The council's senior policy analyst, Scott Figenshow, said yesterday having council business spread across so many locations created "operating inefficiencies and confusion for the community in identifying a single point of contact for council matters".
"We see this as a way to improve customer service and to try to achieve some improved value for money.
"We think there's some greater efficiencies through co-ordination of effort that can occur when people are working together."
Design brief objectives included council headquarters becoming a "one-stop shop" with improved customer service and affordability and a holistic approach to issues by staff being in one place.
The council wanted to "lead by example" in good urban design and sustainability.
The Building Code and fire and earthquake standards would be adhered to if an existing building was used.
The request for expressions of interest document was issued on July 11 and was available on the council's website. The closing date was August 31 and the number of responses so far was not disclosed yesterday.
Asked if the council would move out of downtown Queenstown to a more central location in the Lakes district it serves, Mr Figenshow said it was one of the mandatory requirements the headquarters be located within the Queenstown Town Centre Zone, Town Centre Transition Zone, or the immediately adjacent High Density Residential Zone-Subzone A.
"This is reaffirming the view the council has had for years that it is going to keep the council office functions within the Queenstown town centre," he said.
The council was willing to consider making available council land for a proposal if the participant elected, Mr Figenshow said.
Asked if there was a budget for the project, he said the council could lease existing or proposed accommodation, which would likely require little capital expenditure by the council, or the council could enter into a joint venture where it may provide land, then lease the improvements and require some capital expenditure, or there would be some refurbishment of the existing mix of buildings with longer secured tenancies and improvements to meet the design brief.
"Which of those [three options] stack up as being the most cost effective and deliver the most value for money is something we won't be able to assess until we have those proposals," Mr Figenshow said.
The council intended to make its decision in response to expressions of interest by September 28.
What it would do with its ownership of its existing building and land at 10 Gorge Rd, which had a combined quotable value of $5.7 million, and the satellite office leases of varying tenure, would not be known until then.
