Hawke's Bay Multi-use Sports Facility
Napier City Council has made the decision to withdraw a paper seeking a resolution of council as to whether to proceed to the next phase on the proposed Hawke’s Bay Multi-Use Sports Facility.
A detailed business case on the proposed facility – peer-reviewed with the support of Sport New Zealand – was shared with Councillors and stakeholders at a seminar in February. The business case was withdrawn from public debate due to many councillors still having unanswered questions.
Sport New Zealand and Napier City Council are now working together on accessing the sporting body’s latest research and analysis on the future growth of sporting codes. This evidence will be shared with Councillors to help ensure a well-justified decision is reached.
Mayor Dalton says making sure Napier has the right facilities to accommodate the current and future sporting desires of the Hawke’s Bay community is central to his council’s investment decision.
Councillors will spend the coming months attending workshops on the Multi-Use Sports Facility, and further consultation with Sport New Zealand, as well as its regional arm, Sport Hawke’s Bay, is planned. The paper is likely to be brought back to Council later this year for a decision on whether to proceed.
We are now asking you, the community, to tell us what you think of the proposed Multi-Use Sports Facility.
- What would the increased court space mean to you and your family?
- Do you see the benefit in a velodrome track for our community and region’s growth?
- Do you see the project as a whole benefiting our tourism and economic sectors?
If you have a view, share it with your Councillor or email it to email@example.com
In the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan (LTP), Council included a multi-use sports facility as a key consultation project, proposing $5 million of funding subject to the outcome of a detailed business case and partnership funding.
During the LTP consultation process Council received 629 submissions about the multi-use sports facility, of which 492 (78%) of the submissions supported Council’s consideration of the project.
A large number of submissions in opposition favoured increased indoor court space or a new swimming pool instead of a velodrome. Taking this into consideration, the design and Business Case were developmed for a multi-use sports facility that included three basketball courts as well as a velodrome. Additional swimming pool space is currently being considered by a separate business case study.
The detailed business case will explore site investigation, geotechnical investigation, planning assessment, preliminary design, site-based construction cost, stakeholder engagement, user demand and potential revenue, operating costs, social impact, governance, management and capital funding.
The operating models, successes and challenges of other velodromes and multi-use facilities, such as Invercargill and Cambridge, are also being studied.
Regional benefits from a multi-use sports facility include:
- An alternative indoor facility which will complement existing facilities and which can be used for a range of activities, including court sports, general recreation such as walking and running, track cycling, and non-sports related events
- A safe and accessible facility for all ages and abilities
- A chance to improve health and wellbeing, and positive activity statistics across a wide range of ages
- A positive contribution to Hawke’s Bay as a key tourism destination
- Economic benefits derived through tourism and from hosting events and visitors
- Widening Hawke’s Bay’s range of biking experiences from solely outdoor experiences (BMX, mountainbiking, road work, track and trail)
- Cross-training and use by other sports
- Improved cycling participation rates
Frequently Asked Questions
- Why is the Council proposing to build a multi-use velodrome in Napier?
- How much will it cost to build a multi-use velodrome?
- Why aren't you building a 50m pool instead?
- Why is the business case costing $500,000?
- Where would the multi-use velodrome be located?
- Why the shift from Park Island?
- Why not build a multi-use velodrome at the Regional Sports Hub?
- Would you use a local company to build it?
- What does ‘multi-use’ mean?
- What would be included in this kind of facility?
- Could different events or sports be held at the same time?
- How much will it cost to use this facility?
- How much will the multi-use velodrome cost to run?
- What if I have a disability?
- Who could use this track?
- Is a velodrome just for elite cyclists?
- Why build a 250m track?
- What is the difference between a UCI category 3 track and a category 2 track?
- Is it expensive to get into track cycling?
- Why hasn’t the Detailed Business Case been completed by 29 June?
- Why is the proposed facility no longer referred to as a Velodrome?
- Why not just build indoor courts? Or a velodrome?
- What progress has been made with the Detailed Business Case so far?
- When will the Detailed Business Case be considered by Council?
- Will this delay the project timing?
- Will this add more cost to the development of the Detailed Business Case?
- Where can I find out more about this project?
- Will the detailed business case be made public?
There is demand for additional indoor courts in Napier, particularly from basketball, futsal and volleyball. The need for additional indoor courts in Hawke’s Bay is supported by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Sport Facilities Plan (2015), Sport New Zealand National Indoor Facilities Strategy (2014) and Basketball New Zealand Facilities Guide (2014). There has been significant interest over many years in Hawke’s Bay having a velodrome to support the continued growth in cycling here in a safe and managed way.
Basketball (~2,900 participants), futsal (~1,100 participants) and volleyball (~1,500 participants) are examples of sports in Hawke’s Bay whose activities are limited due to insufficient indoor court space at peak use times, i.e. after school and evenings. Their opportunities to host national tournaments are also reduced by a lack of courts in close proximity.
There are many facilities around the world that successfully combine both indoor court activities and track cycling into a multi-use sports facility for maximum use. Examples can be seen in Invercargill, Derby (England), Newport (Wales) and Milton (Canada).
If Hawke’s Bay had such a facility, there would be potential to significantly enhance sport and recreation opportunities.
Cycling in this region is very popular with more than 30,000 riders living here. With its network of pathways, trails, roads, BMX, mountain bike parks, Ramblers and the Hawke’s Bay Mountain Bike Clubs here (respectively one of the largest road cycling clubs and the largest mountain bike club in the country), participation rates on a per capita basis are amongst the highest in New Zealand.
Based on initial design work for the indicative business case and the costs of building the Cambridge and Invercargill velodromes, the capital cost has been estimated at $15 million.
Napier City Council would provide $5 million which would come from the Parklands residential development and not rates. Work being undertaken as part of the detailed business case will confirm whether a multi-use sports facility can be built in Hawke’s Bay for $15 million.
A business case is presently underway to investigate options for replacing and expanding swimming pool space at the Napier Aquatic Centre. Options will be presented to Council early 2017 before going out to the community for feedback.
The $500,000 is the total of the estimated costs that Council will incur to get to the point where the detailed business case can be considered by Councillors as set out in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan. It doesn’t cover just the cost for the detailed business case, but includes the costs associated with preparing the indicative business case (considered by Council in 2015) and other work required to ensure Councillors can make a fully informed decision on whether to proceed with the project.
These costs include site and geotechnical investigation, planning assessment, preliminary design, site-based construction costing, stakeholder engagement, user demand, potential revenue sources, operating costs, social impact, governance, management and capital funding. This is key information to help the Council decide whether to go ahead with it, but much of it will also benefit the project should it proceed to development and become operational.
Part of the detailed business case requires the development of site options. The current preferred option is for a Hawke’s Bay multi-Use sports facility to be located adjacent to the Pettigrew.Green Arena (PGA) in Taradale. This location is considered to be the best for the following reasons:
- Potential to utilise existing PGA facilities (e.g. reception, changing rooms, offices, meetings rooms etc.) to reduce scope and cost
- Significant EIT Hawke’s Bay sports presence, including a sports lab
- Good access to roads, bus stops and cycle trails, near to Hastings and Central Hawke’s Bay
- 25,000 students live within 15km of PGA versus 15,000 within 15km of Park Island
- 105,000 residents live within 15km of PGA versus 70,000 within 15km of Park Island
- PGA is seeking additional indoor court space to meet the well identified demand for additional indoor courts in the Hawke’s Bay
- Enhances PGA as an indoor event venue. It has the potential to add another three courts and make PGA a six-court venue.
- EIT is interested in making land adjacent to PGA available for the development on the basis it will add to their attractiveness as a tertiary destination and potentially extend what can be offered
- User preference suggests greater intangible benefits through adding to Council’s existing community facility network and opportunities for recreation experiences
- Provides PGA with an opportunity to expand its multi-use facilities
The indicative business case considered several location options and recommended a site within the Park Island Northern Hub. Reasoning included that the land available at Pettigrew-Green Arena (PGA), one of the short-listed options, was considered to have a wider range of potential future uses than the land available at Park Island.
The short-listed options were considered equivalent in terms of the tangible benefits they deliver; e.g. revenue generation, the ability to host large-scale events and economic return through tourism and visitation but different in their ability to deliver the intangible benefits, i.e. Park Island utilisation, and community amenity and experience.
The report noted that land adjacent to Park Island and PGA were still viable sites. Work being undertaken for the detailed business case has identified other synergies with PGA and in particular that a multi-use velodrome with indoor court space would likely enhance PGA’s viability and ability to host major sports events, something that is already being considered by the trust board that runs PGA.
Another synergy not considered in the indicative business case is the best location to ensure that the multi-use sports facility is accessible as a regional facility. PGA may be a better option in this regard as it is closer to Hastings and Central Hawke’s Bay.
Constructing a multi-use sports facility next to the Pettigrew-Green Arena (PGA) and being able to utilise its existing facilities (e.g. reception, changing rooms, offices, meetings rooms etc) may reduce its cost, whereas building at Park Island or the Regional Sports Park, effectively greenfield sites, would most likely cost more.
The viability of a multi-use sports facility would be enhanced by being adjacent to PGA through its closer proximity to schools, residential areas and services including shops, motels, bus stops and cycle trail access points.
Cities around the world whose sporting facilities and opportunities have had the most success have made sure these facilities are community based. Where these practices have been implemented globally, there has been a significant decrease in childhood inactivity.
Other advantages of siting it next to PGA is EIT’s willingness to partner in the development, and what it currently offers at PGA, the sports lab, enhancing PGA itself as an indoor event venue by providing six courts in one location, and increasing its overall attractiveness and viability. Further benefits for the preferred site are being explored as part of the detailed business case.
Council is currently working with a local design team and building contractor to work with its project team to develop a preliminary design and costing. Should the development proceed then they would build the facility. If local companies submit tenders, have the appropriate skills and experience, and meet the other requirements of the tender then it is possible that a local company could build it.
Multi-use means that a facility can cater for a variety of sporting and non-sporting activities. For example, it would be able to provide for basketball, futsal, volleyball, walking, running, non-sporting events and concerts.
It would be a community facility and include:
- a 250m timber cycling track designed to meet requirements for national and smaller international competitions e.g. Oceania Championships
- a 3000m2 (approx.) infield containing three courts suitable for basketball, futsal, volleyball and other ball sports, also able to be used for non-sporting events
- a spectator area
- a 300m indoor walking/running track
- Space for bike storage, maintenance and repair services
- Support facilities, i.e. office space, meeting rooms, changing rooms, toilets etc.
The facility would be designed to allow for concurrent use of recreation spaces. In most instances, when cyclists are on the track, the three multi-use courts located on the infield could be used at the same time with nets used as appropriate. Walkers/joggers could also use the walking/running track located on the spectator level at the same time.
However, when cycling events are being hosted it may be that the court use has to cease, and vice versa.
Work is being undertaken as part of the detailed business case to determine pricing. Prices need to be set taking into operating costs, what the market can afford based on what people are prepared to pay for similar activities and what is charged elsewhere.
At the Cambridge velodrome the standard offerings are one hour of track time, coaching and a bike and helmet for $15, with children taking part in school programmes paying $10.
Providing bikes and helmets is good safety practice for those starting out on the track, or don’t have a bike of their own, and also removes a perceived barrier to trying track cycling. Concessions and group rates can reduce these prices.
The indicative business case anticipated total annual operating costs of between $375,000 and $675,000.
Operating costs may be reduced through synergies associated with the Pettigrew Green Arena site and could be further offset by revenue (estimated to be $460,000 in the first year and growing to $600,000 in year six and beyond). The net ratepayer cost will be determined with further analysis undertaken as part of the detailed business case.
Riders with learning and other disabilities would be able to ride the track, but they must be able to ride a two wheeled bike.
The coach must be able to communicate with them, and be satisfied that the rider has understood the instructions given. There would likely be tandems to enable the visually impaired to ride, and trikes for those with physical disabilities and/or recovering from surgery or accidents.
Trikes are able to safely use the flat area and bottom of the track.
People of any age, because it is both low impact, and being indoor, could be used any time of the year. It could be useful to develop youth sports, as a training option for other sports or just for fun.
This facility, like those in Cambridge and Invercargill, would be designed for use by anyone. The most successful track facilities are those which offer recreational fitness programmes.
With learn-to-ride-track programs, riders can be up and on the track within the first hour of riding. Programs with qualified coaches will be available to introduce people aged 10 and over (children under the age of 10 are unlikely to be able to ride safely) and of all abilities into the facility. Cycling NZ is interested in making this facility one of their regional Performance Hubs which would mean elite and pre-elite athletes will also train at the track.
At the Cambridge velodrome for the 12 months to 30 June 2015 there were nearly 25,000 recorded rides on the track, excluding Cycling New Zealand and competition use. Of that 25,000, half were recreational riders, 29% were school/junior riders, 11% were club riders, and 10% were corporate riders. Cambridge has more than 1,000 riders accredited to ride the track, not including the significant number of occasional, one-off and tourist riders who also use the facility.
No the intention is to build a facility that is multi-use, i.e. it will be designed for a range of uses.
The objective for this facility is to create a velodrome for the region that will be useful for recreational sportspeople, through to elite competitors. While a shorter track could be built for recreational purposes, it would have less appeal for development and would not be able to host national and international competitions. Shorter tracks also have steeper banking.
There are two significant differences between a category three and category two track. The width of a category three track must be a minimum of five metres, whereas category two must be a minimum of seven metres. A category three track requires a minimum lighting level of 500 lux for competitions whereas a category two track requires a minimum level of 1,000 lux. Both category three and category two tracks can be less than 250m in length but the width of the safety zone (the flat area at the bottom of the track) of a 250m track must be a minimum of four metres, whereas a track shorter than 250m only requires a minimum of two metres.
The indicative business case, including the estimated capital cost, was prepared on the basis of a 250m category three track therefore the only significant difference is the level of lighting required. Increasing the level of lighting from 500 lux to 1,000 lux does not result in a significant cost increase in the context of the $15 million estimated cost.
Track bikes and helmets will be hired out for a small fee (yet to be determined). You need suitable clothing, footwear, and a helmet. General sportswear including running shoes are permitted although it is best that they are not too loose fitting. Cycle clothing is the best option but not essential.
Track bikes have less componentry than most other bikes, e.g. they don’t have gears or brakes, so they can be affordable. A good new track bike can be purchased for under $1,500 and good used bikes can be purchased for under $500. Of course like most other types of bikes the sky is the limit when it comes to carbon frames, disc wheels etc. but they are not needed for most track cyclists.
While the Detailed Business Case could have been completed and presented as per the original timings it would not have contained all the information that has recently become available to identify the opportunities and drivers for change. The relatively recent developments such as possible alignments and opportunities with the existing Pettigrew.Green Arena complex, EIT and the community sport facility development at the Hawke’s Bay Regional Sports Park need to be considered and integrated into the Detailed Business Case. It was felt that this was material enough to warrant a delay.
Rest assured, a velodrome is still very much a part of the project plan. However the Detailed Business Case is continuing to throw up a number of surprises, one of which is the many and varied sporting organisations who have indicated their support for a wider sporting focus. Indoor court space is at a premium in Hawke’s Bay and it has become clear that demand from codes such as netball, basketball, and futsal is high. Calling the facility a velodrome is no longer accurate. Cycling – although a vital part of the sporting mix – is but one sport that will be represented at the proposed new facility. Therefore, Council will refer to the facility as the Multi-Use Sports Facility in its communications going forward.
Cost. If ether were to be built in isolation, the commercial appeal for potential funders would be greatly reduced.
Hawke’s Bay is one of the few regions in New Zealand without a velodrome facility. There are many reasons as to why Council proposes a combined facility; An indoor velodrome will complement the cycle way network and will offer new opportunities for the community to participate in sport; Cycling NZ is in strong support of developing regional cycling hubs – this forms part of its national strategy, in alignment with what Rowing NZ has achieved with its regional talent development programmes. This is the third time a velodrome has been proposed for the region.
As it has been established that the proposed site will be adjacent to the existing Pettigrew.Green Arena, the opportunity to develop both facilities as one regional indoor sports hub has emerged. This would see the one complex housing up to six basketball / netball courts, volleyball courts and a number of futsal courts. EIT has also expressed an interest in the facility due to the synergies with its sport education and sport medicine programmes, and its large student population who would likely use the improved indoor spaces.
A need for “future-proofing” the proposed Multi-Use Sports Facility is also continuing to be explored – one example the Detailed Business Case has already thrown up is the possibility of raising the track by 400mm to allow for additional facilities underneath it.
Furthermore, with the recent announcement that a community sport facility is to be developed at the Hawke’s Bay Regional Sports Park, it would be wise to spend some time working through the logistics around these extremely complementary facilities with the developers.
The Detailed Business Case is now due for completion in mid December 2016. The Detailed Business Case will now be considered in February 2017 with the new Council in place. Sport New Zealand and the Steering Group will also carefully review the document and provide their feedback.
While it will delay the decision on whether or not to proceed to phase three (confirming funding and gaining consents), this delay has minimal impact on the overall project. Revenue generation conversations will continue during this period - there are already several interested parties known to the project team, with further work to be done in this area. Resource consents can be obtained in the early part of 2017, should the project be approved.
At this stage the cost can be covered from the existing approved budget, however the extra time ensures that a more comprehensive document is completed. Should any additional material costs emerge, these will need to be approved by Council.
The council’s project web page will be continually updated as the business case is finalised. This will include imagery of how the facility may look at the proposed site at Pettigrew.Green Arena, as well as further details around potential uses.
The Detailed Business Case will be made available after Council consideration.