found in the minutes and agendas of the Board’s business meetings where these projects were approved by the Board.
Although these are prefabricated, they are custom made for the sites by Permaloo. They have to be built extremely robustly for the amount of use they will receive from large visitor numbers at both sites. As well as the costs of design, consenting and project management, the construction costs have included the addition of a water upgrade at Omaha, demolishing the old toilets at Wellsford and siteworks to prepare for the pocket park which will take their place, and then there’s things like the connection of services, and additional items such as ramps, steps, and paths.
Although these are large sums of money, understand that these are funded from depreciation because they are renewals of existing facilities. Even if we had been able to find any additional savings on them, we would not have been able to spend that money elsewhere (no it can’t go on repairing roads!). This does not mean that we have not carefully scrutinised the costs every step of the way. So no, we should never feel “comfortable” when responsible for such large sums of ratepayer money. It is a matter of staying alert, asking questions, and then taking ownership of the decisions we make collectively as a Board.
