Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 16 March 2016

Time:                                    3.30pm

Venue:                                 Boardroom,
180 Smith Street, Linwood

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sara Templeton

Islay McLeod

Alexandra Davids

Joe Davies

Yani Johanson

Paul Lonsdale

Brenda Lowe-Johnson

 

 

10 March 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Faye Collins

Community Board Advisor

941 5108

faye.collins@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Note:  The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted.  If you require further information relating to any reports, please contact the person named on the report.
To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
www.ccc.govt.nz/Council/meetingminutes/agendas/index

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

C       1.       Apologies.......................................................................................................................... 4

B       2.       Declarations of Interest................................................................................................... 4

C       3.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes................................................................................. 4

B       4.       Deputations by Appointment........................................................................................ 4

B       5.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 4

C       6.       Notice of Motion........................................................................................................... 15

C       7.       Notice of Motion........................................................................................................... 17  

B       8.       Staff Briefings ................................................................................................................ 19

B       9.       Sumner Skate Park - Project Update........................................................................... 21

B       10.     Process and actions taken behind the proposed Sumner skate park at Scarborough Beach Park...................................................................................................................... 27

A       11.     Future of Redcliffs Pavilion........................................................................................... 43

C       12.     Proposed Road Names - Richmond Hill Road Greenwood Farm Ltd. (RMA92009091) 59

B       13.     Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Area Report................................................... 63

B       14.     Elected Member Information Exchange...................................................................... 76

B       15.     Question Under Standing Orders................................................................................. 76 

 

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

1.   Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

2.   Declarations of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board meeting held on Tuesday, 1 March 2016 be confirmed (refer page 5).

4.   Deputations by Appointment

4.1

Alisdair Hutchison representing the Sumner Community Residents' Association wishes to discuss with the Board the plans for relocation of Shag Rock Reserve memorial cairns.

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

There were no petitions received at the time the agenda was prepared.  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

 

Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Tuesday 1 March 2016

Time:                                    9am

Venue:                                 Boardroom,
180 Smith Street, Linwood

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sara Templeton

Islay McLeod

Alexandra Davids

Joe Davies

Yani Johanson

Paul Lonsdale

Brenda Lowe-Johnson

 

 

1 March 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Croucher

Community Board Advisor

941 5305

Peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
www.ccc.govt.nz/Council/meetingminutes/agendas/index

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

There were no apologies.

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

Sara Templeton declared an interest in Items numbers 9 and 10.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00032

That the minutes of the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board meeting held on Wednesday, 17 February 2016 be confirmed.

Member Templeton/Member Lonsdale                                                                                                           Carried

 

4.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

4.1   Linwood College

 

             Richard Edmundson, recently appointed Principal, Linwood College introduced himself to the Board.   The Board was informed of Richard's teaching background and systems that Linwood College had in place with regard to community relationships, bullying and pupil and staff support.  Of importance was partnering with neighbouring contributing schools.

             The Chairperson thanked Richard Edmundson for the deputation.

 

4.2       Avon City Backpackers - Rapanui Shag Rock Cycleway

             Michael and Irinka Britnell, of Avon City Backpackers, presented a deputation to the Board regarding Rapanui Shag Rock Cycleway.

             An email was circulated to the Board in which Avon City Backpackers complained about the decision of Christchurch City Council's Transport and Environment Committee to proceed with the plan which would put part of the Rapanui Shag Rock cycleway down Worcester Street. The Britnell's believed that this decision was made without proper consultation or consideration to the negative impact that the plan would have on local businesses. 

             It was also their belief that while Avon City Backpackers was supportive of the cycleway, the presentation of the cycleway plans had slanted questions  and breached sections of the Local Government Act 2002. 

             The deputation was advised that the Board had resolved to write to the Mayor and Chief Executive outlining its concerns on the decision making process on the Rapanui - Shag Rock Cycleway. 

             In support of their deputation, Michael and Irinka Britnell tabled an informal petition, signed by 22 residents.  This sought 'that the Council allow no changes to be undertaken to the design and operation of Worcester Street between Latimer Square and Linwood Avenue that will have the effect of reducing traffic in any way or that will negatively affect any business located on Worcester Street or Stanmore Road, or will reduce traffic flows. The petition further noted that current plans were contrary to central city plans and the Linwood Village Revival plan of 2012 and would have an effect on the survival and revival of businesses in the area.  The petition sought that the Council review the funding that allowed for two cycle ways going effectively to the same destination and to look for an alternative route.'

Community Board Decided HFCB/2016/00033

Part B

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Refers the complaint raised by the deputation of Michael and Irinka Britnell, Avon City Backpackers to the Chief Executive and Mayor for investigation and report the outcome to the Board and Michael and Irinka Britnell.

2.         Thanks Michael and Irinka Britnell, Avon City Backpackers for their deputation.

Member McLeod/Member Lowe-Johnson                                                                                                     Carried

 

4.3       Sumner Community

             Charlotte Hudson and Kimberly Mossman presented a deputation to the Board on behalf of the Sumner Land Use and Development Society regarding the red zoned crown land (former tavern site) at the corner of Wakefield Avenue and Nayland Street.  A background document was tabled.

             The Board was advised that the Society needed to obtain clarity from Council on the status of the site, parking clarification, relocation help, support with unforeseen issues/hazards and funding options.

             The Board was invited to attend a Community Consultation Meeting being held on 30 March 2016 in the Sumner School Hall.  

Community Board Decided HFCB/2016/00034

Part B

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Refers the issues raised by the deputation from the Sumner Land Use and Development Society to staff  for clarification of Councils  parking requirements for the Nayland Street site and the possibility of alignment of the major work streams in the village.

2.         That the Board request a briefing from Land Information New Zealand on the proposals on the use of red zoned land.

3.         Thanks Charlotte Hudson and Kimberly Mossman of the Sumner Land Use and Development Society for the deputation.

Member Templeton/Member Lonsdale                                                                                                           Carried

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.  

6.   Correspondence

 

Part C

 

The Board received a report to consider correspondence received from Mike and Alison Kyne, who are also representing four neighbours, in which they raised concerns relating to road safety at the southern portion of Gracefield Avenue.

 

Photographs of commercial vehicles parked in the southern portion of Gracefield Avenue were tabled

 

The Board was advised that as a result of enforcement staff action, the commercial vehicles had since largely relocated from the avenue.

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the correspondence report dated 01 March 2016

2.         Request staff to consider and report back on parking controls for the southern portion of Gracefield Avenue. 

 

 

Community Board Decided HFCB/2016/00035

Community Board Decisions under Delegation

Part B

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the correspondence report dated 01 March 2016

2.         Request staff to consider and report back on parking controls for the southern portion of Gracefield Avenue. 

Member Templeton/Member Lonsdale                                                                                                           Carried

 

Brenda Lowe-Johanson left the meeting at 10.20am and returned at 10.23

 

7.   Staff Briefings

 

Ryan Rolston and Stefan Jermy briefed the Board on the Transport Project which would introduce 30km/h speed restrictions in the Central City.   A map was circulated to the Board outlining the 30km/h speed limit area which would go live from 12 March 2016.

 

Staff undertook to update the Board on wording on the signage proposed at entrances to the 30 km/h zone.

 

The Board noted and received the information supplied during the Staff Briefing.

 

Islay McLeod left the meeting at 10.41am and returned at 10.42am.

 

8.   Proposed No Stopping Restrictions, Matlock Street / Randolph Street Intersection

 

Board Comment

1)             The Board considered a report to approve the installation of 'No Stopping' restrictions at the Matlock Street / Randolph Street intersection.

 

Staff Recommendations

All staff recommendations were accepted without change

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00036

Community Board Decisions under Delegation

Part C

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southeast side of Randolph Street commencing at its intersection with Matlock Street and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 11 metres. 

2.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southeast side of Randolph Street commencing at its intersection with Matlock Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 25 metres. 

3.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northwest side of Randolph Street commencing at its intersection with Matlock Street and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 11 metres. 

4.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northwest side of Randolph Street commencing at its intersection with Matlock Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 10 metres. 

5.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southwest side of Matlock Street commencing at its intersection with Randolph Street and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 15 metres. 

6.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southwest side of Matlock Street commencing at its intersection with Randolph Street and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 11 metres. 

7.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northeast side of Matlock Street commencing at its intersection with Randolph Street and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres. 

8.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northeast side of Matlock Street commencing at its intersection with Randolph Street and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 14 metres. 

Member Lonsdale/Member Davies                                                                                                                    Carried

 

 

·           The meeting adjourned at 10.42am and reconvened at 10.51am

·           Paul Lonsdale left the meeting during the adjournment and returned at 10.52am.

·           Having previously declared an interest in clauses 9 and 10, Sara Templeton left the meeting at 10.51am

·           Islay McLeod took the Chair at 10.51am.

9.   Application to the Hagley/Ferrymead 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund - Heathcote Valley Community Association - Heathcote Village Project - Silver Linings Book

 

The Board received a report to consider an application for funding from their 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund from Heathcote Valley Community Association. 

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Makes a grant from its 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund to Heathcote Valley Community Association for $2,500 towards the Heathcote Village Project- Silver Linings Book.

 

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00037

Community Board Decisions under Delegation

Part C

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Makes a grant from its 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund to Heathcote Valley Community Association for $1,500 towards the Heathcote Village Project- Silver Linings Book.

Member Lonsdale/Member McLeod                                                                                                                 Carried

 

10. Application to the Hagley/Ferrymead 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund - Heathcote Valley Community Association - Heathcote Village Garden

 

The Board received a report to consider an application for funding from their 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund from Heathcote Valley Community Association.

 

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Makes a grant from its 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund to Heathcote Valley Community Association for $1,200 towards the Heathcote Village Garden.

 

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00038

Community Board Decisions under Delegation

Part C

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Makes a grant from its 2015/16 Discretionary Response Fund to Heathcote Valley Community Association for $1,200 towards the Heathcote Village Garden.

Member McLeod/Member Johanson                                                                                                                Carried

 

Sara Templeton returned to the meeting at 11.25am and resumed the Chair.

 

11. Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Area Report

 

The Board received a report from the Community Governance team including information on Board activities, community activities and events, Community Governance team activity, Board submissions and current consultation calendar.

 

·           The Governance Manager circulated a report to the Board on Hagley/Ferrymead Area Snapshots for 2015/16.

·           The Board agreed that a workshop would be held at 2.30pm on Wednesday 16 March 2016 to progress the development of the Linwood/Woolston Pool Complex.

·           The Governance Manager to co-ordinate a Principals Breakfast meeting

·           The Board agreed that information on member attendance at community events would be provided to the Governance Team as this formed a measurement of the goals within the Community Plan.

 

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive the report.

 

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00039

Community Board Decisions under Delegation

Part B

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive the report.

Member Davies/Member Davids                                                                                                                         Carried

 

12. Elected Member Information Exchange

Part B

Mention was made of the following matters:

·         Some newly planted trees in the Central City have been identified as planted without appropriate staking. There are examples in Colombo Street.  Staff undertook to follow up on this.

·         The Board was updated on initiatives with assisting the homeless in the city.

 

Paul Lonsdale left the meeting at 12.06pm.

 

·         The Summit Road Society , in support of having the Port hills pest-free, is discussing the purchase of possum traps with the Sumner-Redcliffs community.

·         The Summit Road Society is keen to see progress with their request for funding for a camera on the Port Hills Gondola.

·         It was noted that some newly installed traffic islands were already crumbling.  Staff undertook to alert the appropriate staff.

 

Brenda Lowe-Johnson left the meeting at 12.12pm.

 

·         Flooding concerns had been reported in Bass Street.  Staff undertook to follow up with the identified resident.

 

12.1 Tour of the Port Hills

 

At the request of the Board, staff undertook to arrange a tour of the Port Hills.

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00040

That staff be requested to arrange a tour of the Port Hills with appropriate staff to enable a better understanding of land mass movement and how geotech monitoring and assessment was being carried out for the area.

Member Johanson/Member Templeton                                                                                                          Carried

 

12.2 Proposed Change to Meeting Commencement Time

 

The Board expressed a wish for a change of commencement time to 9.30am for the Board's Wednesday meetings.

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00041

That staff be requested to arrange for the formalisation of a change of commencement time to 9.30am for the Board's Wednesday meetings.

Member Templeton/Member Johanson                                                                                                          Carried

 

12.3 Request to Reinstate Regular Customer Service Request Summary Reporting

 

The Board indicated its wish to have regular reporting on Customer Service Requests.

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00042

That staff be requested to reinstate regular reporting in the agenda on the monthly Customer Service Request summaries.

Member Johanson/Member Templeton                                                                                                          Carried

 

12.4 Request for Levels of Service

 

In order for the Board to meet its obligations under the Local Government Act of maintaining an overview of services, the Board requested details of the levels of service for the Hagley-Ferrymead Ward.

 

Community Board Resolved HFCB/2016/00043

That staff be requested to provide details of the maintenance plans and levels of service for the Hagley-Ferrymead Ward, i.e. frequency of cleaning, maps, parks, waterways.

Member Johanson/Member Templeton                                                                                                          Carried

 

13. Questions Under Standing Orders

Part B

There were no questions under standing orders at this meeting.

 

 

   

Meeting concluded at 12.26pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 16th DAY OF March 2016

 

Sara Templeton

Chairperson

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

6.        Notice of Motion

Reference:

16/259345

Contact:

Peter Croucher

peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

Pursuant to Section 3.10.1 of Christchurch City Council’s Standing Orders, the following Notice of Motion was submitted by Joe Davies.

'That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board supports the efforts led by Raf Manji and the Council Working Group that is exploring the possibilities of a community currency in Christchurch.'

 

1.   Recommendation to Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Accepts the Notice of Motion from Joe Davies regarding a community currency in Christchurch. .

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

7.        Notice of Motion

Reference:

16/259431

Contact:

Peter Croucher

peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

Pursuant to Section 3.10.1 of Christchurch City Council’s Standing Orders, the following Notice of Motion was submitted by Joe Davies

'That the Board records its support for the Council to consider the future of freedom camping in Christchurch from a holistic perspective especially considering the importance of tourism to the New Zealand economy.  That Christchurch should be open to travellers from all walks of life, not just for those who can afford hotel rooms.  That the Council should not be led by sensationalist media that has in fact demonised innocent travellers.'

.

1.   Recommendation to Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Accepts the Notice of Motion from Joe Davies regarding the future of freedom camping in Christchurch.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

8.        Staff Briefings

Reference:

16/229775

Contact:

Faye Collins

faye.collins@ccc.govt.nz

941 5108

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Board will be briefed on the following:

Subject

Presenter(s)

Unit/Organisation

1.1       Rapanui Shag Rock

Adrian Thein

Kim Swarbrick

Katherine Eveleigh

 

Asset and Networks Operations Group

1.2       Quarryman's Trial Route

Chris Brown

Gemma Dioni

Philippa Upton

 

Planning and Delivery

CS-Transport

1.3       Property at 26 Nayland Street

 

Note: This briefing refers to items

9 and 10.

Megan Carpenter

CU-Parks Unit

 

 

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Notes the information supplied during the Staff Briefings.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

9         Sumner Skate Park - Project Update

Reference:

15/1406093

Contact:

Megan Carpenter

megan.carpenter@ccc.govt.nz

941 6761

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board to be informed / updated around the first priority for an alternative location for a skate park in Sumner, being the former Marine Tavern Site, 26 Nayland Street.

 

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is being provided to provide an update to the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board around what steps Council staff will be taking to select a suitable site for a skate park in Sumner and responding to the Board resolution from its meeting on 7 October 2015.

1.3       Following the revoking of its decision to install skate park at Scarborough Beach Park;

1.3.1   The Board decided to request staff prepare a report investigating the possibility of an alternative location for a skate park, with the first priority site being the former Marine Tavern site, or if found not suitable, in the Bays area (Ferrymead to Sumner), with a view to Council/community funding in future.

1.3.2   The Board decided to formally request the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority make the land of the former Marine Tavern site area available for use by the Council as a possible location for a skate park and car parking.

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive the report.

 

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       The Chairperson of the Hagley / Ferrymead Community Board sent a letter to CERA to request the land of the former Marine Tavern Site at 26 Nayland Street, Sumner be made available for use by the Council as a possible location for a skate park and parking. The Board had been advised by deputation at their meeting on 7 October 2015 of correspondence between members of the Sumner Community and CERA regarding the temporary use of the land for the purpose of a skate park.

3.2       The Hagley Ferrymead Community Board received a letter from the CERA dated 3 December 2015. The letter advised that the property at 26 Nayland Street, Sumner is privately owned therefore CERA is not able to make any decisions in relation to it.

3.3       The letter advised if the Crown ultimately acquires the property, Council can make an application for the temporary use of the Crown-owned residential red zone land through Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).

3.4       Council's property unit have advised the records show that the Crown purchased the site on 8 December 2015.

3.5       The Community Board on 16 December 2015 decided to:

3.5.1   Request that the Chief Executive contact the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, or the appropriate authority, to request that 26 Nayland Street (the former Marine Tavern site) be made available for use by the Council for a skate park and car parking.

 

4.   Context/Background

4.1       The Community Board resolution from 7 October requests staff to prepare a report investigating the possibility of an alternative location for a skate park, with the first priority site being the former Marine Tavern site (26 Nayland Street), or if found not suitable, in the Bays area (Ferrymead to Sumner), with a view to Council/community funding in the future.

4.2       CERA have advised that if the Crown acquires the land, then an application to LINZ can be made for the temporary use of the land. On 1 December 2015, LINZ took over responsibility for interim management of Crown-owned properties in the flat land and the Port Hills residential red zone. This includes assessing requests for interim use of the land. LINZ do not make decision about the long-term use of the land. These decision will be made by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The timeframes around how long LINZ takes to process an application are unknown and Council staff are not aware of any information that provides timeframes associated with interim temporary use.

4.3       The timeframes for the public engagement on the future use of the Christchurch red zones are still to be determined. Once this engagement is complete, CERA will work in conjunction with Regenerate Christchurch to determine the future use of specific areas and what work will be required to meet this (www.beehive.govt.nz - press release around LINZ taking over responsibility)

4.4       A majority of the site at 26 Nayland Street is within the Proposed District Plan Cliff Hazard Management Area 1 and 2 which have specific planning requirement (see Attachment A). It is possible to get consent to do hazard mitigation works in Cliff Hazard Management Area 2 in specific circumstances, however it will not be an easy consent to achieve. Hazard mitigation works are a prohibited activity in Cliff Hazard Management Area 1, for prohibited activities a resource consent cannot be applied for.

4.5       A site specific geotech report would be required if any type of development was considered for this site. The report would include site mapping of the true nature of the hazard and rock fall modelling costing approximately $35,000.00. The report would be a simple site specific report on the extent of the hazard. If Council require a full geotechnical risk assessment looking at the specific risk associated with these hazards then an additional approximately $15,000.00 would be required. It is important to remember that the consultant whilst identifying area at risk and mitigation like fences, which may be used to reduce the risk, will not make a recommendation on what is considered to be safe. This would require Council to set what an acceptable risk is and inherently carry the possible liability associated with that.

4.6       If the decision was to mitigate risk an engineering option is difficult to cost but for example a bund may cost in the order of $5,000.00 per meter and a fence $3000.00 per meter. Refer to 26 Nayland Street - Issues and Options Plan (see Attachment B). This plan shows the boundary of Cliff Hazard Management Area 2 with a continuation of the Wakefield Avenue bund along the edge of this management area. It also shows that space available for skate with two separation measurement of 20m and 40m from the nearby residential property at 18 Nayland Street, Sumner.

4.7       Council would have a preference to build a Council owned permanent skate park facility on Council owned land or a site with a long term lease. 

4.8       Staff can put an application to LINZ around the availability of the land at 26 Nayland for a temporary skate park such as relocating the wooden ramp from the village square and building other temporary skate features. However a temporary agreement would not be suitable for a permanent skate park facility.

4.8.1   A Geotech report as mentioned above would be required to determine the safety of the site.

4.9       If the Board consider that the uncertainties and site restrictions around 26 Nayland Street cannot be resolved and that it is no longer a viable option, staff will continue with the investigation of other sites within the Bays area.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Proposed District Plan - 26 Nayland Street - Feb 2016

24

b  

26 Nayland Street - Issues and Options Plan - Feb 2016

25

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)    sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii)   adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Megan Carpenter

Recreation Planner - Greenspace

Approved By

Andrew Rutledge

Mary Richardson

Head of Parks

General Manager Customer & Community

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

10     Process and actions taken behind the proposed Sumner skate park at Scarborough Beach Park.

Reference:

15/1466342

Contact:

Megan Carpenter

megan.carpenter@ccc.govt.nz

941 6761

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to inform the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board of the process and actions taken behind the proposed Sumner skate park at Scarborough Beach Park.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is being provided to fulfil a notice of motion submitted by the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board on Wednesday 4 November 2015;

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board request that the appropriate staff provide the Board and the Council with a report on the process and the actions taken behind the proposed Sumner skate park at Scarborough Beach Park.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive this information

 

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       The need for a skate facility in the Sumner/Redcliffs area has been recognised since 2000 through formal research and approaches/demand from the public.

3.2       Representatives from Levi Strauss and Co approached Christchurch City Council in October 2014 with a proposal to build a skate park in Christchurch to the value of $180,000.00. Following discussions with Council staff, Sumner was agreed as a preferred location for a new permanent community skate park.

3.3       Community Consultation was carried out from Monday 23 February until Monday 16 March 2015. At the close of Wednesday 18 March, 1,006 submitters had provided comments on the project with 84% in support of the proposal and 15% generally not supporting the plan.

3.4       On 5 May 2015, the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board resolved to approve the installation of a skate area at Scarborough Beach Park.

3.5       On 7 October 2015 the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board revoked it decision to install a skate park at Scarborough Beach Park and for staff to investigate alternative locations.

 

4.   Context/Background

4.1       The need for a skate facility in the Sumner/Redcliffs area has been recognised since 2000 through formal research and approaches/demand from the public.

4.1.1   Demand was first identified in Sumner/Monck’s Bay Area Profile Research (2000) and reconfirmed in the Hagley/Ferrymead Leisure Parks and Waterways Study (2003).

4.1.2   The Skateboarding, Inline Skating and Freestyle BMX Cycling Strategy (2004) also notes there is gap in provision of skate facilities in the Sumner area with local research identifying there was a demand.

4.1.3   The Sumner Village Centre Master Plan identifies P.1.2.3 Open space enhancements and play area on page 40 (Scarborough Beach Park opposite the corner of the Esplanade and Marriner Street) as having opportunity for a highly visible, accessible and safe play area (for example, skate park or public art project).

4.2       In November 2009 a report was presented to the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board for approval of a concept plan of a bike and skate area in Barnett Park, with strong opposition from some of the community. The Board resolved that the matter lie on the table until the Board had opportunity to visit the site considered for a skate facility in the area.

4.2.1   The Board visited 15 potential sites

4.2.2   Following the site visits the Board requested that further consultation be carried out on the concept plan for the bike and skate area at Barnett Park. The consultation was to be carried out by a consultant independent to the Council.

4.2.3   The Canterbury Earthquakes halted this process as well as the project due to no further funding being available

4.3       Representatives from Levi Strauss & Co approached Christchurch City Council (CCC) in October 2014 with a proposal to build a skate park in Christchurch to the value of $180,000.00. Council staff held phone conversation with Levi's discussing existing provision gaps in Christchurch and spaces that need renewing in November 2014. Levi's had a preference to build a new permanent community space, rather than a renewal and Sumner was agreed as a preferred location.

4.4       Levi's prepared a skate park landscape concept plan in discussion with CCC staff in January 2015 for Scarborough Beach Park (opposite the corner of the Esplanade and Marriner Street in Sumner). The proposed space was aimed at a beginner to intermediate skill level.  The area of the proposed skate park was approximately 570 square meters.

4.4.1   The skate park landscape concept plan and consultation plan was presented to the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board on 16 February 2015

4.5       Community consultation was carried out from Monday 23 February until Monday 16 March 2015. At the close of Wednesday 18 March, 1,006 submitters had provided comments on the project with 84% in support of the proposal and 15% generally not supporting the plan.

4.6       On 5 May 2015, the Hagley Ferrymead Community Board resolved to approve the installation of a skate area at Scarborough Beach Park.

4.7       On 7 October 2015 the Hagley Ferrymead Community Board revoked it decision to install a skate park at Scarborough Beach Park and for staff to investigate alternative locations.

Project process and action

4.8       The process and actions of the skate park proposal for Scarborough Park is explained in detail in Attachment A.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Sumner Skate Park - Process and Actions Feb 2016

30

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)    sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii)   adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Megan Carpenter

Recreation Planner - Greenspace

Approved By

Andrew Rutledge

Mary Richardson

Head of Parks

General Manager Customer & Community

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

11     Future of Redcliffs Pavilion

Reference:

15/1319160

Contact:

Russel Wedge

russel.wedge@ccc.govt.nz

941 8270

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board to recommend to the Council to transfer the ownership of the Redcliffs Pavilion to the Redcliffs Residents Association for $1 and to recommend that the Council deals unilaterally with the Redcliffs Residents Association for a lease over the footprint of the pavilion on Redcliffs Park.

1.2       The Board is also to request that the Property Consultancy Officers are to report back to the Community Board over a lease for the footprint of the Redcliffs Pavilion to the Redcliffs Residents Association.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report has been generated by Council staff to determine the future of the Redcliffs Pavilion situated on Redcliffs Park, which has been closed for over four years due to earthquake damage.

Secretarial Note: The Board consideration this report at meeting of 17 February 2016 and the Board decided to let the report lie on the table for one month. 

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by Russel Wedge, the author based on the suggested thresholds for assessing criteria

2.1.2   The community engagement and consultation outlined in this report reflect the assessment.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board acting in the capacity of land owner:

1.         Recommend to the Council that the ownership of the Redcliffs Pavilion located on Lot 3 DP 47479, be transferred to the Redcliffs Residents Association for a nominal amount of $1.00 and to recommend that the Council deal unilaterally with the Redcliffs Residents Association over a lease for the footprint of the building on Redcliffs Park.

2.         Request that Property Consultancy Officers to report back to the Community Board over the terms and conditions of a lease to the Redcliffs Residents Association, under the Local Government Act 2002 for the footprint of the Redcliffs Pavilion on Redcliffs Park.

 

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2015 - 2025):

4.1.1   Activity: Sports Parks

·     Level of Service: 6.1.3 Overall customer satisfaction with sports parks

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Transfer the Ownership of the Pavilion to the Redcliffs Residents Association (RRA) (preferred option)

·     Option 2 - Remove or Demolish the Pavilion

·     Option 3 - Council Repair Redcliffs Pavilion to 'Basic' Standard

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     The RRA can have control over the repair programme and local community involvement.

·     The pavilion returns to the ownership of the local community, who originally built and maintained the pavilion.

·     The RRA have the unilateral control over the pavilion with the understanding they will work with interested community groups who would like to use the building.

·     The Council can use the LTP community building repair budget to repair other community buildings that are not in use by the local communities.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The repair of the pavilion is reliant on the RRA raising funds to commence repairs on the building.

 

5.   Context/Background

Redcliffs Pavilion

5.1       The Redcliffs Pavilion is situated on the western side of Redcliffs Park, Lot 3 DP47479, Fee Simple land and not part of the park vested for recreation purposes or subject to the Reserves Act 1977. The pavilion is a single story wooden building of approximately 76.87 square metres (refer Attachment One). The pavilion has previously been referred to as the Redcliffs Hall, the Redcliffs Sports Hall and the Table Tennis Club.

5.2       The pavilion was originally built in 1948-49 by Redcliffs volunteers led by Roly Williams. The pavilion was built through local funding and support from the Redcliffs Sports Association using materials from a dismantled Council building.

5.3       As a result of the 2010-2011 earthquakes the pavilion was shaken from its foundation, but was otherwise undamaged. The windows have since been broken and boarded over to prevent access to the interior and further vandalism.

5.4       In 2011, after the earthquakes the pavilion was vacated by the Canterbury Table Tennis Club and gifted to the City Council in an unrepaired state. Prior to the 2011 earthquakes the building had been privately owned.

5.5       The Canterbury Table Tennis group held a lease on the pavilion, which expired 30th August 2012, and was not renewed.

5.6       Since the pavilion was vacated in 2011 it has been closed and is not deemed to be in a safe condition for public use. The pavilion is not connected to power or water.

EQC Insurance

5.7       The pavilion was not insured as a Council asset prior to the earthquakes since it was a privately owned building on a Council park. As the pavilion was not owned by the Council the repair of it was not included in the Council building earthquake claims. There was no EQC insurance claim or pay-out for the repair of the pavilion.

·        HAIL and Archaeological Site

5.8       The Redcliffs Pavilion is located on an uncompacted soil site that is registered as a HAIL site and an Archaeological site. Any digging around the pavilion requires Heritage New Zealand permission such as additional foundations for a deck to the pavilion. The Council has permission to undertake work to the existing foundations that is only to reinstate the foundations to stabilise and make safe the building for public use. A consent to work in a HAIL site will be required.


 

6.   Option 1 - Transfer Ownership of the Pavilion to the Redcliffs Residents Association (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       To transfer the ownership of the pavilion for a nominal amount of $1.00 to the Redcliffs Residents Association (RRA) to repair and use for community activities. The repair and use of the building could be included as conditions of the lease that will be required for a privately owned building situated on a Council park.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are appropriate.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions. Ngai Tahu have been included in the consultation of the pavilion.

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       In July 2015 a report on "Venues for hire in the Redcliffs suburb" was prepared after community consultation had been undertaken. This report was primarily focused on the potential use of the proposed Redcliffs Public Library building, but it is useful for highlighting the large number of rooms for meetings and activities available in Redcliffs (refer Attachment Two).

6.5       At the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board meeting on Wednesday 6 August 2014 the board received a deputation and a supporting submission from the Redcliffs Residents Association (RRA) to carry out a local community resourced project to enable the re-commissioning of the Redcliffs pavilion for community purposes. The RRA have continued to represent the local community throughout 2015 for the repair of the pavilion.

6.6       In October 2015 Council staff attended the monthly meeting of the RRA to discuss the future of the pavilion. From the meeting the RRA were going to provide the following information: (1) support letters from community groups who wanted to use the pavilion and (2) written builder(s) quotes for the repair the building, which they indicated would be for a lower amount than the Council's estimates.

6.7       The RRA has provided support letters from interested groups (refer Attachment Three). With the RRA's involvement with working with community groups to gain support for the repair of the pavilion, it would be appropriate to deal unilaterally with the RRA as the main lease holder for the pavilion. The RRA has confirmed the building could be used by other groups, such as the Sumner Silver Band who would only require it once a week in the evening on a regular basis. No quotes have been received to repair the pavilion, although Council staff have raised this with the RRA over many months.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.8       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

6.8.1   Cost of Implementation - A report prepared by WT Partnership on behalf of the Council estimated the repair of the pavilion to a basic standard for $118,000. If the pavilion was to include any enhancement or betterment (windows replaced, a new deck built) an additional $120,000 is estimated to be required. The total budget is estimated $220,000 - $238,000. There is no additional funding to meet the shortfall over the budgeted $100,000. Archaeological and Engineers reports would be required as the pavilion is located in a HAIL and Archaeological area. A consent would also be required to work in a HAIL site.

6.8.2   Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - If the pavilion was sold to the RRA the on-going maintenance costs would be the responsibility of the RRA.

6.8.3   Funding source - The Council has a Long Term Plan city-wide capital budget of $100,000 for the repair of community buildings. There are a number of Council owned buildings throughout the city that have been damaged by the earthquakes and are waiting for funding to undertake repairs.

6.8.4   If the ownership of the pavilion was transferred to the RRA, the pavilion would be privately owned and the RRA could make a submission to the Long Term Plan for a funding grant. The Council's $100,000 for the repair of community buildings would be reallocated to a Council owned community building that is in need of repair. The RRA might also be in a position to seek external funding through grant applications or fund raising activities to finance the repair of the pavilion, which the Council would not be eligible to apply if the building was a Council owned asset.

6.8.5   The Council's LTP $100,000 budget for the repair of community buildings cannot be used to fund the replacement costs for another community building e.g. if the Redcliffs pavilion was removed from the site and another building brought in to replace the pavilion.

Legal Implications

6.9       A legal agreement can be entered into between the Council and the RRA to transfer the ownership of the pavilion from the Council to the RRA for a nominal amount of a $1.00 A lease agreement could be prepared between the Council and the RRA for the pavilion for privately owned buildings on Council's parks, under the Local Government Act 2002. The conditions of the lease would define any specific requirements for the repair and on-going maintenance of the building, including a maximum time period to repair the building.

Risks and Mitigations

6.10    The lease agreement as per the Local Government Act 2002 is subject to public notification. The conditions within the lease can provide the mechanism to ensure the building is repaired within a specified time period, to the Building Consent standards and a code of compliance is obtained.

Implementation

6.11    Implementation dependencies - no known dependencies for the pavilion to be sold to the RAA.

6.12    Implementation timeframe - approximately 3 - 6 months depending upon submissions received through the public notification process for a lease.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   The RRA can have control over the repair programme and local community involvement.

·   The pavilion returns to the ownership of the local community, who originally built and maintained the pavilion.

·   The RRA have the unilateral control over the pavilion with the understanding they will work with interested community groups who would like to use the building.

·   The Council can use the LTP community building repair budget to repair other community buildings that are not in use by the local communities.

6.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   The repair of the pavilion is reliant on the RRA raising funds to commence repairs on the building.

7.   Option 2 - Remove or Demolish the Pavilion

Option Description

7.1       To remove or demolish the pavilion and landscape the site to provide good visibility from the road into Redcliffs Park

Significance

7.2       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are appropriate.

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

7.4       In July 2015 a report on "Venues for hire in the Redcliffs suburb" was prepared after community consultation had been undertaken. This report was primarily focused on the potential use of the proposed Redcliffs Public Library building, but it is useful for highlighting the large number of rooms for meetings and activities available in Redcliffs (refer Trim: 15/794217). Council staff have raised the question as to whether the Redcliffs area needs another community building as there appears to already be a significant number of meeting venues already available in the area.

7.5       The RRA has expressed an interest in taking over the lease of the pavilion once it has been repaired and has a code of compliance for occupation. The RRA have provided a list of community groups that have indicated they would be interested in using the pavilion. The pavilion has been closed since the 2011 earthquakes and the groups that have indicated they would be interested in using the pavilion have been using other venues in the area. Staff have raised the question that if the groups were to shift to occupying the Redcliffs pavilion would that result in an additional increase in the number of unoccupied venues in the area?

7.6       The July 2015 report has indicated that there are currently a lot of venues for use in the Redcliffs area, which the RRA and other groups could use. The proposed Redcliffs Library will also have a meeting room for hire by community groups. Although the Redcliffs pavilion could be a focus for the local community, as a meeting venue for groups there are a number of other vacant places already available for community groups to occupy.

7.7       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

Financial Implications

7.8       Cost of Implementation - The cost to remove or demolish the Redcliffs pavilion is estimated at $30,000, which would be funded from another budget leaving the community buildings earthquake repair budget available to reallocate to other damaged community buildings in the City.

7.9       The $100,000 budgeted for community building repairs could be allocated to other damaged community buildings in the City. There are still a number of Council community buildings closed due to a lack of funding for repairs, resulting in a shortage of meeting places for local community groups in the City.

7.10    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - not applicable

7.11    Funding source - the estimated $30,000 to remove the pavilion and reinstate the land is provided through an operational budget for recovery management of green spaces.

Legal Implications

7.12    There are no legal implications to remove the building as the building is a Council asset on Council land.

Risks and Mitigations

7.13    The pavilion is on a HAIL and Archaeological site and by removing the building and returning the area to park the preservation of the site would be retained. A consent will be required to work in a HAIL site.

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies - no known dependencies.

7.15    Implementation timeframe - 2 - 6 months to remove and reinstate the site.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   The meeting venues already available in the area will not have their occupancy further reduced by the addition of adding another meeting venue to the area.

·   The occupancy of the existing meeting venues in the Redcliffs area can be used to their full capacity, justifying the Council's on-going maintenance and repair budgets for those venues.

·   The $100,000 community building repair budget can be used to repair another community building in the city where there is a shortage of community meeting venues.

·   There will be no additional foundation work for extensions to the pavilion (e.g. deck) into the HAIL and Archaeological areas.

·   The park can be opened up to improve visibility into the park from the road.

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Some members of the local residents may be upset if they consider they are losing a local community building, even though it has been closed for over four years.

8.   Option 3 - Council Repair Redcliffs Pavilion to 'Basic' Standard

Option Description

8.1       The Council uses the $100,000 budgeted for community building repairs to repair the Redcliffs Pavilion and the community provides the $18,000 short-full to enable the pavilion to meet the code of compliance. Any additional betterment funding is provided by the community. The Council retains ownership of the pavilion.

Significance

8.2       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are appropriate.

Impact on Mana Whenua

8.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

8.4       The RRA has indicated they would like the Council to repair the pavilion to a safe stand to enable it to be used by the Redcliffs community.

8.5       The July 2015 report on "Venues for hire in the Redcliffs suburb" was prepared after community consultation had been undertaken and indicated that there were a significant number of venues available in the Redcliffs area for local groups. The report also highlighted that a new library was to be built in Redcliffs and there would be a meeting room available in the library for local groups to use.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

8.6       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

8.7       Cost of Implementation - The $100,000 budgeted for repairs to community buildings would be used to repair the pavilion. This budget is approximately $18,000 short of the estimated amount to bring the building up to a code of compliance standard. There are no additional funds in this budget to cover the additional $18,000, which may need to be raised by the community or by some other means.

8.8       If the pavilion was to include any betterment such as windows, there are no funds available in the Council's repairs to community buildings budget. Any betterment improvements would need to be raised by the community for through some other funding sources.

8.9       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - The pavilion would still be owned by the Council and therefore additional funding would be required to cover any maintenance and on-going costs. There has been no provision in the operational budgets for the maintenance of this building.

8.10    Funding source - The Council has a Long Term Plan city-wide capital budget of $100,000 for the repair of community buildings. There are a number of Council owned buildings throughout the city that have been damaged by the earthquakes and are waiting for funding to undertake repairs.

Legal Implications

8.11    The pavilion would need to be repaired to a standard that complied with the code of compliance for public buildings. If the building did not reach the required safety standard once the budgeted $100,000 had been used, it would have to remain closed until further funding could be obtained and the repairs completed.

8.12    Once the building had obtained its code of compliance a lease agreement could be entered into for the RRA to use the building under the Local Government Act 2022.

Risks and Mitigations

8.13    There is a risk the pavilion could be substantially repaired but due to lack of funding could not be completed to a code of compliance and would therefore have to remain closed.

8.14    There is a risk that once the pavilion has been repaired occupancy over a period of time declines as groups use the other meeting venues available in the area, including the new library once opened. The July 2015 "Venues for hire in the Redcliffs suburb" indicate there are a number of venues available for hire, without the need for the Redcliffs pavilion.

Implementation

8.15    Implementation dependencies - no known dependencies.

8.16    Implementation timeframe - not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.17    The advantages of this option include:

·   The Redcliffs pavilion remains in Redcliff park, available for the local groups.

8.18    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   The Councils $100,000 repair to community buildings budget could be used to repair the Redcliffs pavilion but not to a safety standard the enables the building to be open for use by the public.

·   The funding required to bring the pavilion up to the safety standard for public use is reliant on sources of funding other than the Council. There is no guarantee as to when or how much additional funding will be obtained to complete the repairs to the building.

·   The funding used to partially repair the Redcliff pavilion could be used to repair other community buildings in the City where there is a shortage of meeting venues for local groups.

·   Additional funds will be required by the Council to cover the on-going maintenance and on-going costs to the pavilion that have not been included in the LTP.

·   The Redcliffs pavilion when open will provide another meeting venue to the Redcliffs area, which already has a good supply of venues available.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Redcliffs Pavilion Site Plan

52

b  

Venus for Hire in the Redcliffs Suburb

53

c  

Redcliffs Residents Association Expressions of Interest

57

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)    sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii)   adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Russel Wedge

Senior Network Planner Parks

Approved By

Brent Smith

Andrew Rutledge

Mary Richardson

Team Leader Asset Planning and Management

Head of Parks

General Manager Customer & Community

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

12     Proposed Road Names - Richmond Hill Road Greenwood Farm Ltd. (RMA92009091)

Reference:

16/222823

Contact:

Bob Pritchard

bob.pritchard@ccc.govt.nz

941 6844

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board to approve the proposed road names in the Greenwood Farm Subdivision.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated resulting from naming requests from the subdivision developer.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision(s) in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and/or with an interest.

2.1.2   Due to the assessment of low significance, no further community engagement and consultation is required.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board approve the names in the Greenwood Farm Subdivision as below:

·        Oxenhope Road

·        Sowerby Place

·        Ridgeway Place

 

4.   Background 

4.1       This is a further stage of the Greenwood Farm Subdivision.

4.2       Stages 2 and 3 are now in development, creating 30 residential allotments.

4.3       This report is for a new road and two new cul-de-sacs just off Richmond Hill Road.

4.4       Names proposed for the new road and cul-de-sacs are:

4.4.1   Oxenhope Road - The Greenwoods lived at Moorehouse Manor in Oxenhope, Yorkshire.

4.4.2   Sowerby Place - It is a village in Yorkshire where the Greenwood family have lived for hundreds of years. Additionally, Austin Mitchell, the MP for Great Grimsby and who is well known to New Zealanders, has a summer home in Sowerby. Interestingly, the village also appears in the Doomsday book of 1086.

4.4.3   Ridgeway Place - Ridgeway lies just south of the South Yorkshire border and is 5 miles south east of Sheffield. Ridgeway is a self-contained village around 700 years old and would once have been part of Sherwood Forrest.

4.5       Alternative suggestions are: Widdop, Bridgehouse and Heptonstall.

4.6       The names are in accordance with the Council's road naming policy and LINZ requirements.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Greenwood Farm Development

61

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)    sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii)   adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Authors

Bob Pritchard

Lelanie Crous

Subdivisions Officer

Personal Assistant / Business Administrator

Approved By

John Higgins

Peter Sparrow

Head of Resource Consents

General Manager Consenting & Compliance

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

13.    Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Area Report

Reference:

16/236792

Contact:

Shupayi Mpunga

shupayi.mpunga@ccc.govt.nz

941 6605

 

 

1.   Matters Arising

 

1.1               Principals' Breakfast:

The dates for the Principals' breakfast will be communicated at the next meeting. 

1.2               Land mass movement tour:

Board members have been asked to indicate the issues they would like to understand and what they would like to see on the tour of the Port Hills.  This will be discussed further at the next Board meeting.

1.3               Request to reinstate regular Customer Service Request Summary Reporting:

Staff will table an example of a report for discussion to ensure that future reports have the information Board members are seeking to get from the report.

2.   Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Plan

At the last Board meeting, members agreed that during the Elected Members Exchange staff would record any activity the Board engages in that contributes to meeting the targets set in the Evaluation and Monitoring Plan. 

 

Staff will talk to the Board about the possibility of including the Community Board outcomes on Page 2 of the Community Board Meeting Agendas.

3.   Naming Process for the New Sumner Facility

Attached is a memorandum from Dyane Hosler, Community Libraries Manager regarding a proposal on the naming process for the new Sumner facility.  A tentative date has been scheduled for a meeting between the Sumner Joint Working Group, Iwi representatives and Council staff to discuss this, subject to the Board's recommendation.   Memorandum attached (attachment A)

4.   Board Activities

4.1       Upcoming Board Meetings and Commitments

·   Tuesday 29 March, 5.30pm, Combined Community Boards Seminar, Committee Room 2, Civic Offices, 53 Hereford Street.

·   Tuesday 5 April, 9am, Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Meeting, Boardroom, 180 Smith Street.

·   Wednesday 6 April, 2.30pm-6.30pm, Hagley/Ferrymead Community Pride Garden Awards, Woolston Club, Hargood Street.

·   Thursday 7 April, 5.00pm-6.30pm, Joint Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee and Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Meeting to consider the Sumner Library and Community Facility - Rebuild. Council Chamber, Hereford Street.

·   Wednesday 20 April, from 3pm, Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Informal Meeting and Board Meeting, Boardroom 180 Smith Street (Note: time could be changed following 5 April 2016 Board Meeting)

·   Tuesday 3 May, 9am, Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Meeting, Boardroom, 180 Smith Street.

5.   Community Activities and Events

·     Woolston Gala 2016, Saturday 19 March 2016, 11am to 3pm, Woolston Park, Ferry Road.

·     Redcliffs Residents Association Annual General Meeting, Tuesday 22 March 2016, 7.30pm, Redcliffs Function Centre, 9 James Street.

·     Summit Road Society 67th Annual General Meeting, Thursday 29 March at 7.30pm, Kowhai Lounge, Cashmere Presbyterian Church, 2 MacMillan Avenue.

6.   Community Governance Team Activity

6.1          Linwood/Woolston Pool Community Engagement

        

         At the last Board meeting, members agreed to have a meeting with staff to set parameters on            a conversation to be had about a Linwood/Woolston pool.  Staff in the Community           Governance          Team have started internal conversations with other parts of Council to ensure     that those who may need to be involved in the process are aware that they will be asked to     participate in early conversations on community engagement around this project.  At the           Board meeting staff will be seeking guidance from the Board on what they would like to            include in the discussion to be had on community engagement.  Staff will also be seeking       guidance on timelines for this process.

 

6.2          Linwood Development Aspirations - Workshop regarding Infrastructure

        

The Community Governance Team will be running a workshop on 23 March 2016 with Community Groups and organisations in the greater Linwood area.   The focus will be on identifying key community development and recreation aspirations and needs of communities, the infrastructure that currently supports these, and what other infrastructure is required to facilitate community development and recreation outcomes in the area. 

 

To inform this process, staff attended the Linwood Youth Festival Experience and surveyed about 50 people.  The findings, and what comes out of the workshop will be compiled into a report that will be shared with the Community Board and this may be useful as a basis for discussion when the Linwood Working Party is set up and meets.  Other opportunities are also being sought to get as much imput from local communities.

 

6.3          New Heathcote Community Facility

 

As part of the process in the development of the Heathcote Community Facility, staff from the Community Governance Team have met with members of the Heathcote Volunteer Library and Heathcote Valley Community Association to discuss the finishing, furniture and fittings for the facility.  The meetings have been centred on understanding what the needs are for the library and creating together a process of how a community workshop to discuss these issues will be run.  The workshop will be held on 30 March 2016 at 6 pm at the St Mary's Church hall.

 

6.4          Peer Review of 2015 Tonkin + Taylor Coastal Hazards Report

 

Maurice Hoban of GHD has been contracted to work with a variety of stakeholders to develop a process of the peer review of the Tonkin + Taylor Coastal Hazards Report.  More information about the process will be made available at the Board meeting.

 

6.5          Strengthening Communities Funding

 

Attached is the new criteria for the Strengthening Communities fund, Discretionary Response Fund and Small Grants Fund.  Criteria attached (attachment B).  Also included are the CCC Funding Outcomes and Priorities.  The funding round will open on Tuesday 15 March and close on 30 April 2016.  A series of seminars will be held across the city including one on Thursday 31 March at the Linwood Office Board Room.  The Board may want to consider whether or not they would like to set up a Small Grants Fund Committee that includes community groups and organisations on the decision panel. 

 

6.6          Inner City East Social and Economic Development issues

 

Community Governance staff have met with Te Whare Roimata and had a few discussions on the social and economic development issues in the Inner City East area.  Prior to the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes this area was vulnerable, and since then has become even more so.  Current concerns come from the struggles the Linwood Village is having - two key businesses are set to close or are up for sale, the difficulty in selling land at the Village, the struggle landowners are having to get traction on getting their developments off the ground and concern about the possible impact that the proposed cycleway could have on the shops, especially with the loss of parking. Social concerns include the increasing signs of homelessness, and people actively busking and begging in the street along with the regular gatherings at the Doris Lusk reserve. There does not appear to be much progress in replacing bedsit units particularly for those on low incomes.  Shop owners have also reported break-ins.  Sadly this gives the perception of the area being unsafe.

 

While the Master Plan and the projects that have stemmed from this have brought some

new life in terms of beautification,  the issues being faced will not easily be solved and would seem to be outside of the ambit of that work. It does not seem at this point realistic to think that the market will provide.

 

Staff are currently working with Te Whare Roimata and a seminar will be included on the Boards 18th April seminar agenda to start discussion on what the issues are and what sort of conversations need to be held to ensure that socially acceptable measures are put in place, and that there is discussion on what needs to happen for the area to recover economically.

7.   Items for Information

·     Homeless Hui, Thursday 24 March 2016 from 10am, PIC Church, Cashel Street.

8.   Community Board Submissions

 

The Board will consider input into the District Plan Review Additional Proposal on Linwood Residential Density at the seminar to be held on 14 March.

 

9.   Consultation Calendar

9.1       Current Council consultations as at 10 March 2016

Consultation page

Consultation dates

Halswell Skate and Recreational Park

25/02/2016 - 18/03/2016 5:00p.m.

Jellie Park Management Plan - Draft Changes

22/01/2016 - 28/03/2016 5:00p.m.

Madras Street / Edgeware Road Intersection Improvement

19/02/2016 - 04/03/2016 3:00p.m.

Major Cycle Routes - Proposed Improvements from Riccarton Bush to University of Canterbury

09/02/2016 - 09/03/2016 5:00p.m.

Manuka Cottage Development

29/02/2016 - 23/03/2016 5:00p.m.

Poplar Street proposal to revoke the pedestrian mall

26/02/2016 - 01/04/2016 5:00p.m.

Proposed Land Sale - Section of QEII Park

02/03/2016 - 04/04/2016 5:00p.m.

Proposed parking charges in Lyttelton Town Centre

10/03/2016 - 31/03/2016

 

10. Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board:

1.         Receive the report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Hagley Ferrymead - 16 March 2016 - Memo Re Naming Sumner Facility - Area Report

67

b  

Hagley Ferrymead Funding Criteria - 16 March 2016

68

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Diana Saxton

Vimbayi Chitaka

Community Recreation Advisor

Community Development Advisor

Approved By

Shupayi Mpunga

Manager Community Governance - Hagley/Ferrymead

  


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

16 March 2016

 

 

14.  Elected Member Information Exchange

 

This item provides an opportunity for Board Members to update each other on recent events and/or issues of relevance and interest to the Board.

14.1    Housing Portfolio Formal Report - Joe Davies

14.2    Engagement with the Community

 

15.  Question Under Standing Orders

 

Any member of the local authority may at any meeting of the local authority at the appointed time, put a question to the Chairperson, or through the Chairperson of the local authority to the Chairperson of any standing or special committee, or to any officer of the local authority concerning any matter relevant to the role or functions of the local authority concerning any matter that does not appear on the agenda, nor arises from any committee report or recommendation submitted to that meeting.

 

Wherever applicable, such questions shall be in writing and handed to the Chairperson prior to the commencement of the meeting at which they are to be asked.