Engineers involved in a failed $29m transport hub in Tauranga face a disciplinary hearing next week.
The Harington Transport Hub in central Tauranga had already cost $19m when construction was halted in September 2019 over seismic design concerns.
Tauranga City Council abandoned the construction due to the issues and extent of remedial work required, says general manager infrastructure Nic Johansson.
The site was eventually sold to a subsidiary of the original construction company Watts and Hughes for $1, for remediation and redevelopment.
The council laid a complaint with Engineering New Zealand about the conduct of three engineers involved in the project. ENZ is the national organisation for more than 22,000 engineers.
The engineers, who have name suppression, will appear before a disciplinary committee on Monday, August 5.
The two-week hearing in Wellington begins six years after construction began on the hub, set to be a nine-storey building with 550 car parks.
The council intended for the hub to help restore economic vibrancy in the city centre, says Johansson.
“The council relied on qualified engineers to design and peer review the building prior to construction.”
Tauranga City Council general manager infrastructure Nic Johansson, Bay of Plenty Times Photo / Alex Cairns
The complaint was investigated by the Engineering New Zealand’s investigating committee, which referred it to their disciplinary committee.
Last month, the investigation committee resolved matters relating to one of the engineers, says Johansson.
An agreed statement of facts has been filed and the disciplinary committee would consider the liability of that engineer based on that evidence.
The hearing would also consider whether the other two engineers undertook engineering activities outside of their competency and if they failed to undertake engineering work in a careful and competent manner, in breach of chartered professional engineer rules and the ENZ code of ethical conduct.
Evidence from former council staff and a range of experts would be presented at the hearing.
There was no set time for a decision to be released after the hearing, says ENZ general manager Justin Brownlie.
If the complaints were upheld, penalties included removing or suspending the engineers’ registration, censuring the engineers, and/or a maximum fine of $5000, according to the ENZ website.
Only upheld decisions would be published, but this was decided by the disciplinary committee, says Brownlie.
The Harington transport hub site in March 2024 after construction of Panorama Towers began. Photo / John Borren:SunLive
Timeline of the failed transport hub
Construction of the $29m Harington Transport Hub began in June 2018.
In March 2019 the structure was 20m high when a beam twisted during a concrete pour, triggering concern.
Between June and July 2019 seismic design problems were revealed.
A high-level structural review showed floor, column and bracing weaknesses.
In September 2019 construction was halted and later that year work began on a remedial strengthening design.
By May 2020 the construction company and engineering firms could not agree on a strengthening design, according to documents obtained from council.
In June 2020 a closed-door meeting was held with the mayor and councillors to decide the hub’s fate.
A decision to abandon the project was made because of the “prohibitive cost” of remediation.
An estimate to demolish the building was $26.5m, structural remediation would have cost $55.4m, and demolition and rebuild was costed at $64.4m, according to a report from TSA Project Management.
In March 2021 the site was sold for $1 to Waibop (Hamilton) Limited - a subsidiary of the original construction company Watts and Hughes.
The agreement meant the new owner would take responsibility for the property and existing structure.
Unused materials and structural steel purchased for use in the building, plus a negotiated settlement for the cancellation of the construction contract, resulted in a final payment to the council of $200,000.
In November 2021 the new owners Watts & Hughes applied for resource consent for Panorama Towers, a 14-storey office and commercial development with 330 car parks.
Construction began on the $60m Panorama Towers in early 2023.
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
9 comments
Yes, Yes and Yes.
Posted on 02-08-2024 15:27 | By Yadick
... whether the other two engineers undertook engineering activities outside of their competency and if they failed to undertake engineering work in a careful and competent manner...
Surely those answers have to be yes, yes, and yes.
The whole design could have cost multiple lives and hospitals and emergency services completely overwhelmed.
If it couldn't even support the concrete at an incomplete stage, imagine the enormity of the potential catastrophe if it was under load from finished concrete, hundreds of vehicles, plus people.
The mind just boggles at the potential disaster.
It cannot all come back to just two people, surely?
Lessons have to be learned from this.
Front Up
Posted on 02-08-2024 16:01 | By FRANKS
So what has the cost been to the ratepayers ? Please front up with the facts.
This is rubbish.
Posted on 03-08-2024 10:35 | By Accountable
Charging three workers at the bottom of the chain is criminal in its self! Will the council charge the people that they employed to do the peer review of the job? Of course they wont. The council assured us there were many checks performed to avoid the situation they found themselves in. The biggest surprise of all is that the council sold the supposedly faulty structure to the contactors employed to build it who have been able to use almost all that was standing to remedy the so called faults and complete the project. The facts are that it should be the council staff that are before the courts and not the three engineers who worked for the company employed to do the engineering designs. Council must also have taken out insurance against all types of mistakes from start to finish.
Rubbish is confused
Posted on 03-08-2024 15:32 | By Informed
Accountable seems to be confused as usual.
If you hire an architect to design a house. And then the foundations fail, would you take yourself to court? Of course not, you would take the architectural firm to court. And then if through that process you found the design flawed. Well you would want that person to be held accountable by their professional body.
Council wasn’t perfect. They should have had more liability coverage in the contract. But the idea of attacking staff for asking an engineering company to do some engineering is a joke. You should be ashamed.
Always the same
Posted on 03-08-2024 19:36 | By Makkas1313
The only people making money out of this whole saga . . . Lawyers. Why has this taken 6 years??? I'm sure contracts subject to so called legal beagles paid for professional advice and suggestions with huge fees with many disclaimers . . . A contract is a contract and if you make a mistake then fix it at your cost not ours . . .the rate payers!
Wake up stupid ratepayers . . . Why does the council have "closed door meetings?"
Mates in the right places lol
Should have pulled it down and started again not sold it to the builder developer for $1!!
Sue the shit out of the engineering firm for all costs it's all covered in insurance huh???
Lots of people didn't and still don't know what they were doing . . . And rates still climb!!!
@Informed
Posted on 04-08-2024 09:32 | By Inmediasres
That is correct.
Although saying accountable should be ashamed seems a bit strong. They're perhaps just misinformed.
So council not accoutable
Posted on 04-08-2024 10:21 | By an_alias
So WHO was in CHARGE PLEASE ?
So your saying Council washes there hands and says WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE ?
Someone was in charge of the project AT COUNCIL, are they still employed by US ?
Whipping cats achieves nothing.
Posted on 04-08-2024 11:45 | By morepork
(They won't change their behaviour...). Looking for blameworthy persons is the stuff of witch hunts and achieves little. The purpose of enquiry should be to understand what went wrong and ensure it doesn't happen again. If these 3 are culpable, then they SHOULD be disciplined for blatant breaches of professional conduct and incompetence, but that won't get us our money back and, if it doesn't reveal how such a situation was allowed to happen, we have no value for the cost of our enquiry.
"Accountable" and "Informed" may argue over who is to blame, but the fact is that responsibility spreads across all parties involved, not just 3 engineers. (This is the FIRST time in years that I find myself in agreement with "Informed"; he made a sensible (even if arguable) post.)
The whole process lacked adequate checks and balances.
So, perhaps the council
Posted on 04-08-2024 11:49 | By earlybird
should tell us, the ratepayers, how much of our money has been lost so far, and how much will be recovered? It's our money so we should be told regardless of any 'confidentality agreements'. Did council, or the design engineers, have sufficient insurance? Seems that the only thing we've had so far is a deafening silence. Perhaps the newly elected council can help in this regard.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.