Partial removal of Mount Maunganui's $1.5million artificial reef is taking a step forward, with Bay of Plenty Regional Council seeking tenders on options for the work.
Photo: file.
Council last month announced the artificial reef, 250m offshore from the Tay St/Marine Parade corner, will be partially removed as it has never functioned as intended.
It was advised work would begin as soon as possible after the April 16 announcement, but council confirms the tender process is only now to be publically advertised.
Bay of Plenty Regional Council consents manager Helen Creagh says the reasoning behind this move is the level of public interest the removal is generating.
Designed by Raglan-based company ASR, the sandbag structure concept has also been sold around the world, including Britain, where there are also problems.
In the past the reef has been criticised, with surfers saying it didn't provide the intended surf breaks, and surf lifesaving organisations became concerned it was creating dangerous rips for swimmers.
Helen says council is currently preparing the tendering documents, which include the scope of the works.
'The actual methodology for partial removal of the reef will be considered as part of the tendering,” says Helen.
BOPRC deputy chief executive Eddie Grogan said at the time of the announcement, the reef's expected positive effects had not been realised.
'It's also generated some unforeseen effects, including creating a large scour hole, which affects waves and currents, increasing the frequency and intensity of rips, which pose a serious risk to swimmers in the popular Tay St area,” said Eddie.
'We have commissioned a specialist report to consider the effects on the beach, swimmer safety, navigation safety, surfing values, cultural values and ecology. The review evaluated three options – status quo, removing the reef and repair and restoration – and recommended removal.”
The review, carried out by Focus Resource Management Group, advises removal is the safest and most-cost-effective option, eliminating environmental and safety risks, together with any potential liability for council.
With respect to environmental and safety issues the review says removal will prevent any future upgrade or restoration of the structure and mean permanent loss of community investment to date.
The review recommends the reef structure be removed in a staged process. Removing the largest geotextile containers, at a cost of about $60,000, would likely eliminate health and safety and environmental issues.
The Mount Maunganui Reef Trust obtained resource consent in August 2000 to construct the pilot offshore submerged reef.
It was constructed from 2005-2008, with donations from the public and community funding groups.



6 comments
Great Ideas?
Posted on 11-05-2014 14:50 | By Watchdog
Sometimes what seems a great idea (and I always thought this one was stupid), are only disproved by reality. And here is another ridiculous spend which I do hope the Ratepayers don't have to pay for. Sadly it seems we will. But I hope the same people who contributed to the reef's establishment will also contribute to its removal. Get rid of it and please.....NO more "great ideas" please!!!!
Suckers
Posted on 11-05-2014 15:13 | By Spy
Hey wasn't this magic reef sold on a benefit being when it was no longer viable you got in the water with a Stanley knife cut the bags and the sand melted into the rest of the beach. I don't remember any $60,000 restoration bill being mentioned. What are these $60 k worth of health and safety and environmental issues ? We have dealt with the Rena aftermath so some bags of sand shouldn't be an issue to cost $60,000 ( plus GST ? )
$1.5million
Posted on 11-05-2014 22:22 | By Capt_Kaveman
i think some one is milking this to the max, just cut the bags and let the sea do the rest,
Just normal
Posted on 12-05-2014 11:17 | By YOGI BEAR
Some womble has a "great idea" that they know anything and everything worth knowing, but of course mother nature just seems to know that little wee bit more that makes it obvious that they don't and never did. But never let a little wee problem like that get in the wy of any "good" idea.
Why?
Posted on 12-05-2014 14:03 | By djm
Do we really need to spend $60000 on this? What about a sign warning of rips in the area? This section of the beach is popular for surfing - swimming not so much. No flagged area or lifeguards on patrol. There are rips the whole way along the coast, not just at Tay st...
Award the tender..
Posted on 12-05-2014 14:18 | By awaroa
To Spy.. They sound like they know what needs to be done and probably at a fraction of the cost.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.