I would demolish the toilets, and move the hall to that vacated area, leaving the art space and Library where they currently are. The kitchen area could be demolished also and replaced by a concrete pad with the back room of the gallery that currently sits above it held up by pilotis. A new kitchen area could be added onto the side on the relocated hall; it needn’t be large or fancy, basically a sink and cupboard/shelf area is required so cups/wine glasses can be washed and stored.
Looking at this below from a Waiheke Local Board Meeting in 2018, it would appear to be a viable proposition.
27. Two separate asset assessments were prepared for the hall and associated coastal assets. The hall assessment noted that while there were some repairs required, overall the building was in reasonable condition and should be fit for purpose for many years if properly maintained.
28. The hall assessment noted that the building is poorly located and suffers from sea action particularly during south-westerly storms. It recommended investigating a number of options including additional sea wall protection, relocation and raising the building on site, demolishing the existing building and constructing a new purpose built facility off-site.
I am concerned that demolition/removal and the construction a new, smaller building is being presented as a fait accompli without supporting documented evidence. We are ‘told’ that this is the only option, without being anything that is written documentation from official channels. Costings are wishy-washy, and we have also learned that hall maintenance has not been happening according to schedule over the last few years. Why was a council representative investigating the hall complex for asbestos in January? Who organised this? It’s unlikely the council did it off their own bat…
If a new building must be constructed, building a smaller hall space is a very bad idea. There will only be more people coming to Rakino to holiday, or even live, and it’s foolish to build for ten years past, instead of the future. Given we have not been given any indications as to footprint, other than that it would be one level and spaces would have to be shared, this is a really difficult option to comment on. The 50sqm of functional space that the current hall has is barely adequate, so anything smaller is pointless, unless we could have a generous covered outdoor space.
I appreciate that many members of the community don’t attend entertainment that is held at the facilities, but equally, many members of the community are interested in workshops/music events/gallery events, etc. These events also serve as community get togethers, and generally benefit everyone. The possibility of a reduced space or non-existent space will seriously curtail these activities.
A new building needs to be a minimum space of 80 sqm, especially if we have to all share the space cooperatively. This would be a fit space for weddings/parties/bands, and if we could have some built ‘furniture’ for art show use, such as plinths or folding screens it could be workable. I strongly oppose downsizing the library to a book cupboard. It is used frequently by permanents and bach owners, so a better solution needs to be found. I’d also like to see some of the aspects of the old hall kept or re-purposed if possible, for example, the hall windows which featured so beautifully in the fabulous photos that many people took at the Anthonie Tonnon show, as well as the excellent acoustics and power system.
I don’t think that a large turning circle for vehicles at the ferry terminal is more important than our community facilities. This flies in the face of Auckland Council ideology with regards to cars. I would rather see people opt to walk an extra 30m or so with their gear on the few times a year when the ferry is packed to the gunwhales than bowl the community buildings because they are in the way of someone’s sports utility vehicle’s ability to turn comfortably.
I’m always keen on self-determination, with the proviso that safety is paramount, especially in a potentially life-threatening situation.
First and foremost I want to see some education around fire hazards; wood/charcoal-fired BBQs, candles, faulty appliances (gas fridges!), fireworks, dry dead vegetation, etc.
It’s hard to avoid an ‘act of god’, but careless human behaviour can be curtailed.
I also think the rules for Rakino aren’t up to scratch. We should have the same fire rules as apply to the conservation islands in the Hauraki Gulf.
“This study was carried out as a desk-top assessment relying on existing reports and informationand no site visit was carried out.”
Oh my god, Mark, you are correct…
I just realised I didn’t attach the Tonkin and Taylor report… I’d best do that, though engineering reports are dry and unreadable, unless you are an engineer!
She’s a very forgiving girl. 🙂
We met her the first night she spent on Rakino as a little pup.
She crashed out on the axminster.
I would demolish the toilets, and move the hall to that vacated area, leaving the art space and Library where they currently are. The kitchen area could be demolished also and replaced by a concrete pad with the back room of the gallery that currently sits above it held up by pilotis. A new kitchen area could be added onto the side on the relocated hall; it needn’t be large or fancy, basically a sink and cupboard/shelf area is required so cups/wine glasses can be washed and stored.
Looking at this below from a Waiheke Local Board Meeting in 2018, it would appear to be a viable proposition.
27. Two separate asset assessments were prepared for the hall and associated coastal assets. The hall assessment noted that while there were some repairs required, overall the building was in reasonable condition and should be fit for purpose for many years if properly maintained.
28. The hall assessment noted that the building is poorly located and suffers from sea action particularly during south-westerly storms. It recommended investigating a number of options including additional sea wall protection, relocation and raising the building on site, demolishing the existing building and constructing a new purpose built facility off-site.
I am concerned that demolition/removal and the construction a new, smaller building is being presented as a fait accompli without supporting documented evidence. We are ‘told’ that this is the only option, without being anything that is written documentation from official channels. Costings are wishy-washy, and we have also learned that hall maintenance has not been happening according to schedule over the last few years. Why was a council representative investigating the hall complex for asbestos in January? Who organised this? It’s unlikely the council did it off their own bat…
If a new building must be constructed, building a smaller hall space is a very bad idea. There will only be more people coming to Rakino to holiday, or even live, and it’s foolish to build for ten years past, instead of the future. Given we have not been given any indications as to footprint, other than that it would be one level and spaces would have to be shared, this is a really difficult option to comment on. The 50sqm of functional space that the current hall has is barely adequate, so anything smaller is pointless, unless we could have a generous covered outdoor space.
I appreciate that many members of the community don’t attend entertainment that is held at the facilities, but equally, many members of the community are interested in workshops/music events/gallery events, etc. These events also serve as community get togethers, and generally benefit everyone. The possibility of a reduced space or non-existent space will seriously curtail these activities.
A new building needs to be a minimum space of 80 sqm, especially if we have to all share the space cooperatively. This would be a fit space for weddings/parties/bands, and if we could have some built ‘furniture’ for art show use, such as plinths or folding screens it could be workable. I strongly oppose downsizing the library to a book cupboard. It is used frequently by permanents and bach owners, so a better solution needs to be found. I’d also like to see some of the aspects of the old hall kept or re-purposed if possible, for example, the hall windows which featured so beautifully in the fabulous photos that many people took at the Anthonie Tonnon show, as well as the excellent acoustics and power system.
I don’t think that a large turning circle for vehicles at the ferry terminal is more important than our community facilities. This flies in the face of Auckland Council ideology with regards to cars. I would rather see people opt to walk an extra 30m or so with their gear on the few times a year when the ferry is packed to the gunwhales than bowl the community buildings because they are in the way of someone’s sports utility vehicle’s ability to turn comfortably.
Just an addendum… does anyone know why the council visited the island in the company of Chairman Clews to inspect for asbestos in the Hall complex?
How do you propose to encourage new people to become part of the RRA committee?
I’m always keen on self-determination, with the proviso that safety is paramount, especially in a potentially life-threatening situation.
First and foremost I want to see some education around fire hazards; wood/charcoal-fired BBQs, candles, faulty appliances (gas fridges!), fireworks, dry dead vegetation, etc.
It’s hard to avoid an ‘act of god’, but careless human behaviour can be curtailed.
I also think the rules for Rakino aren’t up to scratch. We should have the same fire rules as apply to the conservation islands in the Hauraki Gulf.
“This study was carried out as a desk-top assessment relying on existing reports and informationand no site visit was carried out.”
Oh my god, Mark, you are correct…
Attached now! It’s not too dry..
I just realised I didn’t attach the Tonkin and Taylor report… I’d best do that, though engineering reports are dry and unreadable, unless you are an engineer!
Cheers, Emily! 🙂
Thank you Carole! I only just saw your kind comment. 🙂