The purpose of the assessment was to investigate the possibility of a full or partial reuse of the Community Hall in the Naenae Community Hub plans.
The Project Control Group, who are responsible for the governance of the Community Hub project, has considered the implications of a full or partial reuse of the building and have decided that this is not possible. The result of this assessment is that the existing Naenae Community Hall building will be demolished.
Naenae Integrated Community Hub - Building Condition Assessment (PDF 5 MB)
Summary of the report
- There are a number of identified items from the engineers that would trigger significant structural upgrade requirements, e.g. the floor is not tied to piles, masonry cavity tie replacement would be required and there are potential wall bracing requirements along glazed walls.
- The structural engineers comment that in their experience masonry buildings of this nature that are upgraded normally require significant structural work. These requirements may also negatively impact on the ability to create a better design by forcing bracing or supports in specific locations.
- The Council will be unable to get a weather tightness warranty for the existing hall as contractors will only issue this for new builds
- If a reuse option was pursued then only part of the hall heritage and history would be retained. From an external perspective only the upper several metres would be visible due to new building elements at lower levels surrounding the majority of the structure.
- The end design if reuse was undertaken would be smaller than a new facility, limiting the functional space. In real terms this would mean a smaller library, smaller auditorium space etc.
- In addition, the orientation of this design would be sub-optimal. It forces the staff areas to be placed along Everest Avenue which is the highest value on the site and should be where the main entrance to the facility is. This is due to:
- the space requirements of different zones and
- the location of underground services (specifically waste water from the pool).
- By prioritising the retention of existing physical structure over the end user it is highly likely that the quality of customer experience of an adapted facility would be lower than a new build.
- Material cost to the project will increase by an estimated $750,000-$1m which is currently not in the budget. This includes main contract cost increases, time extension costs increases, design cost increases and additional contingency budget required as listed in the report.
- The risk profile of the project as a whole increases significantly.
- Some Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design issues may not be able to be mitigated in this design , e.g. multiple entrance/exit points to allow for easy exit routes if followed, sight lines being optimised so that surveillance into various areas of the building is maximised, placement of glazing etc.
- Council would need to budget extra funds (over normal amounts) in its long term plan for replacement of items that are well through their lifespan. Initial estimates are a minimum of $500,000 over the first ten years of a new asset management plan with the notable item being a full floor replacement in 5-7 years.
- Additional potential issues with a retention project rather than new build that have not been investigated or considered currently include; drainage (as earthworks and draining under the existing building are challenging), fire services, security, electrical and HVAC.
Hawkins also confirmed that it is not physically or financially practical to look at relocation of the hall due to the size of the space and method of construction requiring a full deconstruction, transport and rebuild. It is not able to be moved in sections.