Businesses cases are being prepared on five different options for the redevelopment of the Mount Hot Pools by Tauranga City Aquatics Ltd CEO Tania Delahunty.
She received instruction to do so by Tauranga City Councillors on Monday when she and TCAL director Warren Banks presented the options, without costs, to them.
The meeting was for a catch-up regarding the pools' emergency repairs, the redevelopment project and the Environment Court action.
At present, the plan is to seek an adjournment of the court hearing because there are unsettled planning issues.
The incoming city plan includes the hot pools as a scheduled activity, which they are not at the moment. There is some doubt about their legal status.
Progressing the city plan mediation with TCAL on September 21-22 will also attempt to deal with non complying parts of the proposed redevelopment – noise and building height.
The first two of the options presented fit within the existing footprint and will not require the annexing of tent sites from the adjacent public reserve.
Option one is the existing pools, with new pipes and a filtration system to meet New Zealand standards, plus new concourses and a repaint.
Option two has a new children's pool added as well as the option one makeover.
Option three encompasses option two and includes three new sensation pools, plus a refurbished entry and four or five massage rooms.
Option four is the ‘plan B' presented at mediation without the wellness centre.
It includes new fresh water children's pools and play areas, four or five treatment rooms and a new reception area.
Option five includes an 11 room wellness centre built over campsites, but not over quite as many as the 24 campsites originally expected to be taken from the public reserve for the commercial activity.
The court date for mediation is this Friday, August 12.
The councillors want that delayed so they have time to hear from Tania Delahunty on the business cases for the different pools options – she thinks that will take about two weeks.
There's a council meeting on August 15 and another projects and monitoring committee meeting on August 22.
As Councillor David Stewart saw things, the council will make a decision on the business case and go forward from there.
There're several issues to be resolved, says Tauranga City council ceo Ken Paterson.
There is the City Plan appeals process which TCAL is appealing on four issues – a spelling mistake, and parking, noise and height.
Mediation on those issues is set down for September 21-22. TCAL's is the only appeal, the Sandy Walkers having vacated their appeal.
This Friday TCAL will be seeking an adjournment on the hot pools redevelopment issue.
'We will be approaching the court seeking adjournment until the city plan issues are agreed to,” says Ken. 'Then all parties can engage within that framework.
'The council having agreed there was some measure of sense in the approach of taking one thing at a time, they still want to be well advised as to what their options were.
"They asked that the council get together with TCAL and resolve the what the best scheme is for everybody and what's the business plan for that scheme.”
The case is going to the Environment Court because TCAL is appealing the planning commissioner's decision declining consent for the expanded hot redevelopment project. The council agreed to the appeal, which is being opposed by a group allied under the name of the Mount Protection Society.



15 comments
Follow the US model
Posted on 08-08-2011 17:56 | By Tony
Borrow so more money she'll be right Mate
OPTIONS
Posted on 08-08-2011 19:00 | By STRAITAS
Whats with these Options??? I thought It was already sorted. wat the people wanted was repair the Pools Now they"re coming up with all this other C - - - . Com'n TCC grow some GONAADS get the pools fixed to the Safety Standards and lets get on with it.
Time All Councillors Woke Up to Who Put Them In Power
Posted on 08-08-2011 19:09 | By tabatha
The public of Tauranga, or it seems a large proportion of them, are not in favour of anything other than repairs and tidying up of the existing pools. Touching or changing any part of the camping ground in my opinion is interfering with Mauao is not an option to locals. When is Tania Delahunty, being paid by ratepayers, going to say oops we have made a mistake and need to retract and go with the status quo. I am sorry that some councillors seem to want to squander our, my, money on unnecessary options. If this was all stopped now some of the work needed around Tauranga could be brought back on stream or a reduction in spending would see loans reduced and the need for higher rates yet again next year stopped. Mr Mayor, put on your thinking hat and start listening to the people of Tauranga who elected you, I was one, but will be thinking twice next time unless you realise people voted you in not council staff. The CEO needs time to get to grips with the situation and make the right suggestions to Council. Do I dare say it a referendum through the local papers if not a proper one is needed. I feel the direction of the public will say no stop now. As I said on another ste the Hot Pools at the MOunt have not got the parking, the roading to handle the numbers Tania is trying to say they will get. Stop now and the more people that respond to this site the better, even it is a yeah or no is better than saying nothing. Thank you to those who have taken time to read this and hopefully respond.
GET ON WITH THE HEARING MATE
Posted on 08-08-2011 19:42 | By Secret Squirrel
This is like trying to avoid the executioneer on D-Day, the plans are a basically rehashed effort on the plans placed in front of the public years ago and TCAL decided to go for the most expensive (not there now). It is clear that TCAL have not read all of Commissioner Hill's report on it.
No means ...
Posted on 08-08-2011 19:42 | By bopguy
Wot happens if/when the Env Court also says no?
cost of maintenance upgrade forgotten
Posted on 08-08-2011 20:05 | By Inconvenient Truth
The cost of doing the renovations and upgrades to a normal level seem to have been forgotten here. I want to know who will pay for the upgrade (not the fancy one which seems doomed). Will it be users or ratepayers? What does the Mount Protection Society think? I'll start the discussion by saying it should be users because council shouldn't be going into further debt. Say it costs one million, how much increase in entry will that cost?
Raise the debt ceiling and we can afford anything!!
Posted on 08-08-2011 20:53 | By wreck1080
But seriously, the council should make a huge effort to reduce debt. Then, once a sustainable debt reduction plan is in place they can look into what is affordable and what is not. If the hot pools are not affordable, maybe it could be sold as a going concern.
What about option No6?
Posted on 08-08-2011 21:01 | By The Tomahawk Kid
What about option number 6 (should actually be number 1) SELL IT IMMEDIATELY, and let private enterprise do it properly and at no looting and raping of the ratepayers. Let them spend as much money as they want on it. Then they will run it properly if their own money is at stake. They will deliver EVERYTHING people want to attract customers. They will promote it to make it financially viable, They will . . . oh to hell with it . . . chose ALL of your options - and put the rates up - you know you want to, and wont stop until you do.
us model
Posted on 08-08-2011 21:38 | By STRAITAS
Yea that'll be right. DIG A BIGGER HOLE and bury the lot??????
NOISE PROBLEMS ?
Posted on 08-08-2011 23:01 | By BUSH WACKER
I guess that would be eminating from the massage palour department after dark perhaps? It could be a complete racket depending on the number of inhabitants.
Option Six
Posted on 09-08-2011 08:58 | By bigted
Bowl it, sell it & put up a tower, like the rest of the area.
Direct from 'Yes Minister
Posted on 09-08-2011 09:42 | By RawPrawn
If at first your proposal doesn't succeed, just keep rewriting it in different formats until it does. Bureaucracy 101. It's someone else's money anyway. If it wasn't so appallingly wasteful it'd be funny.
Option No6
Posted on 09-08-2011 09:55 | By Openknee8ted
I'm with Tomahawk Kid. Option 6 is the best option. If the Council can not run a swimming properly what the hell are they doing running the Council. I hope the next election produces some decent candidates in stead of the clowns we have at the moment.
The Mind Boggles
Posted on 09-08-2011 15:29 | By The author of this comment has been removed.
Just what part of NO is so hard for the apparently limited combined intelligence of TCC/TCAL to understand?? STILL looking at Wellness Centers etc, taking over campsites in a parking deficient area, when the Commissioner has given the only sensible RULING. NO means NO Stop wasting OUR money, and roll on the elections to remove these no-hopers.
PUBLIC ARE APPALLED AT HOW TCAL IS GOING ON
Posted on 10-08-2011 18:12 | By KAMIKAZE
Originally 2 options now we have 5 and still no business cases.NO.1 option for HOTPOOLS should be do nothing but regular maintenance work.Every time TCAL cough up figures they don't match up so lets just give the lot of them the biffo....
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.