This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
7. 10. 96
1. HIGH/COLOMBO/HEREFORD STREETS REDEVELOPMENT RR 3585
| Officer responsible | Author |
| City Design Manager | Andrew Craig, Landscape Architect |
| Corporate Plan Output: Major Amenity Improvements p 9.5.52 |
The purpose of this report is to inform Councillors of technical feasibility, cost estimate and to seek direction.
INTRODUCTION
At the April meeting of the Central City Committee dealing with the Stewart Fountain, it was resolved that the:
1. Brief is confirmed (see Appendix 1).
2. Preliminary concept is in principle approved.
3. Staff report on public consultation, timetabling and cost estimation.
Additional to this was the need to determine the technical feasibility of the proposal, which with item 3 above is the subject of this report.
After the preliminary concept plan was submitted to the Committee, its design was refined taking into account suggestions made by Committee members. It was also felt by the Design Team that aspects of the design should be strengthened while being mindful of the need to uphold the brief and the principles upon which the preliminary concept is based. The refined concept was presented to the September meeting of the Central City Committee, which resolved to approve it and proceed towards implementation. However, subsequent concern has been expressed about some aspects of the design. Tabled at this meeting is an optiion developed in response to these concerns.
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
Technical considerations relevant to the Stewart Fountain re-development fall into three main areas; waterworks, engineering and lighting.
The refined plan was submitted to consultants in each of these areas where they were asked to assess the proposal's technical feasibility with preliminary cost estimates to be supplied also. The following summarises what they reported.
Waterworks
Our design engineer consulted Neville Crocker Australia Pty Ltd, who he considered to be the only firm in the region with the expertise and experience in interactive fountain design and installation. They also proffered some advice and additional suggestions on interactive lighting, which could be worth considering. They concluded that what we are proposing is entirely feasible subject to the details of design necessary to ensure that the water systems work. They also outlined some of the interactive mechanisms that will be needed and went on to note that in their experience long periods of interaction and participation can be achieved, especially for children at play (see Appendix 2). They suggested too, that housing for the pumps and attendant equipment will need to be quite extensive, and believe that this should be housed underground as near as possible to the `pyramid' with suitable access provided.
Their only caution is with respect to maintenance and suggested that daily cleaning of the canal surrounding the pyramid may be required. During a recent visit to Christchurch we asked Neville Crocker to tell us in more detail about maintenance. He assured us that modern fountain technology is more robust than previous designs. For example bearings and pumping equipment is completely sealed and filtered so that no matter what was thrown at the fountain, such as soap powder, no malfunctions would occur. He also advised that with the proper design the highest quality of water purity could be attained.
Engineering
In this respect what is proposed is considered feasible. The mesh canopy suspended over the Fishers building will need `structural analysis', but this should pose no real problem.
Lighting
Our Southpower consultants report that the interactive lighting for the proposal is feasible. However, they do point out that there are many variables and therefore considerably more investigation is needed in order to refine the design and to integrate it with other interactive elements. Because of this, their cost estimate, which constitutes one of the largest budget items for this project, is very much a ballpark figure.
Overall, it appears that our proposal for the Stewart Fountain re-development is technically feasible. However, it is also clear that a lot more research and development work will have to be carried out in order to refine the technical aspects of the proposal. If the project is to progress from this point, the next step would be to get all of the technical people together so that they can co-ordinate the refinement of the design, especially with regard to the interactive elements.
COST ESTIMATE
The following cost estimates are very much `ballpark' figures arrived at by our technical staff and consultants. Because the various technical aspects of the design are inextricably linked, and that the estimates were arrived at separately, a degree of overlapping has occurred. For example the lighting of the fountains would be considered as an integral part of the fountain jets, but may have been costed as a separate lighting item by our electrical consultants.
The overall cost estimate is shown to be at $602,000 (see Appendix 3). The allocated budget for this project was $330,000. However, since the Budget Review an extra $60,000 has been allocated by Council, bringing the total to $390,000. This money was the Bertlesmann funding originally allocated for the proposed children's play structure that was to be built in the City Mall adjoining the Arthur Barnett Department Store.
Since this play structure is no longer going ahead and that the proposed Stewart Fountain redevelopment incorporates opportunities for play, it was determined that it would be appropriate to transfer this funding.
At the Budget Review it was determined that the $200,000 plus shortfall be sought from sponsorship and this has been successfully achieved.
Like the technical aspects, the costing will be much more refined as and if development progresses.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
So far this has been confined to consultation with adjoining building owners, particularly with regard to the need to use their buildings for anchor points for the canopy. The manager of the Triangle Centre, gave an indication that a canopy being supported by masts located on this building could be acceptable.
Media coverage in `The Press' (12 April and 10 September 1996) and on CTV evoked very little response. The initial concept has been presented to the Inner City Promotion Team. The refined concept has been present to some central city retailers who have generally responded very positively.
I would like to suggest that further public consultation take place in the form of a presentation targeting nearby shop and building owners, subject to the Council's decision to continue the design and implementation process.
TIMETABLING
In a best case scenario assuming that the Committee at this meeting approves the progress of work, the Stewart Fountain re-development could be complete by the middle of next year.
Finally, I would like to say that considerable research and development work is still needed in order to refine the design and as this progresses details regarding technical feasibility and cost will become increasingly specific.
Recommendation: That the Council approve the concept as presented and that detail design work proceed.