Sport'n'Action Waihi


Waihi Recreation and Community Centre Final Master Plan and Feasibility Study

Final Report | December 2011


Executive Summary

This feasibility and master planning study was commissioned by the Sport ‘n’ Action Waihi Trust (Sport ‘n’ Action) in mid 2011. The study builds on earlier work undertaken by the Trust and its strategic partners within the Waihi community.


The primary objective of the study is to provide the Trust with a viable staged model for the establishment of the Waihi Recreation and Community Centre at Morgan Park. From this hub there are a series of satellite (or related) facilities, such as the Events Centre (which caters for indoor court sports and events) and adventure and motor-sports, which occur in surrounding locations. Although the study is focused on Morgan Park in the first instance it remains cognisant of the importance of its aligned satellite facilities.


The Trust established a clear need for additional optimised facilities within the district following consultation with key sporting codes and community organisations over a number of years. Over the past five years many sports clubs and community organisations in Waihi have experienced trying times due to factors such as fluctuating or diminishing membership, financial hardships and / or facility constraints.


The study determined that all of the required sports and community activities can be accommodated within the proposed Morgan Park precinct. It was found that the development can be staged to enable capital costs to be spread out, while still optimising utilisation of the Reserve, and minimising disruption to existing users.


The optimal master plan layout from a technical and functionality perspective (Option Green) enables good clustering of compatible facilities and sight lines over the playing surfaces. It also generates space for an additional outdoor court while retaining further outdoor court expansion potential. Increased on-site car parking is also created while the existing netball courts are reused as an above ground skate / bike park. The existing rugby club grounds are retained as open space while an artificial bowling green is developed by the main centre. Development footprints are also retained for a multipurpose squash / indoor sprung floor facility and an indoor netball / basketball facility. The total cost for the completed park Master Plan is estimated at $9.6-$10.1M with the hub component costed at $6.1M (including Squash courts).


The development of an additional new indoor netball / basketball court on Morgan Park as part of the Waihi Recreation and Community Centre is not considered essential during early project development stages. However, a development footprint should be allowed for this at Morgan Park. The optimisation of the existing Events Centre to create more usable court space is a higher priority.


The community multi sport facility preliminary business model indicates the development would be viable. After negotiations with potential members and partners it will be necessary to develop a detailed business plan, which takes account of new data and the staging approach selected.


The development is likely to be best governed by a Trust comprised of between five and nine trustees. A proportion of these trustees should be independents who are elected for the technical skills they bring to the Trust. The Trust should examine forming a project control group (PCG) to drive the project during the planning, design, fundraising, construction phases. This is particularly important if the Trust has a greater number of trustees.


It is considered essential the user agreements and full business and operational plans are completed as soon as practicable (certainly well before opening). A detailed business plan will be required prior to seeking funding grants. This plan should be updated and refined constantly.



1. That the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust should, after discussions with its members and on seeking legal advice, review and change its structure and constitution, taking account of the study findings.


2. That the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust establishes a project control group (PCG) to drive the project’s implementation.


3. That the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust and its member and partner organisations should adopt the master plan ‘Option Green’ as a basis for further planning and optimisation.


4. The Trust should enter into discussions with Hauraki District Council (Council) at political and officer level to explore a potential partnership approach and to make sure that Council’s Reserve development requirements will be meet by the Trust.


5. That detailed negotiations commence with potential member and partner organisations around planning and implementation issues. These negotiations should also consider high-level points that will become part of user group agreements.


6. The Trust should approach the RSA and any similar organisations within Waihi and begin more detailed discussions about their potential involvement in the project.



1. Executive Summary

2. Introduction and Project Brief

3. Existing Site Features

4. Existing Park Facilities

5. Stakeholder Requirements

6. Urban Context

7. Master Plan Concept

8. Development Costs Staging

9. Management and Governance

10. Preliminary Operational Plan

11. Conclusions and Recommendations

12. Appendix 1 -Workshop Notes

13. Appendix 2 -Road Map

14. Appendix 3 –Master Plan Costs

15. Appendix 4 -Waihi Events Centre Proposed Modifications

16. Appendix 5 -Hub Concept Plans

17. Appendix 6 -Memorandum of Understanding.



2 Introduction and Project Brief


2.1 Introduction

This feasibility and master planning study was commissioned by the ‘Sport ‘N’ Action Trust’ in 2011. The study builds on earlier work undertaken by the Trust and its strategic partners within the Waihi community.


The primary objective of the study is to provide the Trust with a viable staged model for the establishment of a central community and multi-sport hub at Morgan Park. From this hub there are a series of satellite (or related) facilities, such as the Event Centre (which caters for indoor court sports and events), plus adventure and motor-sports that occur at surrounding locations. It is essential that the Park (in conjunction with its satellite facilities) caters for a broad range of current and future sporting codes and community activities.


Although the study is focused on Morgan Park in the first instance it remains cognisant of the importance of its strategic satellite operations; namely The Waihi Events Centre, and Rugby Park – the home of Waihi Athletic Rugby Football and Sports Union.


2.2 Methodology

The feasibility study and master plans have been developed through a variety of means including:

• Consideration of secondary information (local and national sports group data, Council documentation and site/property information);

• Workshops, meetings, site visits and communications with representatives from potential member clubs and organisations;

• Workshops with the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust;

• Briefing meetings with Council;

• Research on multi use / multi sport developments;

• Drawing on in-house expertise – based on our knowledge of projects similar in nature; and

• Where possible, available technical data (wind / weather records, Council survey and contour data) was utilised to inform our planning.


In developing the Feasibility and Master Planning Study Visitor Solutions has also relied on inputs from architects, project managers and cost managers.


2.3 Background


Requirement for a Sport and Recreation Park

The Trust established a clear need for additional optimised facilities within the district following consultation with key sporting codes and community organisations over a number of years. In more detail this need has been established through:

• A community consultation exercise;

• The findings of an earlier feasibility study (which was primarily briefed as a needs analysis);

• The current requirements and anticipated changing needs of sporting codes.


Over the past five years many sports clubs and community organisations in Waihi have experienced trying times due to factors such as fluctuating or diminishing membership, financial hardships and / or facility constraints.


The majority of groups acknowledge the benefits of consolidating the district’s fragmented facilities that currently house single sports codes and community groups into a more community, multi-use / multi-sport environment. A high quality community and multiple sport / recreation facility is considered to be beneficial, in that it will potentially increase the growth and development of all participating groups, while offering the maximum operational cost-savings and increasing the revenue generating opportunities. One high quality hub facility (with linkages to key spoke facilities) will also likely attract increased sponsorship.


Vision for the Recreation and Community Centre

The Waihi Recreation and Community Centre at Morgan Park is intended to cater to the needs of the entire community. It is a place to exercise for health and vitality, and to meet and socialise with friends and family. It is a place to be competitive, as well as a place to play, or simply sit and relax.


A key objective of the Recreation and Community Centre will be to assist in the achievement of wider social objectives through the varied programmes and activities that will be undertaken there.


The Centre and the park will also form part of a linked network of reserves providing extensive recreational and leisure opportunities for the community.


3 Existing Site Features


3.1 General

Our assessment of the site was carried out over the course of several site visits during the winter and summer of 2011. A general walkover of the entire site and visit to specific facilities with stakeholders was made on the 6th and 7th August 2011. Our analysis has been based on these observations, plus anecdotal information received from stakeholders we met with during those two days and over subsequent meetings.


It should be noted that our assessment of the current facilities at Morgan Park is based on a visual observation only, and was limited to areas where access was possible. Historical wind data has been received from NIWA, however, testing or further detailed examination is beyond the scope of this report. A more detailed examination should look to include;


• Geotechnical / ground stability

• Groundwater

• Contamination

• Drainage

• Road and traffic considerations and

• Infrastructure (including water supply, sewerage and power).


3.2 Spatial

The potential combined site comprises an area of approximately 9.5 ha (including Rugby Park at 1.7444 ha, and Morgan Park at 7.7831 ha.). While Rugby Park is relatively flat Morgan Park is terraced – with a 6.5 metre fall in height across the site from extreme north to south. There are three predominant platforms / terraces within this fall:


• The upper tier containing the netball courts, playground and pavilion is at a contour height of +109m. A steep embankment falls from this tier towards the second tier.

• The second tier contains playing fields at a mean contour height of +106m, as well as croquet and bowling greens at a mean contour of +107m. The ground from here falls away towards the southern corner, with an embankment of up to 2.0m in height.

• The lower tier, containing the tennis courts, has two platforms at +103.5m and +101.5m. From here, the ground slopes steeply down towards the east to a stream gulley at the foot of a large tract of steeply contoured and dense bush reserve.


Formally, there is one main spatial organising grid, determined by the arterial roads which bound the park. These generate a rectilinear grid pattern running almost due NE / SW and NW / SE. Playing surfaces have been aligned to this grid, placing them in a less than optimal orientation to the sun’s path (and glare). Tennis is the only exception to this rule, occupying its own slightly isolated platform to the east of the park, with a more true N-S alignment.


3.3 Access and Linkages

The site is highly accessible and visible, and bounded by the following roads:

Kenny Street / Barry Road (State Highway 25) to the north;

• Clarke Street to the south west; and

• Baker Street to the south east.


Current access to the site by vehicle is from SH25, and Baker Street.

In close proximity to the existing Town Centre, adjacent residential areas, and major roads which link Waihi to other towns, the site will serve both this area and the wider region in providing passive recreation space around dedicated outdoor sports facilities and associated hub, activity areas and green space.


Opportunities for improved access and linkages with surrounding areas exist including pedestrian and bicycle linkages through to other activity areas such as Union Hill and Black Hill Reserve, in addition to Martha Mine and other regional walkways.


3.4 Adjacent Land Uses

The site is constrained on all boundaries, by either major roads or (DoC owned) bush reserves.

Refer Fig 05 for land ownership details.


The site’s proximity to the state Highway has both advantages and disadvantages:

• It is highly visible to passing traffic, thus facilitating easy site identification (and way-finding) for visitors and non-regular users, however,

• It creates a ‘hard’ noisy edge from which players and spectators alike will require some buffering from; and while presenting an ‘active edge’ to the park after hours, sports lighting can potentially have implications for road user safety and will require appropriate design.

• It is an impediment to the physical connection between Morgan Park and Rugby Park (distance and safety).


3.5 Wind Behaviour

Data received from the NIWA Barry Road EWS weather station over an eight year period (1994 – 2001), and the NWG Met Station on Barry Road over a nine year period (2001 - 2009) indicate that:


• Over the course of the year, the predominant wind directions are from the west / south-west (and to a lesser extent the north-east);

• The average wind speed over the collection period (based on hourly collections) was 3.28 m/s;

• Winds from the west / south-west tend to have the greatest strength;

• Calm conditions have a low frequency (average 4.6%), and occur more often when the wind direction is from the north-east;

• From anecdotal information received from stakeholders, daily wind variations over the summer months (being November to February) show a tendency for the wind direction to shift from the south-west/west in morning period to a north-easterly direction in the afternoon period.


Notwithstanding the above, over such a large flat area, the enjoyment of the site by all users will depend on the ability to reduce and/or mitigate the wind.


3.6 Surface Water

There are no existing surface water features evident on the site. A stream (on DoC owned land) runs adjacent to the eastern boundary, and is currently assumed to collect some of tennis court surface water run-off.


We have been advised that the grass playing fields are free draining, holding their condition well over winter months, and requiring no irrigation in summer. The current water table level is unknown, however based on the information above it is likely that storm-water detention ponds are unlikely to be required, and surface soakage plus other passive landscape interventions could be used for the disposal of surface water from the proposed development, and treatment for runoff from car parks and roads. Best practice suggests that grey water supply (toilet flushing and irrigation) should be investigated during subsequent design stages, and therefore, the use of rainwater collected from roofs will also be considered for reuse during subsequent building and park design stages.


3.7 Site Servicing

There is currently mains power, water and telecommunications servicing provided to the site, as well as and waste water reticulation from the park. Any future development will require and assessment of the capacity of the existing infrastructure to ensure adequate supply.


3.8 Ground Condition/Contamination

An area of the site located immediately to the south of the existing netball courts was used historically as a dump site, and contains landfill material. There should be no building development on this area of the site.


A key risk to any development of the site is the known history of ground settlement and subsidence. Accurate data will be required locating below ground activities, and geotechnical information regarding soils stability will be required before further design of any significant structures (the hub), or engineered playing surfaces progresses.


4 Existing Park Facilities


4.1 General

Refer Plan VS10122_01

Although not fully developed, Morgan Park is currently Waihi’s premier outdoor sports and recreation venue, containing a mixture of green fields and playing courts capable of hosting a variety of sports codes.


The park however should not be viewed in isolation.


To the north, and directly across SH25, Rugby Park contains the clubrooms and the number one field of Waihi Athletic Rugby Football and Sports Union – a facility, which when supplemented by the playing fields of Morgan Park, caters for both local and regional rugby competition and training.


Indoor court and wheel sports are currently housed at the nearby Events Centre, providing an indoor competition and training venue for sports such as Netball, Basketball, Badminton, Volleyball, In-line skating, and Wheelchair Basketball. When these facilities are combined, Waihi can offer a diverse range of both indoor and outdoor sports to the region.


The Waihi RSA also provides a social venue in the style of a Working Men’s Club, housing bar, kitchen, lounge and pool room that occupies generous premises on private land at Seddon Street.


4.2 Condition of Existing Facilities

Built Facilities

As a general observation, the condition of Park facilities is variable to poor. The recently constructed netball pavilion is less than a decade old, and appears in relatively new condition with no defects.


By contrast, the Bowling Clubrooms and Squash / Tennis Club are over thirty years old, of out-dated design compared to newer facilities elsewhere, and have elements that do not comply with the current NZ Building Code. These and other factors bring into question the viability of retaining these facilities in the future.


There is no one built facility that anchors key sports codes together in the park. With the exception of the shared Squash / Tennis Clubrooms, individual sports facilities are scattered around the Park perimeter, and remain largely disconnected, having been individually developed by the sports code they house. This results in duplication of function; clubrooms / club lounges are replicated in at least five separate buildings, and kitchen / bar plus shower/change and toilet areas occur in at least three.


Conversely there is an overall lack of publicly available toilets, owing to the vandalism which has historically occurred to the existing block, necessitating clubs to hold keys for their own access to these facilities which are now locked.


Playing Surfaces

Stakeholders report that the existing fields are well drained and hold their condition well in the winter months, requiring no irrigation during the summer. To date, there has been no subsidence reported. Conversely, the existing netball courts suffer considerably from ground movement, resulting in $400,000 of maintenance expenditure (by Council) over the past 9 years to maintain a safe playing surface.


The surface of the existing tennis courts has reached the end of its life, and if not maintained for the coming summer season, will see members migrating to play on courts elsewhere (e.g. Waihi Beach and other clubs). While subsidence is considered by members to be a contributing factor, it is likely that the currently visible cracking and surface movement is caused by water ingress into the substrate, resulting in settlement.


The Croquet greens appear immaculate, and largely unaffected by ground settlement, however the adjacent bowling greens have not fared so well. As a direct result of significant subsidence, the two grass rinks require constant infill and levelling, and an on-going annual maintenance regime to maintain an acceptable playing quality. This is becoming an untenable load on the club’s diminishing membership base.


Ancillary Facilities

There are several sets of training lights on the playing fields as well as playing lights on the tennis and netball courts. While the fittings vary in age, and may not all be worthy of re-use, the below ground infrastructure will be useful for any proposed future lighting.


On-site parking is minimal and disconnected from the main playing areas. There is ample on street parking on adjacent roads, and an opportunity exists to provide dropped kerbs along these roads to allow for on grass parking just off these roads.


Fencing of playing surfaces varies from highly transparent (in the case of the tennis and netball enclosures), to solid and uninviting (in the case of the bowls and some of the croquet enclosure). Playing fields and open space areas are unfenced. While understandably highly maintained and specialist sports surfaces require fencing for security and safety reasons, the future design of these enclosures will impact visibly on the perception of the park’s accessibility, and sense of inclusion or exclusion.

Seating provision is negligible.


The condition of existing facilities (including those at Rugby Park) is summarised below.


4.3 Other Relevant Facilities

The Waihi Events Centre

This facility is managed by Sport’N’Action, and located in the centre of Waihi town, (accessed from Haszard Street). It comprises one large flat sprung floor playing surface, with fixed bleacher seating, reception, change & toilet facilities, plus viewing mezzanine above. These are enclosed within a predominantly rectangular portal steel frame structure - clad with profiled metal sheeting, and 2.0m high tilt-slab (precast concrete) panels.


As a general comment, the exterior structure appears sound; is of durable construction and moderately well maintained.

The condition of the building interior is also good, with some wear to the sprung floor surface owing to the use by wheel sports. However, the available flat floor area (for either wheel or court sports) is reduced significantly by the existing fixed bleachers that run down one side of the hall. Some car parking is provided within the site, and is available on adjacent streets and properties.


To improve the functionality of this facility, and optimise its usability for all regular sports codes and user groups, we have proposed a series of straightforward and cost effective modifications to the existing structure and facilities. These modifications are summarised below, and outlined in Appendix 4 of this report, where a rough order of cost estimate has been provided for these works.


• Remove existing built in bleachers, replace floor with sprung hardwood floor to match existing and make good;

• Extend the existing hall to the north (over the existing car parking area) by adding another portal/bay onto the end of the building (finishes to match existing), add sprung hardwood floor to match existing and make good;

• Insert three tiers of mobile / retractable bleachers along the full length of the hall;

• Upgrade existing mezzanine floor balustrade to cantilevered glass balustrade with handrail to improve visual connection;

• Retain existing Foyer, reception, change and toilet areas unaltered.

• Storage Area added.


Long term, the option of extending this facility to provide an additional indoor (netball) court may be investigated.


Waihi RSA

These privately owned premises are located on Seddon Street at the western end of town. They comprise large clubrooms, kitchen, bar and lounge / dining facilities that are used by a diminishing (and aging) membership base.


The building appears to be in moderate condition, however its strategic value lies in its location (on a gateway site), and the value of the land (which is also owned by Waihi RSA).


5 Stakeholder Requirements & Consultation


5.1 General

Morgan Park in conjunction with Rugby Park is a local facility used by the town, the region and beyond. It contains a collection of individual clubs and facilities, most of whom operate autonomously.


The strength of each code is closely linked to the strength of its administration; there is a healthy culture of volunteer organized sport that works well. These clubs individually run a mix of local and regional sport, and also host regional and inter-island tournaments enhanced by their central location within the town and the North Island.


Virtually all those surveyed spoke of a desire to see a more co-ordinated plan for the Park centred around a multi-purpose ‘hub’ better suited (and sited) than the existing clubrooms.


Those faced with escalated maintenance (caused by ground instability) stated they ‘would move tomorrow’.


All codes apart from netball consider their built facilities to be outdated and no longer in keeping with the requirements of either the clubs or the sport’s governing bodies. In several cases (bowls) current facilities are much larger than they need to be given current membership levels.


Sports currently using the playing fields seem quite satisfied with the facilities provided (excepting toilets). The relative luxury of space leads to few conflicts between the summer sports codes (cricket and athletics are not currently active) and the winter codes (rugby and football ‘soccer’) for both training and game time. However, the advent of additional fixtures, or a considerable growth in one or other of the affected codes, may require tighter management of existing facility use to avoid conflict during the shoulder seasons. This will need to be monitored in the future.


We also spoke to sports clubs who currently use the Events Centre. This group are reasonably well catered for training purposes in this single court facility, but require a two court facility for competitions, and to grow their sports.


They are all open to relocation or modification of the existing facility to improve availability, and could also potentially become stakeholders in the social facilities of a new hub at Morgan Park.


5.2 Dealing With Each Sport Code:


We have been advised that the Athletics club in Waihi is not currently active, so no consultation took place.



Are happy with their current location at the Events Centre, but see availability of courts a key issue (as this is influenced by the number and frequency of tournaments for all users – which take preference over regular club nights). They are open to relocation in a shared multi sport Hub if deemed in the best interest of basketball and / or the other codes.



Are happy with their current location at the Events Centre, but see court availability as a limiting factor in their ability to grow and host competitions. Currently, tournament games are split between the Events Centre (single court) and Waihi College Gym (single court) – which is problematic for logistics and co-ordination.

Basketball is fully supportive of the principle of shared facilities (a multi-sports hub), and use of courts by other codes. They would like to grow their sport, and promote Waihi as a wheelchair sport training / competition hub.



Bowls would ‘move tomorrow’ to a new facility that did not present them with their current maintenance problems. They currently have two 8 rink turf greens, but are keen to move to an artificial 12 rink green, that is lit for evening play.

The clubrooms also host indoor bowls in the winter, and line-dancing as well as a range of functions requiring a bar / kitchen / lounge. This will be an important component for any new facility.

Membership is declining, and so the club sees a move to new shared facilities (plus shared playing surface) as a life-line, and an opportunity to save the club.



We did not speak directly to Cricket, however, there is currently one artificial wicket block, which we will look to replicate within the new park master layout. We were informed that currently no ‘formal’ club exists and any activity is predominantly social in nature.



Croquet is very willing to assist in the optimisation of the wider Morgan Park precinct. Interviewees perceived that the club could only gain from working with other clubs and community groups. The club had a strong desire that the greens at any new location within the park be established prior to a potential move so that club play could transition without a break. The club also offered the use of any buildings that could be relocated for reuse on another site.


Dirt Track Club

The Club currently use a ‘Black Track’ in the quarry off Beach Rd en-route to Tauranga. They perceive potential future risks to their land from residential development, and have therefore expressed an interest in possibly being involved in future phases of the park development.


In-Line Hockey

This group currently share the sprung hardwood floor of the Events Centre with other indoor sports codes and community groups. The rink that they can create within the existing space is too small for hosting competitions (does not comply with NZ regulation Minimum sizes).

Access to the facility is key issue. The current sharing arrangement is problematic, as it limits their ability to cater for current growth in the sport across the region. Ideally they would love to see the Centre become a dedicated Wheel-sports Centre to cater for a whole range of sports events, including Roller-Derby, and wheelchair sports.


Mountain Boarding

In Waihi, this is a small sport, but an international one. This group currently operates from a purpose built downhill course on a local farmer’s field, but would be interested in exploring the sharing of facilities at the park.



Netball currently occupies a dedicated area (with fencing and 5 lit courts) to the north of the park. This location suits netball well, as they see the visibility from the road frontage as a positive for visiting teams.

To run tournaments, netball requires all 5 outdoor courts and 2 indoor courts. The indoor courts are currently provided by the Events Centre and Waihi College, with similar compromises experienced as for Basketball events. Netball is open to the concept of relocating and sharing courts and indoor facilities, but would ideally like to see good use made of their newly constructed pavilion.


Returned Services Association

The Waihi RSA occupies its own site and building on Seddon St. However, its membership is currently declining, and management see a move to new facility as potentially a way of reversing this trend, (but note that the development timing would be key).

Membership has expressed support of the principle of relocating to be part of the proposed hub at Morgan Park, and possibly have some involvement in running / management of the common social facilities.



Waihi RFC owns its own clubrooms and number one field at Rugby Park. For competitions, they utilize additional field(s) in Morgan Park.

In principle they are interested in having a potential involvement in the park, subject to resolution of their key concerns. These predominantly include; the transfer of existing assets, identity and club memorabilia, revenue generation and collection, and their potential location within a newly planned park.



Football (Soccer) currently ‘tread lightly’ on Morgan Park, using a small clubroom building (that is too small for functions, and unsuitable for anything other than match day co-ordination), and one or two turf playing fields (which are in good playing condition). They are receptive to the proposed concept and the provisions made, and feel that if they had suitable premises to use in conjunction with existing or refurbished pitches, they would look to host more tournaments.



Squash have indicated that they would like to be part of the Sport and Recreation Park concept, and have requested three glass-backed courts with operable (retractable) walls to accommodate doubles squash. An allowance for this has been made within the footprint of a future phase of the proposed Sports Hub, which will become a fully multipurpose sprung floor space capable of hosting dance, martial arts, gymnastics and a variety of other community and recreation activities. Until this time, squash could occupy their existing building.



Tennis share facilities with the Squash Club, and use 6 asphalt outdoor tennis courts adjacent to this building. The courts are in desperate need of repair, and at the time of viewing were deemed unplayable for the coming season by the club. The provision of quality courts (either by refurbishing the existing courts, or provision of new artificial ones) is the Club’s primary concern.

Tennis is supportive of shared facilities (hub and playing courts), but see sharing courts with Netball as potentially problematic during the overlap of twilight sessions & summer league, and during tournaments. Key to shared governance for Tennis will be the retention of their identity.


5.3 Preliminary Schedule of Facilities

The following schedule outlines preliminary facility requirements as contained within the proposed Concept Master Plan Options. This information is derived from consultation with stakeholders, and the preliminary performance criteria established from these discussions, coupled with our knowledge of NZ and International best practice for facilities of a similar nature.

Requirements may evolve over time, and as user needs become more firmly established.

This schedule is intended to be iterative, and develop in parallel with individual club’s requirements and the overall project brief.


It is envisaged that these facilities will be provided as a series of staged developments. Woven around these facilities, will be less formal passive recreation space linking key site features, activity and landscaped areas to create a heightened ‘parkland’ experience, and to encourage a greater use by the wider community.


Broadly, the key design criteria for overall master plan development include:


• Logical site circulation with good venue access for sports, spectator, and loading vehicles;

• Integrated landscaping to facilitate way-finding and ease of site navigation, plus mitigation of wind effects;

• Clustering of facilities and buildings to facilitate way-finding and ease of site navigation;

• Synergies between sports codes enabling maximum sharing of facilities; and

• Shared social (bar / lounge / kitchen) for sports and community clubs and the wider community.


Other key detailed design elements for consideration (but beyond the brief of the master plan) include:


• Secure and safe building and environs with good signage and lighting;

• Significant flexible functions space for sports and non-sports use;

• Good quality field/court lighting; and

• Adequate thermal control including use of natural lighting and ventilation.


5.4 Other Stakeholders

Vision Waihi Trust

The Vision Waihi Trust is supportive of the proposed development as it aligns strongly with the Trust’s objectives. Research undertaken by the Trust first identified a community desire for such a facility.


Sport’N’Action Waihi Trust

The Sport ‘N’ Action Trust has been developing the facility concept for many years and has gone from strength to strength. The Trust currently manages the Waihi Events Centre on behalf of Council. It is envisaged the Trust, or a variation of it, may own and manage the new facility.


Community Policing

A telephone interview was conducted with the local community Constable Holly Warne, following a door-to-door campaign in the area. Key issues she raised included;

• A low public perception of safety around the park. Periodically, vandalism to the public toilets, croquet and bowls greens has been an issue, resulting in costly and time consuming repairs that if not effected promptly, add to the above perception.

• It was noted that 1/3 of adjacent properties are presently vacant, and ventured the possibility that there may be a connection to the above.

• She has proposed interim measures to Council to improve CPTED issues, and these include;


-Enforcement of 24/7 liquor ban, to reduce fallout effects from alcohol

being consumed,

-More frequent rubbish collections (and bin locations) to reduce public

perception that the park is neglected.

-Reduce opportunities for concealment by strategically culling low level

tree cover to perimeter planting,

-Provide additional PIP (sensory) lighting (and possibly skate bowl) around

toilets, and skate bowl.

-Propose the introduction of an Overnight Campervan/Motorhome parking

facility (including services) in near vicinity of toilets and skate bowl (current

or future location).


Hauraki District Council

Council is a key partner in the proposed project both because it is the land owner and also because of a strong desire to see ratepayers delivered quality assets. Council has worked with and assisted the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust for many years.


5.5 Other Possible Users

While our discussions have largely focussed around existing stakeholders and park users, there are a number of other groups who could be considered as potential future users of the park and hub. As these facilities grow in popularity and use, a momentum will build, and other groups and users may be drawn to being included within the programme of events and activities on offer. Some of these may include;


• Passive Recreation – (dog) walking, strolling, children’s play,

• Community groups,

• Dance and performance groups,

• Martial Arts,

• School and youth programmes,

• School Holiday programmes.


All will require flexible spaces and a workable booking system to ensure a workable model.


5.6 Memorandum of Understanding

An MOU has been drafted and signed by a number of organisations involved in consultation to date, and serves to record and consolidate their support for the project (current as at August 2011). For detail – refer Appendix 6 of this report. This document underscores a preliminary intention to work collectively, and also may help to inform potential funders and other potential users / stakeholders of the development going forward.


6 Urban Context


6.1 Urban Design Principles

The Ministry for the Environment publication People+Places+Spaces: A design guide for urban New Zealand describes urban design as being “as much about the urban structure (the relationship between spaces, roads and the density and range of activities) as it is about the design of a specific place.”


The Urban Design Protocol 2005 is part of the Government’s Sustainable Development Programme of Action and Urban Affairs portfolio. Its vision is “making New Zealand towns and cities more successful through quality urban design”. This is a non-statutory document.


The Protocol is a voluntary commitment by central and local government, property developers, design professionals and other groups to undertake specific urban design initiatives. It is to be implemented through the actions of its more than 100 signatories through leadership by government, and through raising wider awareness of the value of quality urban design.


The Protocol identifies seven essential design qualities (the “7 Cs”) that together create quality urban design:


• Context - seeing buildings, places and spaces as part of whole towns and cities;

• Character - reflecting and enhancing the distinctive character, heritage and identity of our urban environment;

• Choice - ensuring diversity and choice for people;

• Connections - enhancing how different networks link together for people;

• Creativity - encouraging innovative and imaginative solutions;

• Custodianship - ensuring design is environmentally sustainable, safe and healthy; and

• Collaboration - communicating and sharing knowledge across sectors, professions and with communities.


While Waihi may not currently be working towards a detailed Urban Design protocol, we recommend the redevelopment of Morgan Park incorporates the objectives and principles of the Urban Design Protocol to ensure quality community outcomes can be achieved for Morgan Park and its wider context – Waihi town the region.


6.2 Waihi Context

Current Town Character

Modern day Waihi sits at the base of the Coromandel Ranges, at the junction of state highways linking the coastal towns of the Bay of Plenty with the townships of the Waikato Region.


The Martha Mine pit is one of the dominant landscape features in the town (although it goes unobserved by many), while Morgan Park lies to its southeast – pinched between SH 25 and a large area of bush reserve and DoC land.


Following the discovery of gold in the late nineteenth century, Waihi town grew rapidly and somewhat haphazardly – miners’ cottages quickly replacing more hastily erected structures. Developing a commercial centre along its main streets (now state highways), the town’s residential suburbs spread across the plains between the mountains to the north and the river to the south.


Site Specific Considerations

Morgan Park and nearby Rugby Park with their significant road frontages and regional connections via State Highways, are ideally located to form a gateway experience for those entering the town from the northeast.


While its relatively central geographical location within the town makes Morgan Park accessible to all, its location potentially exposes areas of the Park to a high risk of ground movement and instability as a result of earlier below ground activities. Areas of the Park are unsuitable for building on, and the location of significant (and costly) facilities such as buildings or hard courts / playing surfaces must be considered carefully. Detailed geotechnical data has not yet been obtained for the site, but will be essential to confirm the suitability of preliminary building / facility locations.


The Park provides supplementary outdoor recreation space for town residents, including children who attend four local schools. Availability of additional land for future expansion is limited. However with careful master-planning and operational management, plus co-ordination of events between the College, the Events Centre and the proposed new hub, Morgan Park (and Rugby Park) will continue to serve both the green space requirements and the recreational needs of its immediate neighbours, the town and the region, well into the future.



The Park’s presentation to these frontages varies, ranging from transparent and inviting at the southern corner and playing fields, to concealed and uninviting along its western boundary adjacent to the Bowling club. Individual facilities are isolated, and some (like the public toilets adjacent to the skate bowl / park) regularly fall victim to vandalism and damage.


Key items for consideration are:

• The Park is bounded by roads and bush – there are constraints on its physical size.

• There is a perception that the Park is too far from the College for easy access.

• The large area of uninterrupted open space creates potential for spectators and participants to be exposed to the elements.

• Facilities are fragmented and scattered around the Park in ‘pockets’.

• There is no main entry – no sense of arrival – and hence no significant ‘address’.

• SH25 divides Rugby Park from Morgan Park.

• Lack of night time Park lighting in key areas and adjacent to nearby residential properties – presents residents with (perceived and real) safety issues.

• Waihi town is currently lacking a cultural /recreational, or social centre to the town.



• Improve safe access and connections across the state Highway between Morgan Park and Rugby Park / the Martha Mine walkways.

• Identify and promote main Park entrance – improve layout to positively assist ‘way-finding’ and enhance the sense of arrival at the Park, to create a destination and ‘address’.

• Take a co-ordinated approach to co-locate and cluster activities and uses to take advantage of shared facilities and the promotion of community.

• Create a multi-purpose venue to host community events of a sporting and non-sporting nature.

• Create a destination that has a ‘point of difference’, rather than look to duplicate facilities elsewhere in the region.

• Make more legible connections into and through the Park, linking the different uses within the two Parks and to those adjoining the Park.

• Promote existing leafy and transparent Park boundaries – visual and physical connections will encourage shared use and enhance the standard of the facility able to be offered. Extend the use of deciduous planting to new Park perimeters/or replace with mature evergreen specimens, and use landscape features as visual cues for access and entry points.

• Flat topography and regular street grids within the town lend themselves to multiple cycle connections. Create new and improved tracks and provide connections to any existing networks and tracks.

• Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)

• Utilise passive surveillance, and the resultant drop in vandalism / incidence of reported crime, by formally sanctioning the use of existing parking areas adjacent to the new skate park/ramps for designated motor van park.


Culturally, the whole town is a ‘healthy’ town, not just because people are physically active, but also because sport is driven by volunteers. Sport is the glue that helps bind the town and contributes to the strong sense of community within Waihi and its environs. This creates the potential risk that any rationalisation of the different sporting activities may dilute the sense of ownership of constituent members and volunteers. The challenge is to capture the strength of individual codes and their contributions.


Planning Considerations

Vehicular Access and On-site Parking

• With three road frontages, the Park is readily accessible by car, bicycle or on foot from the road network.

• Linked to a network of formed tracks through Gilmour & Black Hill Reserves, plus connections to the Martha mine tracks via Rugby Park.

• Within walking distance from Waihi East Primary School, St Joseph’s School, and Waihi Central School, the crossing of major roads (namely SH25 and SH2) represents a considerable safety concern for unaccompanied minors. Waihi College is generally considered to be further than a comfortable walk; students typically travel to the Park by bus or bike from school.

• On-site parking is currently provided in three locations:- namely

-sealed parking adjacent to the netball courts and accessed from Kenny

St (approx. 100 spaces),

-unsealed parking adjacent to the Croquet and Bowls Clubs, accessed

from Kenny St with markings (approx.. 30 spaces),

-a small number of unsealed parking spaces adjacent to the Squash and

Tennis Club – accessed from Clarke St (approx.. 6 spaces).

• There is ample on-street parking in adjacent Clarke and Baker Street.

• Plus parking in adjacent connecting streets.


Visual Considerations / Context

Morgan Park is accessible and visible with road frontages to its Northwest, Southwest, and Southeast. The park itself can also be overlooked from the Martha Mine rim and Union Hill, Winner Hill and Black Hill Reserve.

Occupying a gateway site to the town, the Park has frontage directly onto Kenny Street / Barry Road (SH25) – that links Waihi directly to coastal towns to the Northeast.

It fronts directly onto Clarke Street (leading directly to SH2 and Tauranga), and Baker Street – a Cul de Sac containing residential and community premises.

An extensive bush / scrub reserve to the East of the Park connects the Park directly to a chain of formed trails within Black Hill Reserve – a popular off-road motorbike area.



The existing frontages to Clarke and Baker Streets are leafy and transparent, with mature trees planted at generous intervals, providing spectator shelter and shade. As a result of this, the Park and facilities are clearly discernible, thus creating perceived and actual accessibility for park facilities.

This is not the case on the northern boundary, where Bowls and Croquet enclosures are contained within secure solid fenced perimeters. Netball courts are fenced but visible (through chain-link mesh fencing), with controlled access.

There is however no apparent hierarchy of park frontages to give it one ‘address’.

Existing entrances off Kenny and Baker Streets are ineffective, with poor signage. The Park lacks a quality signature feature (architectural or otherwise) to reinforce its importance to the region and its sense of place.


Surrounding Land Use

Adjacent properties are largely zoned residential. A Scout den is currently located on a property adjacent to the Squash / Tennis Club. The local Community Constable advises that during a recent door knocking exercise, approximately one third of adjacent properties appeared vacant. A lack of after-hours lighting and regular use may be a contributing factor.


Environmental/Technical Considerations

The park is known to have a history of ground settlement and subsidence. Large portions of its northern areas (bowling greens, netball courts) have experienced significant settlement over recent years. For this reason, our proposed master plan has chosen to locate any significant built structures (the hub), or engineered playing surfaces towards the southern end of the park.

Foundations of any proposed structures (buildings or courts areas) may require specific design. Site specific investigations to determine soils stability and to locate any below ground activities, are recommended prior to commencing detailed design.


6.3 Planning Context

District & Regional Plan

As a recreation reserve, the Park is also subject to the Reserves Act 1977. There is a legislative requirement for Reserves under the Act to be managed according to a specific Reserve Management Plan. It is assumed this project will be the catalyst for an updated Reserve Management Plan for the Park to be prepared.


Cycle/Walking Strategies

Waihi’s topography and relatively compact layout lends itself to cycling and walking.

HDC aims to increase commuter and recreational cycling/walking in the region and to improve the safety of users of those routes. Parks and reserves are an integral part of this strategy.

There are active strategies in place to encourage more cycling within and around the town of Waihi, and within the Park itself. While on-site initiatives will promote pedestrian and cycling linkages, the Park cannot be viewed in isolation. These on-site linkages must form part of a wider strategy and be complemented by off-site initiatives, if cycling and walking are to be effectively facilitated within the forum.


Open Space/ Urban Growth strategies

We are not currently aware of any growth strategies for the development of Waihi, but see the Park as an integral component of any such study. It has become apparent through this study of Morgan Park, that there is a clear need to broaden the analysis to encompass the development of Waihi as a whole, and the redevelopment of the Park should form an integral part of that.


7 Master Plan Concept


Design Drivers

Though underdeveloped, Morgan Park is ideally placed to play a major role in the future provision of open space plus sports and recreation facilities for the Waihi community. Located adjacent to Rugby Park on Kenny Street, and not far from the Waihi Events Centre in town, Morgan Park should be considered as complimentary to these facilities, rather than competing with them for patronage.


Any future development of the Park must also be balanced against Waihi’s population and rating base, and the need to maximize impact from what is spent, while optimising revenue opportunities, and minimizing operational and maintenance costs for the future administrator. It is also important to preserve the existing dynamic of volunteer sports administration, and harness this energy within the overall management structure.


Best Practice Objectives from Other similar Centres

From our experience of other similar venues throughout NZ and elsewhere, some key issues for consideration are:


• A ‘Sportsville’ concept (which is currently being promoted by many Councils across the country), a strategy of using shared facilities and thereby reducing operational, maintenance and staff costs;

• The creation of truly flexible and multi-use facilities, and in parallel, the reduction of exclusive use facilities - in keeping with a current Local Government philosophy around the provision of facilities and ‘sport for all’;

• Safety by design – the need to provide separation of vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists, and clear layouts that reflect this;

• The need to cater for both active, informal and passive community use of such facilities – i.e. playgrounds, seating and landscaped areas adjacent to key activity areas – courts, buildings etc;

• Provision of an optimum number of changing facilities, many participants will be ‘car boot players’, and will not change at the Park;

• The integration of social elements and indicators as part of the overall programme of events (e.g. programmes for young and old, youth and offenders at risk, under privileged).


Design Intentions

The underlying principle for this site is to provide a recreational facility with variety that maximizes site use throughout the day and all week. The integration of active sports and passive recreation with a multi-use community hub creates a community facility capable of accommodating all ages and abilities. The aim is to achieve this in an economically sustainable and aesthetically desirable manner.


Our design seeks to establish a structure for the Park (that is currently lacking), and give the Park a heart, by clustering playing courts and surfaces around a proposed new central hub. Existing park character is enhanced by retaining and supplementing the existing mature trees that form the park’s inviting and transparent edges. Permeable fencing only will be used adjacent to these boundaries, to enclose the specialist playing surfaces that require separation / protection.


A new and significant park entrance is proposed to provide an ‘address’ and make the park entrance more readable. Clearly defined circulation routes are defined with paving and planting to ensure safe separation of pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.


Playing courts / surfaces that require lighting (for night use) are co-located adjacent to the hub, to maintain infrastructure efficiencies and create a safe and attractive environment after hours.


Proposed Park Layout

Owing to the history of ground settlement towards the northern end of the park, we have consolidated new facilities (playing surfaces and hub) towards the park’s southern end. The impact of this is two-fold;


1. It locates playing fields (with a lower surface specification and hence cost) on areas known to be at risk from subsidence, thus reducing the risk of settlement induced damage, and

2. It clusters the floodlit playing surfaces (tennis / netball / rugby / football) around the new central hub, creating an attractive and safe node that makes good utilisation of a previously under-utilised area.


Key to the creation of a new heart or node for the park is the proposed new hub.


Proposed New Hub

We propose to employ sustainable design principles with regard to the temporary or permanent re-use of existing facilities, together with the placement and design of new structures. To that end, and over time, we propose the demolition of existing buildings scattered around the park, the relocation of some facilities where possible, and the creation of one new central ‘Hub’. This building would comprise of new two storey shared pavilion providing ground floor change and toilet facilities, and first floor lounges and other function rooms for sports clubs and community groups.


A generic building plan has been generated for this facility (refer Appendix 5), but its final layout, orientation and design will be dependent on the final site option selected.


Other Buildings / Facilities

The former Netball facility could be retained and relocated in the short term, either as temporary accommodation for groups during the initial phases of the park redevelopment (and prior to the construction of the new hub), or it could be on-sold as a good quality residential building. The existing hard-standing for the courts could be used as a base for a new skate / bike park, or an expanded parking area.


Playgrounds and/or activity centres should be located adjacent to activity areas; while pedestrian/cycle links could be introduced to improve linkages within the Park, and with nearby facilities (indicated as dashed orange lines).


The Hub building will be located with adequate adjacent space to allow for possible future expansion.


Alternatives Considered

A series of preliminary options were reviewed, incorporating different combinations of groups within the confines of Morgan Park proper. The available land at Rugby Park was then investigated to see what other groups could be accommodated here in the event that Rugby moved ‘across the road’ to Morgan Park.


In addition to this exploration, several possible locations were reviewed for creating a new ‘critical centre of mass’ for the park (the hub). However given the history of ground settlement across the northern end of the park, it was deemed prudent to only investigate options that located this critical element towards the centre or southern end of the park. These options can be viewed in Appendix A.


All but three of these options were discarded owing to their inability to unify existing facilities on site, provide for future expansion, create an enhanced Park entrance and focus, or provide clear unobstructed viewing of facilities from the new hub.


Proposed Option RED - Refer DWG VS10122_02

In this layout, it is assumed that Rugby will move across the road and be assimilated into Morgan Park. The land released by this move will be utilised by bowls and croquet, who will share their own lawn sport precinct, in conjunction with the relocated netball pavilion. The Rugby clubrooms would be demolished.


The new hub is located centrally with two major park entrances (and parking areas) accessed from Baker St and Clarke St.

Two rugby fields are located to the northwest of the hub, with a football pitch to the southwest, and tennis / netball courts to the northeast.


The existing netball and tennis courts are retained for re-use as part of a skate / bike park and parking (respectively).


Perimeter planting is introduced to the Kenny St frontages of both Rugby and Morgan Parks, and existing planting, buildings and structures are removed to prepare for the new layout.


Proposed Option YELLOW - Refer DWG VS10122_03

For this and the following layout (Option Green), it is assumed to remain that rugby will continue to operate from their current premises at Rugby Park. Bowls and croquet will be relocated further towards the south of the site, and clustered around the proposed new hub with tennis and netball courts (some of which will be lit). Two new full sized playing fields (used for either rugby or football), are located to the northwest of the hub, fronting onto Clarke Street (which will receive new deciduous tree plantings) and Kenny Street.


As in the previous option, the new hub is located centrally with two major park entrances (and parking areas) accessed from Baker St and Clarke St.


Proposed Option GREEN - Refer DWG VS10122_04

This layout is similar to the previous option (YELLOW), with the location of tennis / netball and bowls / croquet being mirrored (and subtly altered) on opposite sides of the proposed new hub. This layout generates the maximum amount of on-site parking; accessed from Clarke Street, with a smaller parking / service access accessed from Clarke Street.


Passive Surveillance - Campervan Parking

In addition to the above, we propose that provision is made for campervan overnight parking within the existing Park car parks.

The reason for this is two fold;


i. the provision of sanctioned overnight parking for self-contained campervans encourages additional visitor spending within Waihi town that may not occur if this group were only day trip visitors, or simply passing through, and

ii. if the designated area is located in an area of parking slightly removed from the comings and goings of the Hub, this group can provide passive surveillance for more remote parts of the Park.


For this reason, our preference would be to locate such an area in the existing car park – accessed from SH 25 and adjacent to the proposed new skate / all-terrain park. Directional signage could be displayed on the Highway, and in future, a dump station (often funded by the local branch of the NZ Motor Caravan Association) could even be considered.


Environmentally Sustainable Design

In developing Morgan Park, Council has an opportunity to adopt environmental sustainability as one of its core foundations. The impact of capital works on the environment can be reduced through the consideration and adoption of some key environmental principles.


The decision to adopt a ‘green’ approach and to showcase high local standards in low energy technology, use of appropriate materials, low water use strategies, storm-water management and waste minimisation in the detailed development of the Park is an important consideration for Council. The adoption of such principles may have cost implications for any development and this will be something the Council should investigate further during later design stages.


Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) considers the assessment of facilities design with respect to potential crime situations. This is carried out through the application of broad principles. Although this report does not include a detailed CPTED assessment of the proposal, the redevelopment concepts have considered possible safety and security issues in its design (further assessment will be required at the detailed design stage). These key issues include:


• Site Location

• Personal Safety

• Vehicle Issues

• Vandalism/Property Crime

• Drug and Alcohol Issues.


It is recommended that at the detailed design stages of the project, CPTED principles, as outlined above, be considered. Designs should then be subject to a thorough review. Prior to facility occupation it will be important that the Council produces sound facility management practices and codes of conduct, in consultation with sports codes, to assist in meeting CPTED requirements.


8 Development Costs Staging


8.1 General

By necessity, a Master Plan must first consider the final layout of the park with all of the facilities (currently identified as required) in place. However, the actual development of Morgan Park has always been conceived of as occurring in stages that allow stakeholders’ needs to be aligned with the overall programme for the project, its critical path, and the availability of funding streams.


8.2 Possible Staging

The sequence of developments will largely be driven by stakeholder requirements and funding streams. This must be explored in greater detail during the course of additional stakeholder consultation, and more developed design.

Based on the information received to date, we propose the following sequence for major works to be undertaken:


Phase I

Abandon Rugby (S), Demo. ex. Bldgs and site. Tidy                                $370,000

Construct new Tennis/Netball , Bowls & Croquet surfaces                        $1,672,000

Shift Netball/Croquet buildings to southern end of park.                             $0.00

(use as temporary hub.)

Demo. ex. and build new skate park                                                        $191,000

Construct #1 Rugby field to north (adjacent to) of the hub site.                   $140,000

Construct soccer field on ex. bowls / croquet site.                                    $102,000

Total                                                                               $2.5M                             


Phase II

Construct hub (including squash & gym area).                                                $6,156,000

Sell netball / croquet buildings.                                                                        $0.00

Construct new car-parks, landscaping and roadways.                                    $921,000

Total                                                                                                            $7.1M


Phase III

Demolish Rugby clubrooms.                                                                        $51,000

Convert ex. Squash / Tennis centre to an alternate use (or demolish).            $0.00

Create connection to Rugby Park (across / under Kenny St).                        $0.00

Construct Cricket pitch if there is adequate demand.                                    $58,000


We note that many of the above stages are interlinked, and decisions around prioritisation will need to consider the impact on the user under consideration, as well as those being displaced.


8.3 Development Costs

The following cost estimates are intended to be used for preliminary budgeting purposes only. They will provide Council and the Sport’N’Action Trust with an order of magnitude of costs for the proposed works that can be incorporated into budgets, and leave a “legacy” for the future. They are based upon the concept Master plans and Building Concept Plans contained in this report, but will require further investigations and design. A detailed breakdown of costs is contained in Appendix 3 of this Report.


Proposed New Hub                                                                                    $6,156,000

Total Option RED                                                                                    $10, 000, 000

Total Option YELLOW/GREEN                                                                        $9,600,000

Additional Items (Allowance)

Demolish Squash                                                                                    $64,000

Lighting to Bowls                                                                                    $64,000

Cricket Wicket                                                                                                $58,000

Forming of All Terrain Zone                                                                        $64,000

Drop existing road-side kerbs to berm for parking                                    $32,000

Additional lighting to 3 Netball courts                                                            $58,000

Events Centre modifications                                                                        $660,000

OR Indoor Netball court                                                                                    $2,027,000


The costs are based upon current construction costs (i.e. December 2011) and we suggest an allowance of not less than 5% per annum be added for escalation beyond this date.


The above costs include allowances for professional fees, contractor’s preliminary and general costs and margins, and a contingency allowance in the order of 10% of the estimated costs.


Exclusions to these costs are as follows

• Relocation costs

• Costs for cancelled or rescheduled events, if any

• Loose furniture and equipment

• Council / Development contributions

• Escalation from November 2011

• Building & Resource Consents

• Goods & Services Tax (GST)

• Treatment of contaminated materials

• Client project related costs

• Land, Legal and Financing costs

• Upgrade of electrical supply, or other infrastructure.


8.4 Risks

The time for the preparation of this report has not allowed a risk review to be carried out with key stakeholders. Risks are best reviewed through a Workshop process which allows a risk register to be developed for further monitoring and decision making.


In the absence of a structured risk review with stakeholders, we judge the following risks will need to be addressed.


• Any changes to the financial status of Grant bodies, or any other sources of funding.

• Objection via the RMA consenting process (if this was deemed necessary) for the new facilities.

• Impacts of any (proposed or yet to be adopted) Waihi Town Development studies, or Master Plans of which we are not aware.

• Foundation and drainage risks associated with current or future ground movement.

• Disruption to existing park users during the development, and difficulties re-establishing these users back at the Park once they have left.

• Development of similar facilities, either within Waihi (at previously mentioned complimentary facilities – i.e. the Events Centre or Waihi Schools), or other towns within the region.


9 Governance and Management


Effective governance and management is essential if community multi-sport facilities are to operate successfully. This fact has been recognised by all those representatives who participated in this study.


A range of governance and management options have been investigated and discussed with the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust, Council representatives and potential member club / organisation representatives over the duration of the study.


9.1 Governance and Management Options

All representatives that participated in the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust and the potential member organisation workshops understood that without being a legally recognised entity it would be impossible to enter into negotiations, sign contracts, seek funding, or expect to be formally recognised by other entities.


The consensus view emerging from workshops and interviews was that the best legal structure to govern the proposed facility was a Trust. Many people favoured modifying the existing Sport ’N’ Action Trust rather than developing a new Trust. For this reason the Sport ’N’ Action Trust decided not to appoint new members at its 2011 AGM but rather to place the Trust into a holding pattern until the conclusion of the current study.


During workshops a number of different governance and management models were discussed. Attributes that were identified as being essential in these workshops and from earlier consultation included:


A model with ability to:

1. Provide each club / organisation with a voice.

2. Protect the independence and history each club / organisations.

3. Access the required technical skills and resources to inform governance decisions.

4. Protect the interests of all member clubs / organisations (primarily a governance structure that cannot be easily monopolised).

5. Easily accommodate new member organisations.

6. Have a Trust which can actually function well and deliver results.


After considerable discussion the favoured model was identified.


9.2 Favoured Base Governance and management Structure

The following model should be seen as providing a starting point for discussions with a lawyer. It is extremely important that time be taken with an experienced lawyer to establish the Trust documents. It is also a good idea to have these documents peer reviewed (both by another lawyer as well as individuals involved with running and governing other existing multi-sport facilities).


For preliminary purposes it is assumed there will be a maximum of nine representatives (Trustees). (Figure 09). Our experience suggests nine Trustees should be seen as a maximum as it avoids the structure becoming cumbersome. It should be noted that a Trust with fewer trustees is also possible, and in some instances actually advantageous. For example, a smaller size Trust may be more efficient over the development planning, design, construction and early operational phases(1).


Regardless of size it is considered imperative that as well as having general sports / club experience represented on the Trust there is also a need to appoint Trustees with specific skill sets (for example, legal, accounting, governance, sports management and facility development skills). It is likely the skills sets required by the Trust will change over time as the project progresses through its different stages. Assuming nine trustees are appointed at least four of them should be appointed as independents for particular skills.


In many instances the individuals selected for their specific skills will also be residents in the local community. However, this is not essential; what is important is that they have the necessary skills to support the development and operation of the Multi Sport entity. Another very important role of the independents is the moderating impact they can have within the Trust. ‘Independent’ trustees appointed from outside of the member sports / organisations ensure the Trust is operated without perceived bias toward any particular code / club. Our experience has shown this to be essential.


It is also vital that all Trustees understand that they are tasked with looking after the interests of the Trust. If trustees are appointed from one of the member clubs / organisations they are not there as representatives of a particular club / organisation.


  1. Alternatively if a larger Trust is to be adopted then the project should be run by a project control group (PCG) which reports back to the Trustees.


Representation of the clubs / codes is carried out by a separate group (which is not legally constituted). This group is made up of all the users of the facility (the ‘User Group’) and would normally have two representative appointed by each member club. The business of the ‘User Group’ is formally conducted (with a chairperson, agenda and minutes). The User Group provides advice and feedback to the Trust (Figure 09).


The Trust would be responsible for staff appointments such as a facility manager or a contractor. The facility manager or contractor would then appoint or coordinate staff or volunteers (Figure 09).


9.3 Land Lease / Facility Owner Model – Skills Based Trust

Under this model the Community Multi-sport Trust would assume the role of facility owner and operator (Figure 10) while Council would be the land owner. Council would have a land lease with the Community Multi-sport Trust for any fixed assets owned by the Trust that were on Council land. If the Council contributed a capital grant towards the facilities they are also likely to have a service level agreement / contract with the Trust. The Trusts member clubs / organisations would have use agreements with the Trust.


Pros and Cons from a Community Multi Sport Entity Perspective.



Trustees are a mix of club representatives and skills based (appointed) independent representatives.

Each of the Waihi Sports Clubs can retain its identity and continue to develop / run its operations.

The Multi-Sports Trust / member clubs / organisations potentially have capital freed up to be able to be invested into development and operational activities (assuming Council or other commercial interests want to buy the land).

The entity should be able to negotiate favourable long-term lease and access terms as part of a combined approach to Council.


Other charitable funders may require long-term leases to be in place before granting any capital grants (however, this should not be a problem).

The new model does represent a change for potential member clubs / organisations.

The Trust would be taking on responsibility / liability for the built infrastructure which currently rests with the individual clubs / organisations.


9.4 Project Development

Core project development work for the Community Multi Sport may actually be undertaken by a smaller sub set of representatives who form a project control group (PCG). Under a nine member Trust this is considered essential. The PCG may also co-opt specialist skills to assist it during the planning and development phases (such as project managers and sports planning consultants). It is important that some Trustees sit on the PCG.


The PCG then reports back to the Trust on a regular basis. This approach prevents the planning and development process from being slowed down as delays can equate to increased planning and development costs. However, it is essential that the PCG (or certain Trustees on the PCG) have delegated authority to make decisions to a certain value and understand how and when information is to be communicated to the full Trust.


At the half way stage of development the Trust should be establishing it’s operational and management processes in preparation for the opening of the facility.


9.5 Key Points for Consideration

Having reviewed the environment in which the Waihi Community Multi Sport is being developed Visitor Solutions would suggest one of two governance, management and development options. These are:


A. Smaller Trust

1. Progress discussions with potential member clubs / organisations.

2. Establish a smaller five member trust (with the ability to increase the number of Trustees to a maximum of nine at a later stage). The Trust should have at least two independent skills based Trustees.

3. Progress discussions with Council.

4. Progress planning and fundraising immediately.


B. Larger Trust

1. Progress discussions with potential member clubs / organisations.

2. Establish a nine member trust. The Trust should have at least four independent skills based Trustees.

3. Establish a project control group (PCG) with a mandate from the Trust to progress the project.

4. Progress discussions with Council.

5. Progress planning and fundraising immediately.


Although the final decision about which option is most applicable will be decided by the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust and its member groups, in order to maintain a project’s momentum Visitor Solutions has found that a smaller Trust (that can be expanded at a later stage) does have some advantages.


10 Preliminary Operational Plan


Development of Preliminary Operational Plan

The following operational plan has been based on the preliminary Site Options ‘Green’, ‘Red’ and ‘Yellow’, the Pacific Environments Architect’s facility hub plan, secondary and primary data from Waihi sports clubs and organisations, and a benchmarking exercise. This benchmarking exercise involved examining operational costs and usage data of other existing recreation and multi sport facilities.


In developing the preliminary income and costs streams there were some key assumptions that were made in terms of the management approach and potential user numbers. Further detailed business planning and consultation with potential user groups will be required during the next phase of the facility development to establish a final business plan.


General Assumptions


1. The capital development of the facility will be staged.

2. All capital development will be funded from charitable grants. No debt repayments have been allowed for.

3. All prices exclude GST.

4. At this time the impact of clubs / organisations such as the RSA are currently excluded.

5. The model assumes the facility will be actively promoted / marketed within the community and will become a community hub.

6. The model assumes the facility is well managed and governed.

7. A trust governance model is assumed.


Operational Cost Assumptions


1. Operational costs have been benchmarked against existing multi-sport operations and then adjusted to take into consideration the characteristics of the proposed development.

2. Insurance costs are based on estimates from an insurance broker based on an initial capital build cost (i.e. for Stage 1) of $4 million.

3. No depreciation contribution has been included at this time.

4. Repairs and maintenance in Year One are largely considered to be covered under the building warranties. Maintenance costs will increase gradually over time.

5. Volunteers will be required to operate the facility to its full potential. Wages / salaries have been allowed for a:

a. part time, functions / bar manager,

b. part time facility coordinator.

6. Electricity and gas costs will depend on the composition of the member clubs / organisations and the operational hours. Figures have been benchmarked against existing operations. It is also assumed that the new building will be designed to be more energy efficient than the existing buildings.


Revenue Assumptions


1. Club memberships are assumed (at the time of opening) to be:

On Site playing clubs (active sports participation on site):

• Members 500

Off Site playing clubs (active sports participation off site):

• Members 200

Social Members

• Affiliated ‘Social’ - 100 members.


2. Total playing club membership splits are assumed to be 40% junior and 60% senior.


3. Multi sport subscription fees will be based on each club member contributing towards the operational costs of the Community Multi sport Development.


4. The fee will be:

• $30 per senior onsite member,

• $20 per senior off site member,

• $20 per junior onsite member,

• $10 per junior off site member,

• $25 per affiliated ‘social’ membership.


5. The facility will be available for hire and will be charged out at $200 per half day and $300 per full day. The facility will receive 10 half day bookings ($2,000 pa) and 5 full day bookings ($1,500 pa) in year one. Smaller room hireage will generate $500 per annum in year one. Total room hireage will generate $4,000 pa in year one.


6. A portable canteen cart will generate $5,000 per annum.


7. The bar will turn over $105,000 per annum, with profit @ 38%. This figure takes account of existing bar turnover amongst potential member clubs and is also benchmarked against small existing operations that are already achieving these levels of turnover (a core assumption is that the facility will be a social community hub).


8. Pool tables and vending machines will generate $1,000 per annum.


9. The facility will receive a total of $15,000 per annum in naming rights and signage revenue.


10. Local charitable trusts will grant $5,000 in year one.


Preliminary Operational Plan


• Pool tables and vending machines will generate $1,000 per annum.

• The facility will receive a total of $15,000 per annum in naming rights and signage revenue.

• Local charitable trusts will grant $5,000 in year one.


Draft Revenue


Estimated Subscription Fees (at time of development)

Onsite – Adult                                                                        $9,000

Onsite – Youth                                                                        $4,000

Off Site – Adult                                                                        $2,400

Off Site – Youth                                                                        $800

Affiliated ‘Social’ - 100 members                                                $2,500

Sub-Total                                                                        $18,700


Bar and Function Facilities                                               

Beverage                                                                        $38,000

Canteen                                                                        $5,000

Function Room hireage                                                            $4,000

Pool tables and Vending Machine Commission                        $1,000

Sub-Total                                                                        $48,000


Grants and Donations

Naming Rights and Signage revenue                                    $15,000

Local Trusts’ Grants                                                            $5,000

Sub-Total                                                                        $20,000





Salaries and Wages (or contract fees)                                   

Functions/Bar Manager (Part Time)                                    $15,000

Facility Co-ordinator (Part Time)                                                $20,000

Sub-Total                                                                        $35,000


Communication Expenses

Postage                                                                        $1,000

Stationary                                                                        $500

Telephones                                                                        $2,000

Computer Costs (software and hardware)                        $1,500

Sub-Total                                                                        $5,000



Marketing - Facility General                                                $5,000

Sub-Total                                                                        $5,000


General Facility Costs

Bank Charges                                                                        $500

Insurance                                                                        $10,000

Local Authority rates                                                            $4,000

Security Services – External                                                $2,000

Sky TV                                                                                    $3,600

Accounting and audit fees                                                $2,000

Waste Management                                                            $2,500

Sub-Total                                                                        $24,600


Fuel and Power

Electricity/Gas                                                                        $12,000

Sub-Total                                                                        $12,000


Repairs and Maintenance

Cleaning Materials                                                            $2,000

Repairs and Maintenance -Building Interior                        $2,000

Repairs and Maintenance -Building Exterior                        $2,000

Sub-Total                                                                        $6,000


Total Expenditure                                                            $87,600

Operating Surplus (Loss)                                                $1000

Depreciation Contribution Building                                    Excluded

Net Result (Loss)                                                            $1000



Available data and the assumptions outlined within this section would indicate that the community multi sport facility is a financially viable proposition. The next stage of planning and financial modelling will require the Trust and its potential members (such as clubs) and partner (such as Council) organisations to have entered into negotiations. As a result of these negotiations it will be possible to ascertain additional data to refine the base model outlined in this section.


It is essential during these negotiations that the following key points are discussed:


1. It is likely that member clubs / organisations will see certain aspects of historical revenue generation stop or decline. For example, bar takings. However, this is normally more than made up for by taking the burden of buildings and grounds maintenance and operational costs off clubs and making it the responsibility of the Trust.


2. Member clubs stand to gain financially by working together rather than in isolation. For example, via joint sponsorship initiatives.


3. It will take time to establish financial systems and processes. It is essential that detailed operational / financial planning commence at least six months prior to opening. The detailed business plan should be continually refined over this period. Operational agreements should also be in place.


4. A depreciation contribution has been excluded from this preliminary model. The potential partners should discuss building depreciation and how this will be handled moving forwards. It is recommended that contributions are made towards depreciation.


11 Conclusion



The feasibility and master planning study has identified the following findings:


Key facility / infrastructure findings:


1. All of the required sports and community activities can be accommodated within the Morgan Park precinct.

2. The development of an additional new indoor netball / basketball court on Morgan Park as part of the Waihi Recreation and Community Centre is not considered essential during early project development stages. A development footprint should be allowed for at Morgan Park. The optimisation of the existing Event Centre to create more usable court space higher priority.

3. From a technical and functionality perspective the optimal master plan layout is Option Green. This option enables:

a. Good clustering of compatible facilities and sight lines over the playing surfaces.

b. An additional outdoor court.

c. Outdoor court expansion potential.

d. Increased on site car parking.

e. A development footprint for a multipurpose squash / indoor sprung floor facility.

f. A development footprint for an indoor netball / basketball facility.

g. Re use of the existing netball courts as an above ground skate / bike park.

h. Re-sue of the existing tennis courts for additional car parking.

i. An artificial bowling green.

j. Retained use of the existing rugby club grounds.

4. The development can be staged to enable capital costs to be spread out, while still optimising utilisation of the Reserve, and minimising disruption to existing users.


Key operational findings:


5. The community multi sport facility preliminary business model indicates the development would be viable. After negotiations with potential members and partners it will be necessary to develop a detailed business plan which takes account of new data and the staging approach selected.

6. The development is likely to be best governed by a Trust comprised of between five and nine trustees. A proportion of these trustees should be independents who are elected for the technical skills they bring to the Trust.

7. The Trust should examine forming a project control group (PCG) to drive the project during the planning, design, fundraising, construction phases. This is particularly important if the Trust has a greater number of trustees.

8. It is considered essential the user agreements and full business and operational plans are completed as soon as practicable (certainly well before opening). A detailed business plan will be required prior to seeking funding grants. This plan should be updated and refined constantly.




1. That the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust should, after discussions with its members and on seeking legal advice, review and change its structure and constitution, taking account of the study findings.

2. That the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust establishes a project control group (PCG) to drive the project’s implementation.

3. That the Sport ‘N’ Action Trust and its member and partner organisations should adopt the master plan ‘Option Green ’ as a basis for further planning and optimisation.

4. The Trust should enter into discussions with Council to explore a potential partnership approach and to make sure that Councils Reserve development requirements will be meet by the Trust.

5. That detailed negotiations commence with potential member and partner organisations around planning and implementation issues. These negotiations should also consider high level points that will become part of user group agreements.

6. The Trust should approach the RSA and any similar organisations within Waihi and begin more detailed discussions about their potential involvement in the project.


12 Appendix 1. Workshop Notes


Waihi Multi Sport Workshop Notes – Golden Legacy Centre 17/7/11

The following notes were taken at the workshop held at Newmont Waihi Golden Legacy Centre on 17/7/11. The notes are in no specific order and not in any order of priority.


What are our questions?

• How do we accommodate everyone at Morgan Park?

• Will the “Sport ‘n Action” concept last ‘200 plus’ years?

• Has the Council approved the land use?

• How do we address the Site Geotech issues?

• Financial sustainability? (Don’t want a white elephant)

• Is the ‘sky’ the financial limit?

• What’s the time line? – Staged, based on need.

• How do we fund our facilities with multiple demands on our sponsors?

• Get all groups to come together when some have valuable assets and others nothing.

• What will happen to the Rugby Club?

• What do we do with the Events Centre?

• Sharing the Events centre.

• Future proofing the grounds – Expansion?

• How do we administer our clubs with a decreasing volunteer base?

• Be more efficient re volunteers / resources.

• Paid positions to support volunteer base.

• Who will own the complex?

• Who do we lease from?

• Who will oversee the running of the complex?

• How long will resource consent take from time of Go ahead?

• Will we all have separate club rooms?

• Maintenance of grounds and building/s?

• Badminton

• How can we encourage this building to be the main centre?

• How do we incorporate ‘dirt track / dirt boards’ & other less traditional codes?


What are our challenges?

Once all the challenges had been identified each workshop participant was given 10 votes to assign to the ‘challenges’ to indicate which was the most important to them. The number of votes for each ‘challenge’ is given in brackets; the higher to number of votes the more important the ‘challenge’ was considered to be.

• Funding (17 votes)

• Clubs with ‘assets’, versus clubs with ‘no assets’ (14 votes)

• Ongoing operational costs (12 votes)

• Staging the development (12 votes)

• Who will run the new facility management (11 votes)

• Who will run the bar etc (4 votes)

• Governance (3 votes)

• Maintaining each club’s own identity (9 votes)

• Changing timeframe (8 votes)

• Second site – dirt track / horses (7 votes)

• Land allocation – Morgan Park land stability (6 votes)

• Safe ground (6 votes)

• Clashes over use of the main rooms of the complex (6 votes)

• Lack of ability to expand (5 votes)

• All clubs working together (5 votes)

• Self interest (4 votes)

• Serving two communities, but only getting funding from one (3 votes)

• What to do until the new facility is running (3 votes)

• Communication (3 votes)

• Trees / birds (3 votes)

• RMA – resource consent (2 votes)

• Space, room for others to join (2 votes)

• Parochialism (2 votes)

• Lease costs to clubs (2 votes)

• History / tradition (1 vote)

• Club rooms close to courts (1 vote)

• Addressing the now – rather than looking to the future (1 vote)

• Project management

• Contractors / builders


What are our Opportunities?

• Able to grow sport

• More people playing sport

• Attracting new members

• New membership

• A social Hub for Waihi

• Bar and eating facilities to promote socialising together

• Community pride

• Community well being

• Community coming together

• The ‘Place’ to be

• Better Facilities

• Upgraded facility

• District facilities

• Modern, up-to-date facilities as an asset for our grandchildren

• More cooperation between codes

• Council support

• Newmont support

• Promoting the town’s tourism

• By sharing facilities and resources we can achieve more than individually.

• Good facilities develop excellent sportspeople (national representatives) which grows interest in sport.

• Sports administrators can focus on their sport rather than facilities management

• We can get on with sport rather than being bogged down with funding issues / quality of facilities etc.

• Fitness centre (gym, aerobics etc)

• Sports teams training attraction e.g. Chiefs, Magic Netball etc.

• Governance structure in place.

• Reduced overall operating costs

• Volunteer support

• Children’s entertainment

• Safe environment

• History, computer based

• Linkages with Union Hill and other walkways around town.


13 Appendix 2. Road Map


Preliminary Project ‘Road Map’

The following preliminary ‘roadmap’ has been prepared in order to act as a project implementation guide. It is designed to provide a general direction and has not attempted to set out all project stages, many of which will be dependent on the direction set by the Trust and potential partners.




© Visitor Solutions 2012


This Report has been prepared by Visitor Solutions on the specific instructions of Sport ‘N’ Action Waihi Trust (“the client”). It is solely for our Client’s use for the purpose for which it was commissioned (in accordance with the terms of our engagement and agreed scope of work). Any use or reliance by any person contrary to the above, to which Visitor Solutions has not given it’s prior written consent, is done so at that person’s own risk.

Information, data and general assumptions used in the compilation of this Draft Master Plan and Feasibility Study have been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Visitor Solutions Ltd has used this information in good faith and makes no warranties or representations, expressed or implied, concerning the accuracy or completeness of this information.

Interested parties should perform their own detailed investigations, analysis and projections on all issues prior to acting in any way with regard to this project. It is strongly recommended that a full feasibility study and business case be developed.


Auckland Office

P.O. Box 14-245, Panmure,

Auckland 1741

Level 3, 45 Mt Wellington Highway,

Mt Wellington, Auckland

Phone: 09 570 3870

Fax: 09 574 6918

[email protected]