Bowled over by massive costs for green roof
A Hamilton bowling club is aghast after being told that it would need to pay the council $236,000 in development contributions before it could erect a canopy over its beloved bowling green.
Development contributions are usually paid by property developers to help pay for the infrastructure that supports developments.
The Frankton club has long been a stalwart of the inner city lawn bowls scene and was seeking to make its greens more comfortable and attractive for members before the shock bill halted work.
A planned PVC canopy of more than 1100m2 would go over a new carpeted green at the Hamilton Workingmen’s Club-based Junction Bowling Club. It is part of $1.5 million in development after its merger with the Frankton Railway Bowling Club.
Hamilton Workingmen’s Club (HWC) general manager Ken Marcum is worried about the extra financial pressure the $236,000 bill would create.
‘‘It would be very close to putting the skids under the project,’’ he said yesterday. He’s approached mayor Paula Southgate and her deputy Angela O’leary for help.
In late October, council staff responding to a resource consent application, advised the canopy was set to trigger the $236,000 in DCS because it would increase the site’s official ‘‘gross floor area’’.
A consultant for HWC told the staffer this must be a mistake. ‘‘I have prepared many resource consent applications for similar structures for bowls clubs throughout New Zealand. We have never been charged a DC on the structure within any other council jurisdiction.’’
But the staffer said the charges were a ‘‘standard application of the Hamilton City Council DC policy’’ and that a High Court judicial review had upheld the council’s approach. The council’s logic was that demand for using the site would increase due to the new canopy.
The council would consider a reduction in development contributions if it could be proved
demand would be less than assumed, but HWC will need to bear the costs of evaluating this.
HWC’S contractor, Farbric Structure, said of the council’s approach: ‘‘We are in disbelief over this as there have been many other bowls canopies put up over the country, which have not attracted this sort of decision from the council.’’
Marcum yesterday said the club had been ‘‘blind-sided’’ by the huge DCS suggestion.
The $236,000 was about what the club would need in 10 years to replace the new carpeted green.
The club was planning to make a formal application for DC remission and would need specialists to evaluate the council’s assessment of extra demand for the site due to the canopy. This could cost up to $25,000.
Marcum felt the council had gone over the top with its assessment on how much the canopy would add to pressure on local infrastructure, such as roads and water services.
For example, he said the council had suggested the canopy would lead to an extra 245 vehicle movements in and out of the site per day.
But he said only about 64 players a day would use the full covered green in winter, hopefully for twice a week at most. In summer, it was rare for both greens to be used. Marcum said the club could afford DCS of around $20,000 but ‘‘$236,000 is a long way from being affordable’’.
O’leary said of the $236,000 DCS that ‘‘on the face of it, it may seem unfair’’ but noted canopies could create extra infrastructure demand, such as for stormwater run-off.