Christchurch City Council

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Christchurch City Council will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Thursday 14 July 2016

Time:                                    9.30am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Vicki Buck

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Phil Clearwater

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor David East

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Ali Jones

Councillor Paul Lonsdale

Councillor Glenn Livingstone

Councillor Raf Manji

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Andrew Turner

 

 

7 July 2016

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Dr Karleen Edwards

Chief Executive

Tel: 941 8554

 

Jo Daly

Council Secretary

941 8581

Jo.Daly@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.
Watch Council meetings live on the web:
http://councillive.ccc.govt.nz/live-stream

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

Council - Terms of Reference

 

 

Chair

The Mayor

Membership

The Mayor and all Councillors are members of Council

Quorum

Half of the members if the number of members (including vacancies) is even, or a majority of members if the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.

Meeting Cycle

To be separately considered

 

 

The Council has the power to: (these powers cannot legally be delegated)

·         Make a rate

·         Make a bylaw

·         Borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the long-term plan

·         Adopt a long-term plan, annual plan or annual report

·         Appoint a Chief Executive

·         Adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act 2002 in association with the long term plan or the preparation of the local governance statement

·         Adopt a remuneration and employment policy

 

The Council is also responsible for:

·         Reviewing and making decisions, when required, on the District Plan

·         Approving all Council strategy and policy, except that specifically delegated to a committee or subcommittee

·         Adoption of, and amendment to, Committee Terms of Reference, Standing Orders and Code of Conduct

·         Approving or amending the Triennial Agreement  and Local Governance Statement

·         Reviewing and making decisions on representation reviews

·         Appointing and discharging trustees, directors or office holders to Council’s Council-Controlled Organisations  and Council Organisations, except where specifically delegated to a committee or officer, and determining the remuneration for trustees, directors or office holders

·         Dealing with issues of significant community importance

·         Monitoring progress on earthquake recovery

Considering recommendations from Council committees, subcommittees, Community Boards, the public, stakeholders and others, and making Council decisions with regard for the requirements of Sections 76 – 81 of the Local Government Act 2002

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

1.       Apologies................................................................................................................................... 5

2.       Declarations of Interest............................................................................................................ 5

3.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes.......................................................................................... 5

4.       Public Participation.................................................................................................................. 5

4.1       Public Forum....................................................................................................................... 5

4.2       Deputations by Appointment............................................................................................... 5

5.       Presentation of Petitions......................................................................................................... 5

Akaroa-Wairewa Community Board

6.       Akaroa/Wairewa Community Board Minutes - 11 May 2016............................................. 35

Lyttelton-Mt Herbert Community Board

7.       Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board Minutes - 1 June 2016....................................... 45

8.       Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board Minutes - 15 June 2016..................................... 49

Hagley-Ferrymead Community Board

9.       Easement Over Part of Hagley Park...................................................................................... 61

10.     Lease of Former United Bowling Clubrooms and Greens at Hagley Park.......................... 73

11.     Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Deputation ............................................................. 89

12.     Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Minutes - 31 May 2016........................................... 91

13.     Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Minutes - 15 June 2016.......................................... 99

Riccarton-Wigram Community Board

14.     Riccarton/Wigram Community Board Minutes - 31 May 2016......................................... 109

15.     Riccarton/Wigram Community Board Minutes - 14 June 2016........................................ 115

Shirley-Papanui Community Board

16.     Notice of Motion................................................................................................................... 125

17.     Shirley/Papanui Community Board Minutes - 1 June 2016.............................................. 129

18.     Shirley/Papanui Community Board Minutes - 15 June 2016............................................ 137

Spreydon-Heathcote Community Board

19.     Elected Members Information Exchange - Community Board Flier................................. 145

20.     Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 20 May 2016.................................... 147

21.     Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 8 June 2016...................................... 155

22.     Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 17 June 2016.................................... 161

Burwood-Pegasus Community Board

23.     Mairehau Road Improvement Plan..................................................................................... 169

24.     Waterways Maintenance Contract Review........................................................................ 171

25.     Community Board Delegations - Levels of service and local contracts............................ 173

26.     Burwood/Pegasus Community Board Minutes - 16 May 2016......................................... 175

27.     Burwood/Pegasus Community Board Minutes - 7 June 2016........................................... 185

28.     Burwood/Pegasus Community Board Minutes - 20 June 2016......................................... 191

Fendalton-Waimairi Community Board

29.     Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board Minutes - 30 May 2016...................................... 201

30.     Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board Minutes - 13 June 2016..................................... 207

Regulation and Consents Committee

31.     Parks and Reserves Bylaw - report back on scattering of ashes....................................... 213

32.     Temporary Alcohol Ban in Riccarton Park Areas on New Zealand Cup Day 2016.......... 273

33.     Regulation and Consents Committee Minutes - 16 June 2016.......................................... 285

Strategy and Finance Committee

34.     Council Controlled Organisations - Half Year Financial Statements - Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust...................................................................................................................... 291

35.     Vbase Limited - Amendment to Constitution.................................................................... 321

36.     Strategy and Finance Committee Minutes - 16 June 2016................................................ 329

Te Hononga Council - Papatipu Rūnanga Committee

37.     Te Hononga Council - Papatipu Runanga Committee Minutes - 15 March 2016............ 335

STAFF REPORTS

38.     2015/16 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund........................................................ 341

39.     Elected Member Allowances and Expenses from 1 July 2016........................................... 345

40.     Request for delegation in relation to tree removals for SCIRT programme ................... 355

41.     Governance Group Memorandum of Understanding in relation to the Whakaraupō / Lyttelton Harbour Catchment Management Plan............................................................. 363

42.     Resolution to Exclude the Public......................................................................................... 378  

 

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

1.   Apologies

There were no apologies at the time the agenda was prepared.

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 Council meetings held on Tuesday 21 June 2016 (refer page 6) and Thursday 23 June 2016 (refer page 17) be confirmed.

4.   Public Participation

4.1  Public Forum

A period of up to 30 minutes is available for people to speak for up five minutes on any issue that is not the subject of a separate hearings process.

4.2  Deputations by Appointment

A period of up to 30 minutes for deputations that have made application and been approved by the Chairperson.

4.2.1

Andrew Findlay and John Targett of the Christchurch Petanque Club will speak to the Council regarding the report Lease of the Former United Bowling Club Area.

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

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


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

 

Christchurch City Council

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Tuesday 21 June 2016

Time:                                    9.30am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Vicki Buck

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Phil Clearwater

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor David East

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Ali Jones

Councillor Paul Lonsdale

Councillor Glenn Livingstone

Councillor Raf Manji

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Andrew Turner

 

 

21 June 2016

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Dr Karleen Edwards

Chief Executive

Tel: 941 8554

 

Megan Pearce

Team Leader Hearings and Council Support

941 8140

Megan.Pearce@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Watch Council meetings live on the web:
http://councillive.ccc.govt.nz/live-stream

 


  

1.   Apologies

There were no apologies.

2.   Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   2016/17 Annual Plan and Amendments to 2015/25 Long Term Plan

 

Council Decision

Mayor Dalziel moved, seconded by Councillor Manji, that the Council:

1.         Receives the information included in and attached to the staff report.

2.         Adopts the Mayor’s recommendations, that the Council:

Fees and charges: swimming pools

a.         In order to improve access to Council swimming pools

i.          resolve that all persons holding Community Services cards be eligible for a 25% discount on child entry fees to all Council-owned swimming pools. 

ii.         resolve that an additional $40,000 is applied to the Council’s Swimsafe learn to swim programme.

b.         Resolve that the proposed general increases in swimming pool entry fees not be applied to Templeton Pool; and that entry fees for Templeton Pool be set at $2.00 for children and $2.50 for adults.

Kerb and channel and footpath renewals

c.         Resolve to approve an additional $600,000 to the 2016/17 capital programme to enable advance design of the street renewal programme to support the acceleration of construction in FY 2017/18 and 2018/19.

d.         Resolve to approve an additional $1,782,000 to the 2016/17 capital programme for footpath renewals

Mt Pleasant War Memorial Community Centre

e.         Approve a grant of up to $428,000 to the Mt Pleasant Community Centre and Residents Association Inc., to enable the completion of construction and landscaping (including civil works) of the Mt Pleasant War Memorial Community Centre, noting that this is grant is instead of and not in addition to the interest free loan conditionally agreed to 28 April 2016.

Akaroa Museum

f.          Approve an additional $250,000 to the capital programme for 2016/17 to enable Akaroa Museum to complete the fit out of exhibition spaces within the Museum

Proposed pedestrian bridge: Lower Heathcote

g.         Request staff to appoint a case manager, and offer building and resource consent advice to support the development of the bridge and wharf

h.         Approve a $20,000 contribution towards the construction of the project

i.          Consider whether a regeneration plan could be developed for this area.

New Brighton Surf Bathing and Lifesaving Club

j.          Request Development Christchurch Ltd to work with the New Brighton Surf Bathing and Lifesaving Club to assess whether, in principle, funds could be allocated to support the rebuild of the Club’s facility  once the Club is ready to confirm the project; and assess what other community funding and partnership options might be available

k.         Request Council staff to work with Surf Life Saving New Zealand and clubs providing surf lifesaving services in Christchurch in order for the Council to understand the condition of club assets and facilities, outstanding earthquake matters, and their 10 year plans for service delivery; and to report back to Council on how these align with the Council’s commitments in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan to fund beach lifeguard services.

SingularityU Summit

l.          Resolve to grant $70,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to Missing Link Consultants Ltd, organisers of the SingularityU New Zealand Summit, to support the Summit.

Ministry of Health/Council Partnership Fund

m.       Resolve to transfer $1,000,000 from the Participatory Democracy budget to the Partnership Fund once the Fund has been established, noting the carry forward of  these funds allocated from the Capital Endowment Fund 2015/16.

2017 Asia Pacific Cycling Congress

n.         Resolve to grant $50,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to fund the initial work required to establish the conference, noting that at their meeting of 9 June 2016 the Council resolved that if possible the funds be repaid from any surplus income from the conference

City Foundation

o.         Resolve to set aside $400,000 to support the establishment of a City Foundation, subject to further staff advice being brought to Council on the appropriate vehicle to support philanthropic funding,  and funding options for subsequent financial years.

 

Mona Vale Gatehouse and Halswell Quarry Park

p.         Resolve to set aside up to $500,000, subject to further staff advice being brought to Council, to do the additional work required for the Mona Vale gatehouse and a building within the Halswell Quarry Park to be used for commercial activities.

Intersection Improvement: Cashmere/Hoon Hay /Worsleys

q.         Request the Chief Executive report back to Council by the end of July on options to bring forward intersection improvements at the Cashmere/Hoon Hay/Worsleys intersection.  The Council requests the report include options for projects within the capital programme that could be rephased; and options for alternative funding mechanisms, noting that the Christchurch Adventure Park has expressed support for a cycle underpass.

Request for Reports

r.          Request the Chief Executive to report on the following matters in time for consideration in the 2017/18 Annual Plan at the latest, noting that mechanisms may exist for earlier resolution:

i.          In light of the provisions of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016, take steps to seek resolution of the following matters:

land on the western side of Cranford Street, excluding the stormwater basin, to be rezoned residential

flood plain and estuary edge management for the estuary side of Southshore; noting that this includes the area north of Bridge Street.

s.         Prepare options for the future of the Robert McDougall Gallery in line with the provisions of the gift to the City.

t.          Prepare advice for Council as to whether incentivising the use of rainwater collection and grey water systems in residential and commercial buildings could contribute to environmental and water quality outcomes for the city

u.         Prepare a Memorandum of Understanding (utilising as appropriate the Life in Vacant Spaces for transitional use model and the MOU between ACTIS, the Council and the Crown entered into in the early 2000s) and a partnership model to provide how the Council can support community groups managing and running council facilities.  The Council requests the model focus on fully activating facilities for the benefit of local communities, and that it include a requirement to offer holiday activities.

v.         Review the Council’s Rates Postponement Policy to ensure the current criteria and conditions are fit for purpose and consistent with the policy’s primary objective to assist older residents on fixed incomes manage their rates liabilities.  

w.        That the Council note:

i.          The Council’s support for the Akaroa-Wairewa Community Board to establish a working party of Community Board members, representatives  key local organisations and Council staff to address concerns raised by submitters about the adequacy of refuse collection facilities and other maintenance issues in Akaroa.

That staff will this year consider options for a Christchurch Biodiversity Partnership.  This will be funded within existing budgets.  Depending on progress, the model chosen and the work programme the Partnership itself may seek further funds for biodiversity initiatives through the next LTP.

ii.         That Suburban Master Plans, including the Plan developed for Redcliffs, have been referred to Development Christchurch Ltd for consideration and advice

iii.        For clarity, that all library services are included within the Arts and Culture budget, and requests that for future Plans the title of this budget be amended to read Libraries, Arts and Culture

iv.        That a report describing the criteria for prioritisation of sports field upgrades has been requested, and that this include advice on the provision of sport fields for baseball.

 

 

Amendment

 

Councillor Johanson moved by way of amendment that as a matter of urgency staff prepare a timeline for the high level scope and site selection (including the process for community consultation) for the Linwood/Woolston pool, and a report be provided to Council for bringing forward funding for the project.

 

With the agreement of the mover and seconder the amendment was included in the substantive motion.

 

 

Amendment

 

Councillor Johanson moved by way of amendment that the Council request the Chief Executive to prepare advice on whether the Council’s shareholding in Enable should be added to the strategic assets list and report back to Council by the end of 2016.

 

With the agreement of the mover and seconder the amendment was included in the substantive motion.

 

 

Amendment

 

Councillor Johanson moved by way of amendment that Lancaster Park be added to the Council’s Strategic Asset List.

 

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Chen and on being put to the meeting was declared lost.

Councillor Cotter abstained from voting on this matter.

 

Amendment

 

Councillor Johanson moved by way of amendment that the Council resolve to fund through operational funding support for the Linwood Avenue Transitional Community Pool.

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Lonsdale and on being put to the meeting was declared lost.

 


 

Council Resolved ALTP/2016/00001

Clauses 1. and 2. were taken separately.

Mayor Dalziel moved, seconded by Councillor Manji, recommendations 1. and 2.  as amended (set out below). When put to the meeting as the substantive motion, was declared carried.

That the Council:

1.         Receives the information included in and attached to the staff report.

2.         Adopts the Mayor’s recommendations as amended, that the Council:

Fees and charges: swimming pools

a.         In order to improve access to Council swimming pools:

i.          Resolve that all persons holding Community Services cards be eligible for a 25% discount on child entry fees to all Council-owned swimming pools. 

ii.         Resolve that an additional $40,000 is applied to the Council’s Swimsafe learn to swim programme.

b.         Resolve that the proposed general increases in swimming pool entry fees not be applied to Templeton Pool; and that entry fees for Templeton Pool be set at $2.00 for children and $2.50 for adults.

Kerb and channel and footpath renewals

c.         Approve an additional $600,000 to the 2016/17 capital programme to enable advance design of the street renewal programme to support the acceleration of construction in FY 2017/18 and 2018/19.

d.         Approve an additional $1,782,000 to the 2016/17 capital programme for footpath renewals

Mt Pleasant War Memorial Community Centre

e.         Approve a grant of up to $428,000 to the Mt Pleasant Community Centre and Residents Association Inc., to enable the completion of construction and landscaping (including civil works) of the Mt Pleasant War Memorial Community Centre, noting that this is grant is instead of and not in addition to the interest free loan conditionally agreed to 28 April 2016.

Akaroa Museum

f.        Approve an additional $250,000 to the capital programme for 2016/17 to enable Akaroa Museum to complete the fit out of exhibition spaces within the Museum

Proposed pedestrian bridge: Lower Heathcote

g.       Request staff to appoint a case manager, and offer building and resource consent advice to support the development of the bridge and wharf

h.       Approve a $20,000 contribution towards the construction of the project

i.        Consider whether a regeneration plan could be developed for this area.

New Brighton Surf Bathing and Lifesaving Club

j.        Request Development Christchurch Ltd to work with the New Brighton Surf Bathing and Lifesaving Club to assess whether, in principle, funds could be allocated to support the rebuild of the Club’s facility  once the Club is ready to confirm the project; and assess what other community funding and partnership options might be available

k.       Request Council staff to work with Surf Life Saving New Zealand and clubs providing surf lifesaving services in Christchurch in order for the Council to understand the condition of club assets and facilities, outstanding earthquake matters, and their 10 year plans for service delivery; and to report back to Council on how these align with the Council’s commitments in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan to fund beach lifeguard services.

SingularityU Summit

l.        Grant $70,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to Missing Link Consultants Ltd, organisers of the SingularityU New Zealand Summit, to support the Summit.

Ministry of Health/Council Partnership Fund

m.     Transfer $1,000,000 from the Participatory Democracy budget to the Partnership Fund once the Fund has been established, noting the carry forward of  these funds allocated from the Capital Endowment Fund 2015/16.

2017 Asia Pacific Cycling Congress

n.       Grant $50,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to fund the initial work required to establish the conference, noting that at their meeting of 9 June 2016 the Council resolved that if possible the funds be repaid from any surplus income from the conference

City Foundation

o.       Set aside $400,000 to support the establishment of a City Foundation, subject to further staff advice being brought to Council on the appropriate vehicle to support philanthropic funding,  and funding options for subsequent financial years.

Mona Vale Gatehouse and Halswell Quarry Park

p.       Set aside up to $500,000, subject to further staff advice being brought to Council, to do the additional work required for the Mona Vale gatehouse and a building within the Halswell Quarry Park to be used for commercial activities.

Intersection Improvement: Cashmere/Hoon Hay /Worsleys

q.       Request the Chief Executive report back to Council by the end of July on options to bring forward intersection improvements at the Cashmere/Hoon Hay/Worsleys intersection.  The Council requests the report include options for projects within the capital programme that could be rephased; and options for alternative funding mechanisms, noting that the Christchurch Adventure Park has expressed support for a cycle underpass.

Linwood/Woolston Pool

r.        That as a matter of urgency staff prepare a timeline for the high level scope and site selection (including the process for community consultation) for the Linwwod/Woolston pool, and a report be provided to Council for bringing forward funding for the project.


Requested reports

s.       Request the Chief Executive to report on the following matters in time for consideration in the 2017/18 Annual Plan at the latest, noting that mechanisms may exist for earlier resolution:

i.          In light of the provisions of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016, take steps to seek resolution of the following matters:

land on the western side of Cranford Street, excluding the stormwater basin, to be rezoned residential

Flood plain and estuary edge management for the estuary side of Southshore; noting that this includes the area north of Bridge Street.

t.        Prepare options for the future of the Robert McDougall Gallery in line with the provisions of the gift to the City.

u.       Prepare advice for Council as to whether incentivising the use of rainwater collection and grey water systems in residential and commercial buildings could contribute to environmental and water quality outcomes for the city

v.       Prepare a Memorandum of Understanding (utilising as appropriate the Life in Vacant Spaces for transitional use model and the MOU between ACTIS, the Council and the Crown entered into in the early 2000s) and a partnership model to provide how the Council can support community groups managing and running council facilities.  The Council requests the model focus on fully activating facilities for the benefit of local communities, and that it include a requirement to offer holiday activities.

w.      Review the Council’s Rates Postponement Policy to ensure the current criteria and conditions are fit for purpose and consistent with the policy’s primary objective to assist older residents on fixed incomes manage their rates liabilities and investigate whether this is appropriate also for development contributions for the traditional ‘granny flat’.   

x.       Prepare advice on whether Council’s shareholding in Enable should be added to the strategic assets list and report back to Council by the end of 2016.

y.       Request that further work is done on swimming pool entry fees and indoor court hire fees. That this be reported back to Council by the end of October 2016 so that a decision on fees and charges can be made before the 2016/17 summer season.

z.       That the Council note:

i.          The Council’s support for the Akaroa-Wairewa Community Board to establish a working party of Community Board members, representatives of key local organisations and Council staff to address concerns raised by submitters about the adequacy of refuse collection facilities and other maintenance issues in Akaroa

ii.         That staff will this year consider options for a Christchurch Biodiversity Partnership to be funded within existing budgets, depending on the model chosen and the work programme to include consideration of the possibility of establishing a biodiversity partnership fund to include items such as fencing and pest control, through the next Annual Plan.

iii.        That implementation of the Suburban Master Plans, including the Ferry Road/Main Road Master Plan developed for Redcliffs, has been referred to Development Christchurch Ltd for consideration and advice

iv.        For clarity, that all library services are included within the Arts and Culture budget, and requests that for future Plans the title of this budget be amended to read Libraries, Arts and Culture

v.         That a report describing the criteria for prioritisation of sports field upgrades has been requested, and that this include advice on the provision of sport fields for baseball.

 

Mayor/Councillor Manji                                                                                                                                              Carried

 

 

At 12:11pm the meeting adjourned until 9am on Thursday 23 June 2016.

The meeting resumed at 9:10am on Thursday 23 June 2016.

 

 

Council Resolved ALTP/2016/00002

That the Council:

3.         Adopts the summary of the rates impact of the proposed changes to the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan and draft amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan set out in Appendix C.

4.         Adopts the proposed changes to the Council’s capital programme in the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan and draft amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan set out in Appendix D.

5.         Adopts the proposed changes to the Council’s operating expenditure in the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan and draft amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan set out in Appendix E.

6.         Adopts the proposed changes to the policies, fees and charges in the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan and draft amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan set out in Appendix F.

7.         Adopts the minor changes and errors set out in Appendix G.

8.         Agrees, in accordance with section 100 of the Local Government Act 2002, it is financially prudent not to set the Council’s operating revenues at a level sufficient to meet the projected operating expenses in the 2019/20 year of the 2015/25 Long Term Plan.

9.         Receives the draft audit report from Audit New Zealand confirming the report it made when the 2015/25 Long Term Plan was adopted.

10.       Adopts the amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan, comprising the draft amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan, and the changes set out in Appendices D, E, F, and G adopted by resolutions 3 – 7 above.

11.       Authorises staff to incorporate the amendments into the 2015/25 Long Term Plan, including the signed audit report received from Audit New Zealand.

12.       Adopts the 2016/17 Annual Plan, comprising the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan, and the changes set out in Appendices D, E, F, and G adopted by resolutions 3 – 7 above, noting the amendment to the General Rates decimal charge.

13.       Authorises the Chief Financial Officer and the Head of Financial Management (jointly) to borrow in accordance with the Liability Management Policy sufficient funds to enable the Council to meet its funding requirements as set out in the 2016/17 Annual Plan.

14.       Revokes the exemption from being a Council-controlled Organisation granted to CCHL Six Ltd under section 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 with effect from 1 July 2015.

15.       Authorises Christchurch City Holdings Ltd to provide funding to Development Christchurch Ltd of up to $3 million per annum for the next five years.

16.       Authorises the Chief Financial Officer to make any necessary amendments required to ensure the published 2016/17 Annual Plan and amendments to the 2015/25 Long Term Plan are in accordance with the Council’s resolutions at its meeting on 21 & 23 June 2016.

17.       Applies Option 2 of Clause 6(3) of the Canterbury Earthquake (Rating) Order 2012 (as extended by the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016).

Mayor/Councillor Lonsdale                                                                                                                                       Carried

Councillor Johanson requested his vote against clause 4. be recorded.

 

Council Resolved ALTP/2016/00003

18.       Having set out rates information in the Funding Impact Statement and the Revenue and Financing Policy contained in the 2016/17 Annual Plan (adopted by resolution above) the Council now proposes to set and assess those rates and for that purpose.

 

19.       Resolves to set the following rates under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 for the 2016/17 financial year, commencing on 1 July 2016 and ending on 30 June 2017 (all statutory references are to the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002):

a.      a uniform annual general charge under section 15(1)(b) of $117.56 (inc GST) per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit.

b.     a general rate under sections 13(2)(b) and 14 at different rates in the dollar of rateable value. Note, if the late Mayoral changes are adopted the decimals below will change.

 

Differential Category

Rateable Value

Rate Factor (cents/$ capital value) (inc GST)

Standard

Capital Value

0.318361

Business

Capital Value

0.528480

Remote Rural (Farming and Forestry)

Capital Value

0.238771

 

c.      a water supply targeted rate under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(b) set differentially depending on whether a property is connected or capable of connection to the on-demand water reticulation system, as follows:

 

Differential Category

Rateable Value

Rate Factor (cents/$ capital value) (inc GST)

Connected (full charge)

Capital Value

0.041844

Serviceable (half charge)

Capital Value

0.020922

 

d.     a restricted water supply targeted rate under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) on all rating units with one or more connections to restricted water supply systems of $180.00 (inc GST) for each standard level of service received by a rating unit.

e.     a land drainage targeted rate under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) on all rating units in the serviced area of 0.025889 cents per dollar of capital value (inc GST).

f.      a sewerage targeted rate under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) on all rating units in the serviced area of 0.069543 cents per dollar of capital value (inc GST).

g.      a waste minimisation targeted rate under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(b) set differentially depending on whether a full or partial service is provided, as follows:

 

Differential Category

Basis for Liability

Rate Charge (inc GST)

Full service

Per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit

$142.47

Partial service

Per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit

$106.85

 

Note:

The full service charge is assessed on every separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit in the serviced area. The partial service charge is assessed on every separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit outside the kerbside collection area, where a limited depot collection service is available (75% of the full rate). Where ratepayers elect and Council agrees, additional levels of service may be provided. Each additional level of service will be rated at the full service charge.

h.     a water supply fire connection targeted rate under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) on all rating units receiving the benefit of a water supply fire connection of $111.75 (inc GST) per connection.

i.       an excess water supply volumetric targeted rate under section 19(2)(a) set for all land connected to a water supply and metered for extraordinary use during the rating year of $0.73 (inc GST) per m3 or any part of a m3 for consumption in excess of that assessed by the water supply targeted rate for each rating unit.

For example, if a rating unit is assessed $730 for the water supply targeted rate, that rating unit's consumption allocation is 1,000m3 (730 divided by 0.73c/m3). Liability for the excess water supply volumetric targeted rate commences when consumption commences of the 1001st cubic metre by that rating unit.

j.       an active travel targeted rate under section 16(3)(a) and 16(4)(a) of $20.00 (inc GST) per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit.

20.       Resolves that all rates be due in four instalments, and sets the following due dates for payment:

Instalment

1

2

3

4

Area 1

15 August 2016

15 November 2016

15 February 2017

15 May 2017

Area 2

15 September 2016

15 December 2016

15 March 2017

15 June 2017

Area 3

31 August 2016

30 November 2016

28 February 2017

31 May 2017

 

Where the Instalment Areas are defined geographically as follows:

 

Area 1

Area 2

Area 3

Includes generally the Central City and the suburbs of St Albans, Merivale, Mairehau, Papanui, Riccarton, Addington, Spreydon, Sydenham, Beckenham, Opawa and Banks Peninsula.

Includes generally the suburbs of Shirley, New Brighton, Linwood, Woolston, Mt Pleasant, Sumner, Cashmere and Heathcote.

Includes generally the suburbs of Belfast, Redwood, Parklands, Harewood, Avonhead, Bishopdale, Ilam, Fendalton, Hornby, Templeton and Halswell.

 

21.       Resolves to add the following penalties to unpaid rates:

a.      a penalty of 10 per cent will be added to any portion of any instalment not paid for instalments one to four on the following dates:

Instalment

1

2

3

4

Area 1

18 August 2016

18 November 2016

20 February 2017

18 May 2017

Area 2

20 September 2016

20 December 2016

20 March 2017

20 June 2017

Area 3

05 September 2016

05 December 2016

03 March 2017

06 June 2017

 

b.     an additional penalty of 10 per cent will be added on 01 October 2016 to any rates assessed, and penalties added, before 1 July 2016 and which remain unpaid on 01 October 2016.

c.      a further penalty of 10 per cent will be added if any rates to which a penalty has been added under (b) above remain unpaid on 01 April 2017.

 

Mayor/Councillor Lonsdale                                                                                                                                       Carried

 

 

 

   

Meeting concluded at 9:18am Thursday 23 June 2016.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 14th  DAY OF JULY 2016

 

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Chairperson

 

 

 

Christchurch City Council

Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Thursday 23 June 2016

Time:                                    9.30am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Vicki Buck

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Phil Clearwater

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor David East

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Ali Jones

Councillor Paul Lonsdale

Councillor Glenn Livingstone

Councillor Raf Manji

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Andrew Turner

 

 

23 June 2016

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Dr Karleen Edwards

Chief Executive

Tel: 941 8554

 

Jo Daly

Council Secretary

941 8581

Jo.Daly@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Watch Council meetings live on the web:
http://councillive.ccc.govt.nz/live-stream

 


  

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

 

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00273

It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Clearwater, seconded by Councillor Jones that the apologies for lateness from Councillors Turner and Johanson be accepted.

Councillor Clearwater/Councillor Jones                                                                                                             Carried

2.   Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00274

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on Thursday, 9 June 2016 be confirmed.

AND

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Audit and Risk Management Committee meeting held 24 May 2016.

AND

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Chief Executive and Employment Matters Committee meeting held 27 January 2016.

AND

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Chief Executive and Employment Matters Committee meeting held 24 May 2016.

AND

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee meeting held 2 June 2016.

AND

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee meeting held 2 June 2016.

Councillor Scandrett/Councillor Lonsdale                                                                                                          Carried

 

4.   Public Participation

4.1  Public Forum

There were no public forum presentations.

 

4.2  Deputations by Appointment

There were no deputations by appointment.

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

There was no presentation of petitions.

40. Resolution to Include Supplementary Reports

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00275

That the following reports be received and considered at the Council meeting on Thursday, 23 June 2016:

41.       Hearings Panel Report to the Council on the Proposed Land Sale Section of QEII Park.

42.       Proposed Sale of Portion of QEII Park to the Ministry of Education.

44.       2016/17 Insurance Renewal.

 

Councillor Scandrett/Councillor Livingstone                                                                                                     Carried

 

6.   Chief Executive's Report

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00276

That the Council:

1.         Receive the report.

 

Mayor/Councillor Chen                                                                                                                                            Carried

 

Councillor Johanson joined the meeting at 9:45am.

 

Report from Audit and Risk Management Committee - 24 May 2016

7.   Audit New Zealand Management Report for the 2015 year end audit

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00277

That:

1.         The Council receive the Audit New Zealand 2015 Management Report.

2.         That a workshop be held with Councillors on the Audit New Zealand 2015 Management Report, including the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Repair Team (SCIRT) aspects.

 

Councillor Manji/Councillor Gough                                                                                                                      Carried

 


 

 

Report from Audit and Risk Management Committee - 24 May 2016

8.   Health and Safety Management Update

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00278

That the Council:

1.         Receive the information presented in this report.

2.         Will establish a Health and Safety Committee as a Committee of Council comprising independent members as well as Councillors.

3.         Request the Chief Executive to provide a report on the establishment of the Committee, draft Terms of Reference and the appointments process for independent members by the end of July 2016, with a view to formally establishing the Committee in September 2016.

 

Councillor East/Councillor Scandrett                                                                                                                   Carried

 

Report from Audit and Risk Management Committee - 24 May 2016

9.   Annual Review of ARMC Terms of Reference

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00279

That the Council:

1.         Approve the updated Terms of Reference.

2.         Approve that a workshop be held with the Audit and Risk Management Committee and all Councillors to approve the risk strategy.

 

Councillor Manji/Councillor Chen                                                                                                                         Carried

 

10. Audit and Risk Management Committee Minutes - 24 May 2016

 

Council Decision

Refer to item 3.

 

11. Chief Executive and Employment Matters Committee Minutes - 27 January 2016

 

Council Decision

Refer to item 3.

 

12. Chief Executive and Employment Matters Committee Minutes - 24 May 2016

 

Council Decision

Refer to item 3.

 

Report from Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee - 2 June 2016

13. Proposed Draft Housing Policy

 

Amended Staff Recommendation

 

That the Council:

2.         Approve the Draft Housing Policy for consultation with the following amendments:

a.         Amend Goal 6 on 'Acute Needs' to read 'Work with other agencies in the effective provision of housing and associated support services to address acute housing need and to eliminate homelessness.

b.         Amend the fifth bullet point item from Schedule One of the Policy, to read: ‘Encourage and support a range of ownership models for modest income households such as assisted home ownership.

c.         Amend the fifteenth bullet point item from Schedule One of the Policy, to read 'Education and advocacy on a range of housing issues, including promoting a range of housing types and tenures.

3.         Consults on the Draft Housing Policy.

4.         Requests staff report back to Council, through the Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee, on a proposed final Housing Policy by the end of September 2016.

 

Councillor Livingstone/Councillor Clearwater

 

 

Councillor East moved by way of amendment that:

The words ‘to eliminate’ in 1a be replaced with ‘substantially reduce’.

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Jones and on being put to the meeting was declared lost.

 

Councillors East and Jones requested their votes for the amendment be recorded.

 

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00280

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Approve the Draft Housing Policy for consultation with the following amendments:

a.         Amend Goal 6 on 'Acute Needs' to read 'Work with other agencies in the effective provision of housing and associated support services to address acute housing need and to eliminate homelessness.

b.         Amend the fifth bullet point item from Schedule One of the Policy, to read: ‘Encourage and support a range of ownership models for modest income households such as assisted home ownership.

c.         Amend the fifteenth bullet point item from Schedule One of the Policy, to read 'Education and advocacy on a range of housing issues, including promoting a range of housing types and tenures.

2.         Consults on the Draft Housing Policy.

3.         Requests staff report back to Council, through the Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee, on a proposed final Housing Policy by the end of September 2016.

 

Councillor Livingstone/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                  Carried

 

 

 

The meeting adjourned at 10:47am and resumed at 11:07am.

 

26. Proposed Road Names - South Precinct

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00281

1.         That the Council approve the names below for lanes in the South Frame:

a.         Mauri Ora Lane

b.         Lava Lane

c.         Te Pohue Lane

d.         Sugarloaf Lane

e.         Mata Lane

f.          Nurseryman Lane

Councillor Clearwater/Councillor Scandrett                                                                                                     Carried

 

14. Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee Minutes - 2 June 2016

 

Council Decision

Refer to item 3.

 

Report from Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee - 2 June 2016

15. Christchurch City Council Freight Management Action Plan

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00282

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Receive and adopt the information in the Christchurch City Council Freight Management Action Plan report.

 

Councillor Clearwater/Councillor Lonsdale                                                                                                       Carried

 

Report from Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee - 2 June 2016

16. Shared Fleet Report

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00283

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Request staff to seek commitments from potential shared fleet partners for a 100% electric compact car fleet, with zero tail pipe emissions.

2.         Request staff to undertake a formal procurement process to engage a third party to provide a shared 100% electric car fleet, with zero tail pipe emissions, for Council and its shared fleet partners.

3.         Request staff to report back through the Infrastructure Transport and Environment Committee on the third party proposals received; the preferred proposal and the affordability of this proposal; and seek approval on whether to proceed with engaging the preferred third party to operate the shared fleet for Council and its shared fleet partners.

 

Deputy Mayor/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                                 Carried

 

Report from Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee - 2 June 2016

17. Estuary Drain Concept Design

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00284

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Progress the preferred Estuary Drain option (Option 1) to detailed design, consenting and construction.

 

Councillor Cotter/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                            Carried

 

Councillor Gough left the meeting at 11:41 am and returned at 11:46 am.

Councillor Livingstone left the meeting at 11:58 am and returned at 12:01 pm.

 

Report from Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee - 2 June 2016

18. No. 1 Drain Earthquake Damage Repair Options

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00285

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Progress the preferred repair option (Option 1) which involves the Land Drainage Recovery Programme undertaking:

a.         Detailed design of the naturalisation of No. 1 Drain

b.         Construction works to naturalise the western half of the drain

c.         Spot repairs to earthquake damage in the eastern half of the drain (if required)

d.         To include storm water quality treatment design as proposed in the report.

 

Councillor Cotter/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                            Carried

 

Councillor Turner joined the meeting at 12:03 pm.

 

Report from Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee - 2 June 2016

19. Construction site Hoardings - Temporary Use of Legal Road Fee Rebate Programme

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00286

Part A

That the Council continue and extend the Construction Site Hoardings - Temporary Use of Legal Road Fee Rebate Programme for two years with the following recommended changes:

1.         Disseminate information on the programme to capture the various levels of construction delivery (developers, architects, planners, construction companies).

2.         Simplify the current design guidelines

3.         Implement standard graphics option including

a.         Print ready files of pre-designed graphics that can be downloaded from the Council's website, printed, and installed following a guide by the developer.  

 

Councillor Gough/Councillor Lonsdale                                                                                                                Carried

 

20. Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee Minutes - 2 June 2016

 

Council Decision

Refer to item 3.

 

21. Hearings Panel Report to the Council on the Proposed Changes to the Jellie Park Management Plan

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00287

That the Council:

1.         Approves the changes to the Jellie Park Management Plan incorporated in it in Attachment B in the agenda thereby approving, in accordance with section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977, the amended Jellie Park Management Plan as it appears in Attachment B as the operative plan.

 

Councillor East/Councillor Manji                                                                                                                           Carried

 

22. Hearings Panel Report to the Council on the Proposed Revocation of the Pedestrian Mall in Poplar Street

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00288

That the Council:

1.         Declares that the part-time Pedestrian Mall status over the section of Poplar Street from its intersection with Lichfield Street to its intersection with Ash Street is revoked.

2.         Revoke all traffic controls on Poplar Street from its intersection with Lichfield Street to its intersection with Ash Street, and that this one way section of Poplar Street be revoked as authorised under clause 12 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008. 

3.         Approve pursuant to clause 12 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 that Poplar Street be one way north to south for all road users, except cyclists and pedestrians from its intersection with Lichfield Street, to its intersection with Ash Street.

4.         Approve pursuant to Section 14A of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008, that Poplar Street, between Lichfield Street and Ash Street, be declared a Shared Zone (note 1 applies) where the driving, riding or parking of any vehicle, including passenger service vehicles, is prohibited at all times subject to the following exceptions and conditions:

a.         The following are permitted in the Shared Zone at any time: Pedestrians, Trams, Cycles and Street cleaning and rubbish collection vehicles operated by the Christchurch City Council or its nominated contractor.

b.         Trade and other vehicles (including those operated by service authorities) of any class may enter the Shared Zone at specified times if authorised to do so by the council officer who holds the position of asset owner at that time.

c.         Goods service vehicles are permitted in the Shared Zone for the purpose of loading and unloading between 3am and 10am and between 3pm and 6pm each day.

d.         Nothing in this Council resolution prohibits or restricts the use of the Shared Zone by any fire appliance, ambulance or other vehicle where it is necessary for that appliance, ambulance or other vehicle to enter the Shared Zone for the protection of human life or of property.

e.         Any vehicle or specified class of vehicle that has entered the Shared Zone under the above provisions must not be parked for a longer period than is necessary for its driver to carry out his or her business or for the period of any emergency.

5.         Revoke all parking and stopping restrictions on both sides of Poplar Street from its intersection with Lichfield Street to its intersection with Ash Street.

6.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on both sides of Poplar Street, from its intersection with Lichfield Street to its intersection with Ash Street.

7.         Note that the Hearings Panel noted that the time restrictions around the goods service vehicles are likely to require reviewing as the area develops.

Note 1: For the purposes of the following resolutions relating to a Shared Zone, under clause 8(2) of the Speed Limits Bylaw (amendment made by decision under section 27 (1) (e) of the Canterbury Earthquake Act 2011, dated 11 December 2014), a speed limit of 10km/h applies to the Shared Zone.

 

In the context of making these recommendations the Hearings Panel additionally requested that staff provide the Council with information on the proposed new public laneway from Lichfield Street to Tuam Street (shown as the blue arrow in the map within clause 4.4.1 below) and traffic management to the proposed new car park building that will have its access and egress into that laneway. Staff are in the process of preparing a memorandum accordingly.

 

Councillor Clearwater/Councillor Lonsdale                                                                                                       Carried

 

23. Hearings Panel Report to the Council on the Proposed Changes to the Dog Control Policy and Dog Control Bylaw 2016

 

The Council acknowledged Islay McLeod and her contribution to the Hearings Panel.

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00289

1.      That the Council adopt the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Policy 2016, as attached

2.      That the Council note the following changes to the Policy (as proposed):

a.         Re-ordering section 3, changing two subsections into notes, and clarifying the meaning of 'under effective control'.

b.         Improving the wording relating to dog registration classifications in section 4.

c.         Clarifying the wording in relation to the registration of working dogs and introducing a new working dog category (rural working dogs) in section 4.

d.         Replacing the wording relating to 'under effective control' in section 6.

e.         Extending the summer beach prohibition period from '1 December to 1 March' to '1 November to 31 March' on all specified beaches and adding one new beach and one previously removed beach on Banks Peninsula in section 6.

f.          Clarifying the description of 'road' and improving the wording relating to 'boat ramps and slipways' in section 6.

g.         Adding a paragraph about exercising care when taking children into Dog Parks in section 7.

h.         Amending the licence to own multiple dogs to refer to 'more than two dogs' and adding information about the purpose of the licence in section 8.

i.          Improving the wording relating to 'barking dogs', adding a new subsection on 'female dogs in season', and adding new information to the subsection 'learning how to be a good dog owner' in section 9.

3.      Making various amendments to the prohibited and leashed dog control areas in Schedule 1 to the Policy, including: -

a.         Deleting entries for: Balmoral Hill, Hoon Hay Scenic Reserve and Skellerup Reserve

b.         Altering the dog control status of entries for: Pony Point (leashed / under effective control), Hagley Park paths (leashed on sealed paths and two specified gravel paths) and Abberley Park (leashed / under effective control)

c.         Altering all entries with summer beach prohibition areas (change of dates)

d.         Clarifying the wording in the entries for: Akaroa Main Wharf, Britomart Reserve, Lake Forsyth, Cass Bay, Corsair Bay, , Governor's Bay mudflats, Sandy Bay beach, Mountfort Park, Ernle Clark Reserve, Jubilee Walkway, Southshore Spit Reserve and foreshore, Godley Head foreshore, Styx Mill Reserve, Roto Kohatu Regional Park, Halswell Quarry and Riccarton Bush

e.         Reinstating entries proposed for removal for: Akaroa Seaside Reserve (leashed), Rue Balguerie Reserve (leashed),  Paradise Bay beach (summer beach prohibition), the Groynes (prohibited / leashed / under effective control)

f.          Adding new entries for: Daly's Wharf (leashed), Lyttelton Recreation Ground (leashed), Diamond Harbour jetty (leashed), Head to Head walkway coastal track from Magazine Bay to Pony Point (leashed) and Hays Bay beach (summer beach prohibition)

g.         Other technical changes and corrections as shown in the attached policy.

4.         That the Council declares, under section 4 of the Dog Control Act 1996 and the section 2 definition of working dog, the following to be a classification of working dog (known as 'rural working dog') for the purposes of the Dog Control Act 1996 and the Council's Dog Control Policy and Dog Control Bylaw:

A dog which is

a.      housed on a working farm property; and

b.      that is kept solely or principally to contribute to the working of a farm or otherwise assist in farming activities.

5.         That the form of the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Policy 2016 meets the requirements of section 10 of the Dog Control Act 1996, and that the Council has had regard to the matters in section 10(4) of that Act.

6.         That the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Policy 2016 comes into force on 1 September 2016 and at that time revokes and replaces the Dog Control Policy 2008.

7.         That the Council adopt the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Bylaw 2016, as attached,

8.         That the Council note the following changes to the Bylaw (as proposed):

a.      Amending the definitions of "road" and "under effective control", and adding a new definition of "short leash" in clause 4.

b.      Improving the wording of clause 5(1), and changing clause 5(4) into an explanatory note.

c.      Changing clause 7(2) into an explanatory note, and extending the summer beach prohibition period from '1 December to 1 March' to '1 November to 31 March'

d.      Improving the explanatory notes relating to clauses 8(C) and 8(F)

e.      Improving the wording of clauses 10(A) and 10(B).

f.       Amending clause 11 to provide that it applies to more than two dogs.

g.      Reinstating a clause on female dogs in season, with new wording.

h.      Adding a new subclause to provide an exception for working dogs that are being worked whilst on the open tray of a vehicle.

i.       Other technical changes and corrections as shown in the attached bylaw.

9.      That the form of the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Bylaw 2016 is the most appropriate form, and that the bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

10.   That the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Bylaw 2016 comes into force on 1 September 2016.

11.   That staff are otherwise authorised to make any typographical changes or correct minor errors as the case may be before the Bylaw and Policy come into force.

12.   That the Council give public notice as soon as practicable, that the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Policy 2016 and the Christchurch City Council Dog Control Bylaw 2016 have been made by the Council, that they come into effect on 1 September 2016 and that copies of the policy and bylaw may be inspected and obtained at the Council’s offices or on its website, without payment.

13.   Revoke the 'Responsible Dog Owner Status Policy 1997 ' and remove it from the Council's policy register and webpages

14.   That the concerns about the speed of cyclists on paths in Hagley Park made in submissions be referred to the Police so that they are aware of the issues and can look at public education or enforcement in these areas and along the cycleways network and other shared paths generally.

15.   That the Parks Unit facilitates the design and installation of Dog Park signage, in consultation with the Animal Management Unit.

16.   That the Parks Unit facilitates the design and installation of consistent and easy to understand signage (including maps where possible) about leashed and prohibited areas across the district.

 

Councillor East/Councillor Turner                                                                                                                         Carried

 

24. Te Waihora Co-Governance Group membership

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00290

That the Council:

1.         Join the Te Waihora Co-Governance Group.

2.         Appoint the Mayor, or the Mayor’s alternate (currently Councillor Cotter), to the Te Waihora Co-Governance Group.

 

Mayor/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                                                 Carried

 

25. Community Organisation Loan Scheme

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00291

That the Council:

1.         Receive the information in this report and the attached Community Loans Scheme Decision Matrix.

2.         Approve a loan of $46,000 at the rate of 4.5% interest per annum, over a five year repayment term to contribute towards Halswell Bowling Club Inc. Pavilion Extension, subject to:

a.         Provision of a first ranking Mortgage over the building at 301 Halswell Rd, to ensure on-going Council awareness of any future secured lending which may be entered into by the Club, and/or a General Security Agreement if appropriate.

2.         Delegates authority to the Team Leader Community Funding to require such security from Halswell Bowling Club Inc. for repayment of the loan, and to implement such security arrangements on behalf of the Council.

 

Councillor Chen/Deputy Mayor                                                                                                                            Carried

 

27. Christchurch Earthquake Mayoral Relief Fund

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00292

That the Council:

1.         Receive the information as requested in this report provided by The Residential Advisory Service.

2.         Approves a grant of $50,000 to The Residential Advisory Service from the Christchurch Earthquake Mayoral Relief Fund as a contribution towards its continued operations to the end of December 2016.

3.         Approves the closure of the Christchurch Earthquake Mayoral Relief Fund.

Mayor/Councillor Livingstone                                                                                                                                Carried

 

Councillor Johanson did not participate in discussion or debate on this item.

 

The meeting adjourned at 12:52pm and resumed at 2:34pm.

41. Hearings Panel Report to the Council on the Proposed Land Sale Section of QEII Park

 

Hearings Panel Recommendation

That:

1.         The Council agrees to sell or dispose of that part of QEII Park as is delineated by a broken red line on the plan attached to the Hearings Panel report (excluding the medical centre car park as shown on that plan) to the Ministry of Education for the development of the new Avonside Girls' High School and Shirley Boys' High School.

2.         The Sale and Purchase Agreement to be entered into by the Council and the Ministry of Education includes the following requirements :

a.         An encumbrance to be registered against the title of the land to protect trees numbered 221, 222, 223, 224, 219, 214, 215, 229, 230, 231, 232.

b.         An encumbrance to be registered against the title of the land to protect trees numbered 120, 119, 121, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128.

c.         Retention of as many of the balance of the established trees on the site as is reasonably possible.

d.         Provision of a publicly accessible fitness/walking track around the perimeter of the site in a manner which connects the fitness/walking track on the balance of the QEII park site to be retained by the Council.

3.         The Council allocates the proceeds from the sale of land towards the development and implementation of a Masterplan for the rest of QEII Park.

 

Councillor Johanson/Councillor Livingstonet

 

 

            

Amendment CNCL/2016/00293

Councillor East moved by way of amendment that clause 2b and 2c above be replaced with:

b.         that the Council work with the Ministry of Education to ensure that as many as possible of the trees numbered 120, 119, 121, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128 be retained.

c.         Retention of as many of the balance of the established trees on the site as is reasonably possible and planting of new trees.

 

The amendment was seconded by Mayor Dalziel and on being put to the meeting was declared carried.

Councillor East/Mayor                                                                                                                                               Carried

Councillor Johanson requested that his vote against the amendment be recorded.

 

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00294

It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Johanson, seconded by Councillor Livingstone that the motion as amended (see below) was put to the meeting as the substantive motion and declared carried.

1.         The Council agrees to sell or dispose of that part of QEII Park as is delineated by a broken red line on the plan attached to the Hearings Panel report (excluding the medical centre car park as shown on that plan) to the Ministry of Education for the development of the new Avonside Girls' High School and Shirley Boys' High School.

2.         The Sale and Purchase Agreement to be entered into by the Council and the Ministry of Education includes the following requirements :

a.         An encumbrance to be registered against the title of the land to protect trees numbered 221, 222, 223, 224, 219, 214, 215, 229, 230, 231, 232.

b.         That the Council work with the Ministry of Education to ensure that as many as possible of the trees numbered 120, 119, 121, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128 be retained.

c.         Retention of as many of the balance of the established trees on the site as is reasonably possible.

d.         Provision of a publicly accessible fitness/walking track around the perimeter of the site in a manner which connects the fitness/walking track on the balance of the QEII park site to be retained by the Council.

3.         The Council allocates the proceeds from the sale of land towards the development and implementation of a Masterplan for the rest of QEII Park.

Councillor Johanson/Councillor Livingstone                                                                                                     Carried

Councillor Johanson requested that his vote against the resolution be recorded.

 

42. Proposed Sale of Portion of QEII Park to the Ministry of Education

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00295

That:

1.         The Council agrees to sell that part of QEII Park as is delineated by a broken red line on the plan attached (excluding the medical centre car park as shown on that plan) (“the Land”) to the Ministry of Education for the development of the new Avonside Girls' High School and Shirley Boys' High School.

2          The Sale and Purchase Agreement to be entered into by the Council and the Ministry of Education includes the following requirements :

a.         An encumbrance to be registered against the title of the land to protect trees numbered 221, 222, 223, 224, 219, 214, 215, 229, 230, 231, 232.

b.         that the Council work with the Ministry of Education to ensure that as many as possible of the trees numbered 120, 119, 121, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128 be retained.

c.         Retention of as many of the balance of the established trees on the site as is reasonably possible and planting of new trees.

d.         Provision of a publicly accessible fitness/walking track around the perimeter of the site in a manner which connects the fitness/walking track on the balance of the QEII park site to be retained by the Council.

3             The Council allocates the proceeds from the sale of the Land towards the development and implementation of a Masterplan (and/or regeneration plan) for the rest of QEII Park.

 

4          The Property Consultancy Manager be granted delegated authority to negotiate and enter into an agreement for the sale of the Land and related documentation on such terms and conditions as he considers are appropriate and which are consistent with the above resolution.

Councillor East/Councillor Livingstone                                                                                                                Carried

Councillor Johanson requested that his vote against the resolution be recorded.

 

28  Resolution to Exclude the Public

 

Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00296

That Steve Walsh from Marsh remain after the public have been excluded for Item 44 of the public excluded agenda as he has knowledge that is relevant to that item and will assist the Council.

That Bob Lineham of Christchurch City Holdings Limited remain after the public have been excluded for item 44 and the briefing to be given by Christchurch City Holdings Limited in public excluded under s7(2)(b)(ii) of the Local Government and Official Information Meetings Act.

AND

That at 3:23pm the resolution to exclude the public set out on pages 440 to 442 of the agenda and pages 59 to 60 of the supplementary agenda be adopted.

Mayor/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                                                   Carried

Councillor Cotter left the meeting at 3:45pm during public excluded.

 

The public were re-admitted to the meeting at 4:59pm.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 4:59pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 14th DAY OF JULY 2016

 

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Chairperson

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

6.        Akaroa/Wairewa Community Board Minutes - 11 May 2016

Reference:

16/555050

Contact:

Liz Carter

Liz.carter@ccc.govt.nz

941-5682

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Akaroa/Wairewa Community Board held a meeting on 11 May 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Akaroa/Wairewa Community Board meeting held 11 May 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Akaroa/Wairewa Community Board - 11 May 2016

36

 

 

Signatories

Author

Liz Carter

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

7.        Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board Minutes - 1 June 2016

Reference:

16/692334

Contact:

Liz Beaven

Liz.Beaven@ccc.govt.nz

941 5602

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board held a meeting on 1 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board meeting held 1 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board - 1 June 2016

46

 

 

Signatories

Author

Liz Beaven

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

8.        Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board Minutes - 15 June 2016

Reference:

16/692356

Contact:

Liz Beaven

Liz.Beaven@ccc.govt.nz

941 5602

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board held a meeting on 15 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board meeting held 15 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board - 15 June 2016

50

 

 

Signatories

Author

Liz Beaven,               Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board  – 31 May 2016

 

9.        Easement Over Part of Hagley Park

Reference:

16/687403

Contact:

Justin Sims

justin.sims@ccc.govt.nz

941 6424

 

 

 

 

1.   Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Consideration

 

Part B

The Board considered a report requesting its approval to grant the right to drain water easements over part of Hagley Park that adjoins the new Acute Services Building (ASB) of the Christchurch Hospital, and seeking its recommendation to the Council that it give the consent of the Minister of Conservation to the easements acting under the delegated authority of the Minister of Conservation. 

Having heard the concerns raised in the deputation from Mr Thornley at item 4.4 and following further discussion and consideration, the Board decided to request:

1.         Clarification on the building consent granted to Canterbury District Hospital Board (CDHB) for the new Acute Services Building and its relationship to the flood plain.

2.         That staff work with CDHB to mitigate the amount of cigarette litter around the seating in the area.

 

The Board notes that the granting of this easement does not change ownership of the area or alter the reserve status of Hagley Park.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

 

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

1.            Approves the proposed works shown on the plan at Attachment A to provide improved public access between the ASB and Hagley Park.

2.            Approve pursuant to Section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 , the granting of easements for the right to drain water over part of Hagley Park (Certificate of Title reference 658884) shown shaded yellow on the plan at Attachment B to this report subject to; 

a.         No objections being received and upheld in response to the public notification.

·     Note, that if submissions in opposition are received in response to the public notice, a reserves hearings panel is to be convened under staff delegation (16.12.04) with this panel under the delegated authority of Council to receive and consider such submissions in opposition and determine if they should be upheld or not.

b.         The consent of the Minister of Conservation.

3.            Authorise the Property Consultancy Manager, should the easement be granted with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, to finalise documentation to implement the easement and works proposed by this report.

4.            Recommend that the Christchurch City Council acting in the capacity of holding a delegated authority from the Minister of Conservation;

a.         Subject to and conditional on recommendation 2(a), consent to the granting of the easement as outlined in this report.

 

3.   Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Decisions Under Delegation

 

Part C

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

1.         Approves the proposed works shown on the plan at Attachment A to provide improved public access between the ASB and Hagley Park.

2.         Approve pursuant to Section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 , the granting of easements for the right to drain water over part of Hagley Park (Certificate of Title reference 658884) shown shaded yellow on the plan at Attachment B to this report subject to; 

a.         No objections being received and upheld in response to the public notification.

·          Note, that if submissions in opposition are received in response to the public notice, a reserves hearings panel is to be convened under staff delegation (16.12.04) with this panel under the delegated authority of Council to receive and consider such submissions in opposition and determine if they should be upheld or not.

b.         The consent of the Minister of Conservation.

3.         Authorise the Property Consultancy Manager, should the easement be granted with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, to finalise documentation to implement the easement and works proposed by this report.

Member Davies requested that his vote against the motion be recorded. 

 

4.   Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

1.      That the Christchurch City Council, acting in the capacity of holding a delegated authority from the Minister of Conservation;

a.         Subject to and conditional on recommendation 2(a), consent to the granting of the easement as outlined in this report.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Easement Over Part of Hagley Park

63

 

No.

Title

Page

a

Landscape Plan

70

b

Easement Scheme Plan

72

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Easement Over Part of Hagley Park

Reference:

15/1561372

Contact:

Justin Sims

Justin.sims@ccc.govt.nz

941 6424

 

 

1.       Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1          The purpose of this report is for the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board to approve the grant of right to drain water easements over part of Hagley Park that adjoins the new Acute Services Building (ASB) of the Christchurch Hospital.

1.2          The Board is also requested to recommend to the Council that it give the consent of the Minister of Conservation to the easements acting under the delegated authority of the Minister of Conservation. 

Origin of Report

1.3          This report is being submitted to the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board following the redesign of the interface of the ASB as requested by the Council to the Ministry of Health following a workshop on 25th May 2015.

1.4          Easements are required over Hagley Park to allow the construction of bunds and low retaining walls but staff do not have a delegation to make a decision in this matter because the land is a Reserve administered under the Christchurch City (Reserves) Empowering Act 1971 and the Reserves Act 1977. The Board has the delegated authority of Council to make a decision on the granting of this proposed easement whilst the Council has the delegation to grant consent on behalf of the Minister of Conservation.

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 Justin Sims utilising the significance and    engagement assessment worksheet. 

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

 

3.       Staff Recommendations

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

1.              Approves the proposed works shown on the plan at Attachment A to provide improved public access between the ASB and Hagley Park.

2.              Approve pursuant to Section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 , the granting of easements for the right to drain water over part of Hagley Park (Certificate of Title reference 658884) shown shaded yellow on the plan at Attachment B to this report subject to; 

a.              No objections being received and upheld in response to the public notification.

·      Note, that if submissions in opposition are received in response to the public notice, a reserves hearings panel is to be convened under staff delegation (16.12.04) with this panel under the delegated authority of Council to receive and consider such submissions in opposition and determine if they should be upheld or not.

b.             The consent of the Minister of Conservation.

3.              Authorise the Property Consultancy Manager, should the easement be granted with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, to finalise documentation to implement the easement and works proposed by this report.

4.              Recommend that the Christchurch City Council acting in the capacity of holding a delegated authority from the Minister of Conservation to;

a.              Subject to and conditional on recommendation 2(a), consent to the granting of the easement as outlined in this report.

 

 

4.       Key Points

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

4.1.1     Activity: Garden and Heritage Parks

·           Level of Service: 6.2.11 Proportion of visitors satisfied with the appearance of garden  and heritage parks

4.2          The following feasible two options have been considered:

·                Option 1 – Grant an easement (preferred option)

·                Option 2 – Do not grant an easement

4.3          Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1    The advantages of this option include:

·                Improved public access between Christchurch Hospital and Hagley Park.

·                Higher level of amenities around the new ASB.

·                Opportunity for hospital patients to benefit from proximity to park.

·                Better aesthetic appeal of the ASB from Hagley Park.

·                The easement will protect the infrastructure in perpetuity.

·                An easement is required to comply with the Christchurch City (Reserves) Empowering Act 1971 and the Reserves Act 1977.


 

 

4.3.2     The disadvantages of this option include:

·                The title will be encumbered with an easement in perpetuity.

·                CDHB structures on Council land.

·                Lack of flexibility to change this area if circumstances change.

 

5.       Context/Background

Background

5.1          A new Acute Services Building is currently under construction at the Christchurch Hospital.  The ASB is sited on land that was formerly part of Hagley Park that was exchanged through an Order in Council (Canterbury Earthquake (Canterbury DHB Land Exchange) Order 2014) for adjacent land along the Avon riverbank owned by the CDHB. 

5.2          The Minister of Canterbury Earthquake Recovery inserted a designation for the proposed ASB into the Christchurch City Plan on 3 July 2014 pursuant to section 27(1) of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 (CER Act).   The designation included sufficient detail such that an Outline Plan was not required to be submitted to the Christchurch City Council under section 176(2)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

5.3          The designation included a limited number of conditions for landscaping, Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), trees, transportation and urban design, that were required to be met before the works could be undertaken.  The Ministry of Health has met these conditions.

Landscape Works

5.4          Christchurch City Councillors were briefed by the Ministry of Health on the proposed development at a Council workshop on 23 March 2015.  At the workshop Councillors expressed concern at the relationship of the proposed ASB to Hagley Park and the Botanic Gardens.  The Councillors requested that the Ministry of Health should address the scale and visual dominance of the proposed building and the proposed landscape treatment along the edge of the building which did not encourage hospital patients to take advantage of Hagley Park as part of their recovery.

5.5          At a subsequent Councillor workshop on 25 May 2015 the Ministry of Health presented draft landscape plans showing possible landscape works along the edge of Hagley Park (on park land) which would create a more inviting edge for patients and visitors while maintaining the necessary flood protection levels required by the ASB.   The workshop requested that this proposal should be brought to Council for approval which has led to this report.

5.6          The proposed landscape works include:

·                Earthworks;

·                Undulating grass mounds;

·                Retaining walls;

·                Steps and paths;

·                Seats;

·                Planted areas;

·                Access way for park service vehicles and mowers.

5.7          The proposed landscape work would improve access to Hagley Park by providing better opportunities for hospital patients and visitors to  access the park from the ASB and creating a more usable and attractive space along the edge of the building.  While they do provide a level of flood protection for the lower ground floor of the ASB this is integral to the design of the earthworks and does not restrict public access.

Easement

5.8          Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 (“the Act”) provides that the Council with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, may grant easements for drainage or for any other purpose over reserve land. Under section 48(2) of the Act it is necessary for the Council to publicly notify its intention to grant an easement except where the reserve is unlikely to be materially altered or permanently damaged, and the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are unlikely to be permanently affected (section 48(3) of the Act). As the works proposed to be built will not comply with the requirements of section 48(3), public notice of the intended easement has been undertaken with a notice published in The Press on 15th April 2016. At the time of writing this report no submissions had yet been received.

5.9          The easement areas required are shaded yellow and marked annotated on Attachment B.

Consent of the Minister of Conservation

5.14        In exercising the consent of the Minister of Conservation, the Council should be satisfied that

due process has been followed and in this respect the Council should have regard to the following matters;

 

·                The land affected by the application is a reserve subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

·                The easement being applied for falls within the purposes specified in Section 48(6) of the Act.

·                The provisions of Section 48(2) (public notification) have been complied with or that a waiver can be given to this requirement under Section 48(3).

·                Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 (This Act shall be interpreted and administered as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi) meaning that in consenting to transactions under the Reserves Act 1977 consideration is to be given to the requirement or otherwise to consult with iwi.

 

5.15.    It is confirmed that the subject land is a reserve, the Council’s title 658884 recording this interest. Section 48(1) of the Act allows the Council to grant easements for a right to drain water. Public notification of the easement has been undertaken and the consent of the Minister will be subject to no objections being received and upheld. The outcome of the notification will be known at the time of the Council meeting to consider granting this consent.       

 

 

 

 

6.       Option 1 - Grant an Easement Over Part of Hagley Park

Option Description

6.1          That the Council accepts the proposed landscape plans as an application for an easement under the Reserves Act 1977 and carries out due process to consider the application under the Reserves Act including publically notifying the application, holding hearings, and seeking the Minister of Conservation's approval.

Significance

6.2          The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report. The Reserves Act process does however require public notification.

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.

Community Views and Preferences

6.4          A statutory notification process is being undertaken to determine if there are any views in opposition to this proposal. The response to this notification after the closing date will be the formal indication of the Community to the intended easement.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.5          This option is considered to be consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

Financial Implications

6.6          Cost of Implementation - the majority, if not all to be covered by the Ministry of Health.

6.7          Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - maintenance of the structures would be covered by the Canterbury District Health Board.  Operational costs for Hagley Park would be unchanged.

6.8          Funding source - N/A.

Legal Implications

6.9          The Council would need to grant an easement under section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.  Before doing so the Council is required to publically notify the proposal and to hold a public hearing to consider submissions if requested.

Risks and Mitigations

6.10       Risk of public opposition to granting an easement over Hagley Park through the Reserves Act submission and hearing process.

6.11       Risk of delays to the project caused by Reserves Act submission and hearing process and / or legal challenges.

6.12       Risk of additional costs to the Council or Ministry of Health arising from Reserves Act submission and hearing process.

6.13       Risk that easement will not be granted once Reserves Act submission and hearing process is completed.

Implementation

6.14       Implementation dependencies - landscape works need to be completed as part of the construction of the ASB to ensure that flood protection is provided to the lower ground floor.

6.15       Implementation timeframe - dependent on outcome of public notification process, works are programmed for Summer 2016/17.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16       The advantages of this option include:

·                Improved public access between Christchurch Hospital and Hagley Park.

·                Higher level of amenities around the new ASB.

·                Opportunity for hospital patients to benefit from proximity to park.

·                Better aesthetic appeal of the ASB from Hagley Park.

·                The easement will protect the infrastructure in perpetuity.

·                An easement is required to comply with the Christchurch City (Reserves) Empowering Act 1971 and the Reserves Act 1977.

6.17       The disadvantages of this option include:

·                The title will be encumbered with an easement in perpetuity.

·                CDHB structures on Council land.

·                Lack of flexibility to change this area if circumstances change.

7.       Option 2 - Do Not Grant an Easement

Option Description

7.1          The Council does not approve the proposed landscape plans and easements and the Ministry of Health carries out landscape and flood protection works on its own land.

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 not required.

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          N/A.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.6          Cost of Implementation - N/A.

7.7          Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Maintenance costs for Hagley Park are unchanged.

7.8          Funding source - N/A.

Legal Implications

7.9          N/A.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10       N/A.

Implementation

7.11       Implementation dependencies  - N/A.

7.12       Implementation timeframe - N/A.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13       The advantages of this option include:

·                No change for the Council

7.14       The disadvantages of this option include:

·                Missed opportunity to improve access between the proposed ASB and Hagley Park.

·                Missed opportunity for patients to benefit from the proximity to Hagley Park.

The aesthetic appeal between the ASB and Hagley Park is not optimised.Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a 

Landscape Plan

 

b 

Easement Scheme Plan

 

 

 

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

Justin Sims

Hugh Nicholson

Property Consultant

Principal Advisor Urban Design

Approved By

Angus Smith

Andrew Rutledge

Mary Richardson

Manager Property Consultancy

Head of Parks

General Manager Customer & Community

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board  – 15 June 2016

 

10.    Lease of Former United Bowling Clubrooms and Greens at Hagley Park

Reference:

16/703471

Contact:

Kathy Jarden

kathy.jarden@ccc.govt.nz

941 8203

 

 

 

 

1.   Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Recommendation to Council

 

 (Original Staff Recommendation Accepted without Change)

Part A

 

That the Council: 

1.         Publicly notify the proposal to grant a lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust over that part of Hagley Park where the former United Bowling Clubrooms and green space is situated, an area of approximately 5387.5m2, part of Section 6 Survey Office Plan 467852 of 87.5600 hectares more or less, classified as a recreation reserve notified in New Zealand Gazette number 107 page 2706 on 11 September 1980 as shown on Attachment A, Lease Area Plan RPS 1332.

2.         In its capacity of holding the Minister of Conservation's Delegation, pending the outcome of 1 above, to give consent to the lease in accordance with 54(1)(a)and (b) of the Reserves Act 1977.

3.         To authorise the Property Consultancy Manager to manage and conclude all issues and processes associated with the above resolutions including, but not limited to:

a.         Convening a hearings panel to consider any objections and making a recommendation back to the Council for a decision.

b.         Finalising lease documentation to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust for a period of up to 33 years broken into three 11 year terms at an annual rental set in accordance with the Council's Sports Lease Charges Policy.

c.         Granting permission to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust to enter into hire and sublease arrangements for utilisation of the grounds and buildings contained within the lease area specifically to High School Old Boys Rugby Club Incorporated, United Croquet Club Incorporated and Christchurch Petanque Club Incorporated as well as other sport and recreation user groups on terms and conditions to be approved by the Property Consultancy Manager on behalf of Council.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Lease of Former United Bowling Clubrooms and Greens at Hagley Park

75

 

No.

Title

Page

a

United Bowling Club - Areas for Lease Plan - Attachment A

85

b

United Bowling Clubrooms Photos - Attachment B

86

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Lease of Former United Bowling Clubrooms and Greens at Hagley Park

Reference:

16/570137

Contact:

Kathy Jarden

kathy.jarden@ccc.govt.nz

941-8203

 

 

              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 Council that a lease be granted to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust over an area of Hagley Park formerly occupied by United Bowling Club Incorporated.

Origin of Report

1.2          This report is staff generated.

2.       Significance

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

2.1.1     The level of significance was determined by staff evaluation.

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

 

3.       Staff Recommendations

That the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board recommend to Council:

1.              That it publicly notify the proposal to grant a lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust over that part of Hagley Park where the former United Bowling Clubrooms and green space is situated, an area of approximately 5387.5m2, part of Section 6 Survey Office Plan 467852 of 87.5600 hectares more or less, classified as a recreation reserve notified in New Zealand Gazette number 107 page 2706 on 11 September 1980 as shown on Attachment A, Lease Area Plan RPS 1332.

2.               In its capacity of holding the Minister of Conservation's Delegation, pending the outcome of 1 above, to give consent to the lease in accordance with 54(1)(a)and (b) of the Reserves Act 1977.

3.              To authorise the Property Consultancy Manager to manage and conclude all issues and processes associated with the above resolutions including, but not limited to:

a.              Convening a hearings panel to consider any objections and making a recommendation back to the Council for a decision.

b.             Finalising lease documentation to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust for a period of up to 33 years broken into three 11 year terms at an annual rental set in accordance with the Council's Sports Lease Charges Policy.

c.              Granting permission to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust to enter into hire and sublease arrangements for utilisation of the grounds and buildings contained within the lease area specifically to High School Old Boys Rugby Club Incorporated, United Croquet Club Incorporated and Christchurch Petanque Club Incorporated as well as other sport and recreation user groups on terms and conditions to be approved by the Property Consultancy Manager on behalf of Council.

 

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: 7.1.5 Provide well utilised sports parks

4.2          The following feasible options have been considered:

·           Option 1 - Grant a Lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust  (preferred option)

·           Option 2 - Not grant a lease

4.3          Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1     The advantages of this option include:

·         Maximising the recreational potential of the park.

·         Keeping to a minimum the number of new buildings on the park.

·         Utilising existing buildings for use by more than one sporting code.

·         Concluding the occupation on the park by United Bowling Club.

4.3.2     The disadvantages of this option include:

·           An area of Hagley Park is occupied exclusively by sports and recreational user groups.

 

5.       Context/Background

United Bowling Club Incorporated

5.1          United Bowling Club Incorporated (the "Bowling Club") held a lease over clubrooms and equipment storage shed and two bowling greens at Hagley Park. 

5.2          The Bowling Club did not exercise a right of renewal for a further lease term and the lease rolled over on a monthly basis.  A report to Council on 30 September 2010 from the Hagley Ferrymead Community Board meeting of 1 September 2010 resolved that the Council:

·      Accept United Bowling Club's wish to not enter into a new lease of their former Hagley Park site, and support a letter being written to the Club extending best wishes to all members in their future sporting endeavours.

·      Endorse officers' actions to find new lessees for the former leased site thereby ensuring that the maximum recreational benefit is derived of this opportunity, both for the potential lessees and for the greater recreational benefit of the City as a whole.

5.3          The Bowling Club retained ownership of the built improvements at Hagley Park consisting of clubrooms and an equipment shed as shown in the photographs in Attachment B.  The Bowling Club wishes to sell these improvements in order to wind up their affairs in accordance with the requirements of their incorporated club rules.

5.4          There is an internal concrete block wall that separates United Bowling Club and United Croquet Club; the two clubrooms share the same roof.

5.5          The Bowling Club members became affiliated with the Barrington Bowling Club which is now named Barrington United Bowling Club Incorporated and based at Barrington Park.

5.6          On 12 April 2012 temporary permission was granted to High School Old Boys Rugby Club (the "Rugby Club") for use of the clubrooms for the balance of the 2012 rugby season.  That temporary permission has extended to the present date.  The Rugby Club obtained indemnity insurance for the building while in use by them.

5.7          The Rugby Club wished to purchase the clubrooms and enter into a ground lease with Council.  Council officers received advice from the Council's Legal Services team that it could not deal unilaterally with the Rugby Club and an open transparent process, in accordance with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, would be required to grant a new ground lease over the land that was now available as a result of the Bowling Club relinquishing their lease.

5.8          The Rugby Club was informed that a Request for Proposals (RFP) process would be run by Council and any future sale and purchase negotiations for the former bowling clubrooms and equipment shed would need to be negotiated directly between the former Bowling Club and the incoming lessee appointed through the RFP process.

Request for Proposals

5.9          Council staff advertised the RFP for the ground lease of the former United Bowling Clubrooms site at Hagley Park in February 2016.  Respondents were invited to submit proposals for any configuration of land areas that would suit their needs.  The areas available are shown in Attachment A.

 

5.10       Three Proposals were submitted and summarised below:

Organisation

Area Identified

Evaluation - Final Consensus Score

High School Old Boys Rugby Club

A, B, C, D, E, F  (all areas)

79

Christchurch Petanque Club

A, B - various configurations of the two former bowling greens

71

United Croquet Club

E - shared use of the mowing/equipment shed

73

 

·      All Respondents indicated a willingness to work with each other and share the buildings and land subject to the RFP.

·      The Rugby Club and Christchurch Petanque Club Incorporated (the "Petanque Club") indicated in their submissions that they have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a joint entity for the purpose of leasing and management of the land subject to the proposal and ownership of the former bowling clubrooms and equipment shed.

·      Council officers held further discussions with the Rugby Club and Petanque Club and are satisfied that a joint approach between both sports bodies is the best outcome for utilisation of these grounds and facilities.

·      At the time of writing this report, the Rugby Club and Petanque Club were seeking registration as a charitable entity to be named "North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust" (the "Trust").

·      The Trust has indicated that they would like to partner with the other sports user groups in north Hagley Park and make the clubrooms available to other recreational users such as Bridge and Touch Rugby, thereby maximising use of the facilities.  They are open to discussions with other groups as well.

·      The successful Respondent will be required to enter into independent negotiations with the Bowling Club for the purchase of the clubrooms and equipment shed.

·      Christchurch Old Boys Rugby Club or its Nominee have made an offer to United Bowling Club for the purchase of the buildings on site, subject to Council approval to grant a lease.

Overview of Individual Groups and Proposals

5.11       United Croquet Club Incorporated

·      United Croquet Club Incorporated (the "Croquet Club") have been using part of the Shed E, as shown in Attachment A, to store grounds maintenance equipment since 2010 when the Bowling Club relinquished their lease.

·      The Croquet Club would like to utilise part of this shed and would share it with other user groups.

·      The Croquet Club would discuss the possibility of installing doors directly onto their existing leased grounds area so that they don't have to access it through Area C as shown on Attachment A.

·      The Trust has indicated that they would like to share the equipment shed and a formal occupancy agreement would be put in place between the two parties, subject to Council approval.

5.12       Christchurch Petanque Club Incorporated

·      The petanque grounds were located on the former North Hagley Bowling Club bowling greens to the north of the Botanic Gardens.  The former North Hagley Bowling Club clubrooms (RSA Pavilion) building required extensive earthquake strengthening and a lease was never formalised for utilisation of the building.  These clubrooms have since been demolished in 2015 as a result of extensive earthquake damage in 2010/2011.

·      The Christchurch Petanque Club have expressed interest in the former United Bowling Club's lawn bowls area and utilisation of the clubrooms.

·      A memorandum of understanding between the Petanque Club and Rugby Club has been undertaken to facilitate the shared usage of these areas.

·      As part of the rebuild programme, funding has been allocated in Tranche 1 for a project to re-establish petanque in Hagley Park.  Council's Senior Project Manager in conjunction with the Parks Unit have undertaken to re-establish petanque pistes in this area if the parties are granted a lease.

5.13       High School Old Boys Rugby Club

·      The Rugby Club is interested in taking a lease over all areas available.

·      They have indicated a willingness to share facilities and work with other clubs and organisations to make maximum use of the available buildings and grounds.

·      A memorandum of understanding between the Petanque Club and Rugby Club has been undertaken to facilitate the shared usage of these areas.

·      The Rugby Club is interested in developing an all-weather training surface that would be suitable for off-field training, touch, junior club training and would also suit the pitch requirements for petanque pistes.

5.14       Hagley Park Tennis Club

·      The tennis club was formed in 1905 and was referred to in their original lease document as The United Bowling, Tennis and Croquet Club.  A lease was granted between King Edward VII and the Club.  The tennis club have occupied Hagley Park ever since.

·      The United clubs shared a pavilion which was unfortunately destroyed by fire.

·      The "United" clubs separated in 1982 and tennis completed construction of their own pavilion on the site.  They changed their name to Hagley Park Tennis Club in 2004.

·      The tennis club holds an interest in the leased area subject to the RFP.  There is a right of access in the leased area for the conveyance of electricity from the site of the old pavilion, the right to lay and maintain water supply pipes and access to the pump head (and maintenance of same) along the land and the right to dispose of refuse in an area shared by the surrounding clubs.  This interest is recorded in their current lease with the Council, as well as similar provisions in the lease with United Croquet Club.  It will be documented in the proposed lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust.

·      The Tennis Club wrote to the Council's Leasing Team Leader to advise that it did not wish to express an interest in the RFP but requested officers ensure that the Lease Plan and lease documents reflected the above arrangements.

 

Hagley Park Management Plan 2007

5.15       The Hagley Park Management Plan became operative on 16 August 2007.

5.16       One of the key elements of the vision for the park is to have a space that is "managed effectively for a variety of public recreational uses, with access and facilities provided to a level that is acceptable in terms of impact on the Park's environment".

5.17       Hagley Park is classified as Recreation Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 "for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public … with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and on outdoor recreational activities …"

5.18       Clubs and organisations occupying the Park with activities that are compatible with the purpose of the Park and don't compromise the optimum public benefit being achieved for the areas occupied are required to enter into negotiation for formal lease agreements with the Council.

5.19       The operative management plan did not consider clubrooms and associated grounds for the purpose of rugby or petanque in this area of Hagley Park.   It would not have been envisioned that the Bowling Club would relinquish their lease leaving behind built assets such as the clubrooms and equipment sheds.

5.20       Objective 13 of the plan entitled "Organised Recreation":

To maximise the recreational potential of the park but limit ancillary developments such as buildings and car-parking which detract from the park's landscape values.

The relevant policies to achieve the above objective which need to be considered prior to granting a lease are:

Formal lease agreements shall be required where sports clubs occupy land and/or buildings in Hagley Park.

 If the Trust's application is successful, a lease agreement will be entered into.

Sports clubs with direct links to Hagley Park should be encouraged to consolidate their clubrooms on the Park in favour of fewer buildings that can better provide for user needs.

5.21       Objective 17 of the plan entitled "Buildings and Structures":

To keep to a minimum the number of new buildings on the park and to coordinate and integrate the existing Hagley Park buildings and structures into the Park environment.  To protect historic buildings and structures within the park.

The relevant policies to achieve the above objective which need to be considered prior to granting a lease are:

All opportunities for multiple use of Hagley Park's recreational facilities shall be investigated and, where possible and practical to do so, implemented to ensure the maximum use is made of existing facilities by a wide range of sports.

The Trust's proposal is to utilise a building that was previously owned by a club that has now vacated Hagley Park.  Utilising the existing building to bring together multiple sporting codes and recreational activities reduces the need for a new building in the Park.

5.22       Objective 30 of the plan entitled "Leases, Licences and Rights to Occupy Facilities":

To manage the use of Hagley Park by sports clubs and other organisations.

The relevant policies to achieve the above objective which needs to be considered prior to granting a lease are:

Leases shall be negotiated in accordance with Section 54 of the Reserves Act 1977 for the use of land and buildings on Hagley Park held by sports clubs or other organisations.

The conditions of any lease shall be based on those prescribed in the First Schedule to the Reserves Act 1977 and on such other conditions and charges the Council may from time to time determine.

Any new and renegotiated deeds of lease shall include a clause requiring that all details of financial income and expenditure be made available, on request, to the Council.

No automatic right of renewal shall be included in any lease document.

The Deed of Lease will be prepared in accordance with the above provisions.

Reserves Act 1977 and Advertising

5.23       Public advertising of the proposal is not required if the proposal is foreshadowed in the management plan for the park.

5.24       Staff are recommending that advertising of the lease be undertaken as the Hagley Park Management Plan did not contemplate occupation of the subject site to be occupied by sports user groups such as Rugby or Petanque and other recreational activities like Bridge and Touch Rugby; the subject site specified croquet, tennis and lawn bowls.

5.25       Therefore, Section 54(2) of the Reserves Act 1977 requires the Council to publicly advertise the Council's intention to offer the Trust a lease.  If submissions are received, and submitters wish to be heard in support of their submission, it will be necessary to convene a Reserves Hearing Panel to hear submitters' views prior to the panel making a recommendation back to the Council.

Delegations

5.26       The Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board does not have delegated authority from the Council to make the decision on behalf of the Council to grant a lease where the application is considered to have an influence on a park that is considered more than local and is of a metropolitan significance.  

5.27       Officers deem the leasing of any parts of Hagley Park to be of metropolitan significance.  This report is therefore placed before the Board to enable it to make a recommendation to the Council.

Minister of Conservation Delegations

 

5.28       On 12 June 2013, the Minister of Conservation delegated to all territorial authorities powers, functions and duties where the territorial authority is the administering body of the relevant reserve.  These delegations cannot be sub-delegated to a Community Board level.

5.29       In exercising the Minister’s delegation, the administering body (i.e. Council) must give consideration to those matters previously applied by the Minister, for example ensuring that:

·                The land has been correctly identified;

·                The necessary statutory processes have been followed;

·                The functions and purposes of the Reserves Act have been taken into account in respect to the classification and purpose of the reserve as required under section 40 of the Act;

·                The administering body has considered submissions and objections from affected parties and that, on the basis of the evidence, the decision is a reasonable one;

·                Pursuant to the requirements of section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, the administering body has consulted with and considered the views of tangata whenua or has in some other way been able to make an informed decision.

·                Council officers have publically notified the Council’s intentions to consider granting North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust a lease for 33 years.

·                Council officers are satisfied that the proposed lease complies with the Minister’s requirements.

Annual Rent

5.30       The annual rent for the ground lease is determined using the Council's Sports Lease Charges policy.

5.31       The annual rent would be reviewed three-yearly and calculated as:

Leased Area

Area Assessed

2014 Rate per m2

Excl GST

Including 15% GST

Building Footprint

295

 $       0.6806

 $         200.78

 $                    230.89

Greenspace Area

5092.5

 $       0.1702

 $         866.74

 $                    996.76

Total

5387.5

 

 $      1,067.52

 $                 1,227.65

6.       Option 1 - Grant a Lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust (preferred)

Option Description

6.1          To grant a lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust over the area of Hagley Park previously occupied by United Bowling Club Incorporated.

Significance

6.2          The level of significance of this option is medium; consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are required and will be carried out through the legislative process set down in the Reserves Act 1977.

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.

Community Views and Preferences

6.4          Sports user groups including Rugby, Petanque and Croquet are specifically affected by this option due to their desire to utilise the grounds and buildings made available with the departure of United Bowling Club.  Their views are supportive of entering into a lease agreement with the Council.

6.5          The views of the wider community are unknown at this stage.  Public advertising of the intention to grant a lease will capture those views and preferences.  A Reserves Panel Hearing may need to be called to deal with any objections to the intention to grant a new lease over this area of Hagley Park that cannot be satisfied by Council officers.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.7          Cost of Implementation - Public Advertising, Hearing Panel and Lease Preparation Costs to be recovered from North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust; staff time which is covered in current operational budgets.  If the lease is approved there will be funds from the Tranche 1 project to tidy up that area of Hagley Park where petanque was located by Victoria Lake after helping to establish new petanque pistes on the former United Bowling Club greens.

6.8          Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Lessee's ongoing costs.

6.9          Funding source - Lessee to source.

Legal Implications

6.10       A Deed of Lease will be prepared to document the lease arrangement.  The Trust will be responsible for the cost of preparing the new deed which is $250 plus GST.

Risks and Mitigations

6.11       The risk in granting a lease for a period of up to 33 years is that the Lessees may cease to operate.  To mitigate the risk, the lease will consist of three terms of 11 years which provides an opportunity for the Lessee to determine any changes in the level of service they provide to their members and the public.  The lease documentation will protect the Council's interest at Hagley Park and provide measures for dealing with early termination, assignment or abandonment.

Implementation

6.12       Implementation dependencies  - Recommendation by Community Board; Resolution by Council; Public Notification of Intention to Grant Lease; Possible requirement for Reserves Hearing Panel

6.13       Implementation timeframe - Two to six months

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.14       The advantages of this option include:

·         Maximising the recreational potential of the park.

·         Keeping to a minimum the number of new buildings on the park.

·         Utilising existing buildings for use by more than one sporting code.

·         Concluding the occupation on the park by United Bowling Club.

·         Supports the recommendation of the Hagley Ferrymead Community Board to find new Lessees for the former leased site.

6.15       The disadvantages of this option include:

·      An area of Hagley Park occupied exclusively by sports and recreational user groups.

7.       Option 2 - Not grant a lease to North Hagley Community Sports and Recreation Charitable Trust

Option Description

7.1          Not grant a lease.

Significance

7.2          The level of significance of this option is low which differs from section 2 of this report due to the decision being made.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not required.

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          The former United Bowling Club Incorporated members are specifically affected by this option due to their desire to sell their asset, being the clubrooms and equipment shed.  Their views are not supportive of this option and would create financial hardship to the trustees of the Club who are wanting to finalise all activities (i.e. sale of buildings) in order to wind-up with Companies Branch.

7.5          The members of the Trust, their players and families are also specifically affected by this option as they wish to establish a home base at Hagley Park.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.7          Cost of Implementation - not quantified however costs would include staff time and resources to facilitate the removal or on-sale of the buildings and improvements and reinstating the land into open park space.

7.8          Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - if the buildings were not removed by the current owner, United Bowling Club, the Council could find itself in a position to cover the costs for removal of the buildings and improvements, or ongoing maintenance if the buildings and improvements were left in situ.

7.9          The Council has committed in Tranche 1 to re-establish petanque at Hagley Park.  If the lease was not approved the Council would then need to commence further work to make this happen. 

7.10       Funding source - there is no budget provided for the Council to facilitate this option.

Legal Implications

7.11       The current lease provides the guidelines to deal with the termination and non-renewal of the lease.  In this instance, the Lessor (Council) is required to ensure that any other incoming Lessee will pay to the outgoing Lessee the value as determined by the Lessor of all buildings and other improvements belonging to the Lessee.

Risks and Mitigations

7.12       If the Council does not grant a new lease then it may be faced with the costs to remove the improvements.  To mitigate this risk the Council could ask that the Bowling Club remove the improvements but they may not have the financial resources to do so and Council could find itself liable to remove the improvements from the reserve. One way to remove that risk is to approve the granting of a new lease.

Implementation

7.13       Implementation dependencies - not applicable

7.14       Implementation timeframe - not applicable

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.15       The advantages of this option include:

·      Opening up of Hagley Park by removing buildings and improvements. 

7.16       The disadvantages of this option include:

·      Does not support the recommendation of the Hagley Ferrymead Community Board to find new Lessees for the former leased site.

·      Displacing established recreational activities from a park with built infrastructure that could serve a purpose to the sporting codes that expressed an interest in the RFP.

·      Unnecessary financial hardship to United Bowling Club if required to remove the buildings and improvements.  United Croquet Club shares an internal block wall with the Bowling Club and this would be quite costly to the Croquet Club if they had to remodel their part of the building.

·       Financial implications to the Council if the Bowling Club does not remove the improvements.

·      Lack of facilities for sporting and recreational activities which may then lead to further applications from individual clubs to build club rooms and facilities at Hagley Park for the same purposes.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a 

United Bowling Club - Areas for Lease Plan - Attachment A

 

b 

United Bowling Clubrooms Photos - Attachment B

 

 

 

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

Kathy Jarden

Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Approved By

Brent Smith

Andrew Rutledge

Mary Richardson

Team Leader Asset Planning and Management

Head of Parks

General Manager Customer & Community

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board  – 15 June 2016

 

11.    Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Deputation

Reference:

16/703547

Contact:

Barbara Strang

barbara.strang@ccc.govt.nz

941 6601

 

 

 

1.   Consideration

 

At its meeting on 16 June 2016, the Hagley/Ferrymead Board heard a deputation from Ms Irinka Britnell and Ms Robyn Kilty of the Englefield Resident’s Association. 

 

Ms Britnell and Ms Kilty expressed to the Board that in their opinion, Christchurch has lost a considerable amount of its built heritage since the earthquakes in 2011 and asked if there are processes within the Council that protect demolition of heritage buildings.  Ms Britnell and Ms Kilty also raised concern about a tree removal on the corner of Avonside Drive and Fitzgerald Avenue which has not been replaced yet.

 

The Board considered the issues raised by the deputation, and decided to request that the Council develop a strategy for the future protection of natural and built heritage. 

 

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

 

The Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board recommend that the Council urgently develop a heritage strategy for natural and built heritage.

 

 

Secretarial Note:  Staff have advised that work on developing a Heritage Strategy has been put on hold while staff resources have been directed to the replacement District Plan Review process.  The Heritage Strategy will commence in the 2016/2017 financial year, once Heritage staff resources are no longer required to support the District Plan review.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

12.    Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Minutes - 31 May 2016

Reference:

16/675237

Contact:

Barbara Strang

barbara.strang@ccc.govt.nz

941 6601

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board held a meeting on 31 May 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board meeting held 31 May 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board - 31 May 2016

92

 

 

Signatories

Author

Barbara Strang

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

13.    Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board Minutes - 15 June 2016

Reference:

16/703602

Contact:

Barbara Strang

barbara.strang@ccc.govt.nz

941 6601

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board held a meeting on 15 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board meeting held 15 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board - 15 June 2016

100

 

 

Signatories

Author

Barbara Strang,       Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

14.    Riccarton/Wigram Community Board Minutes - 31 May 2016

Reference:

16/639778

Contact:

Peter Dow

peter.dow@ccc.govt.nz

941 6501

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Riccarton/Wigram Community Board held a meeting on 31 May 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Riccarton/Wigram Community Board meeting held 31 May 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Riccarton/Wigram Community Board - 31 May 2016

110

 

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Dow

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

15.    Riccarton/Wigram Community Board Minutes - 14 June 2016

Reference:

16/776274

Contact:

Peter Dow

peter.dow@ccc.govt.nz

941 6501

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Riccarton/Wigram Community Board held a meeting on 14 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Riccarton/Wigram Community Board meeting held 14 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Riccarton/Wigram Community Board - 14 June 2016

116

 

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Dow,               Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Shirley/Papanui Community Board  – 1 June 2016

 

16.    Notice of Motion

Reference:

16/649975

Contact:

Judith Pascoe

Judith.pascoe@ccc.govt.nz

941 5414

 

 

 

 

1.   Staff Recommendations

 

That the Shirley/Papanui Community Board:

1.         Accepts the Notice of Motion from Mike Davidson regarding the proposed installation of a pedestrian refuge island.

2.         That the Shirley/Papanui Community Board requests that the Council investigate:

a.         Installing a pedestrian refuge island on the Main North Road between Harewood and Langdons Roads in the vicinity of Age Concern which is situated at 24 Main North Road

b.         Restricting traffic movements out of Loftus Road on to the Main North Road to left turn only in order to create a more pedestrian friendly environment to allow people, many of whom are elderly, to cross the Main North Road safely without having to walk to the signalised crossing points.

 

2.   Shirley/Papanui Community Board Decisions Under Delegation

 

Part C

That the Shirley/Papanui Community Board:

1.         Accepts the Notice of Motion from Mike Davidson regarding the proposed installation of a pedestrian refuge island.

 

3.   Shirley/Papanui Community Board Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

That the Council requests that staff investigate:

a.         Installing a pedestrian refuge island on the Main North Road between Harewood and Langdons Roads in the vicinity of Age Concern which is situated at 24 Main North Road

b.         Restricting traffic movements out of Loftus Road on to the Main North Road to left turn only in order to create a more pedestrian friendly environment to allow people, many of whom are elderly, to cross the Main North Road safely without having to walk to the signalised crossing points.

 

Secretarial Note:  Staff advice to assist the Council in considering the Board’s recommendation on this matter will be provided to Councillors under separate cover.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Notice of Motion

127

 

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Notice of Motion

Reference:

16/603699

Contact:

Judith Pascoe

Judith.pascoe@ccc.govt.nz

941 5414

 

 

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

 

1.       Recommendation to Shirley/Papanui Community Board

That the Shirley/Papanui Community Board:

4.              Accepts the Notice of Motion from Mike Davidson regarding the proposed installation of a pedestrian refuge island.

5.              That the Shirley/Papanui Community Board requests that the Council investigate:

a.              installing a pedestrian refuge island on the Main North Road between Harewood and Langdons Roads in the vicinity of Age Concern which is situated at 24 Main North Road

b.             restricting traffic movements out of Loftus Road on to the Main North Road to left turn only in order to create a more pedestrian friendly environment to allow people, many of whom are elderly, to cross the Main North Road safely without having to walk to the signalised crossing points.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

17.    Shirley/Papanui Community Board Minutes - 1 June 2016

Reference:

16/649951

Contact:

Judith Pascoe

Judith.pascoe@ccc.govt.nz

941 5414

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Shirley/Papanui Community Board held a meeting on 1 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Shirley/Papanui Community Board meeting held 1 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Shirley/Papanui Community Board - 1 June 2016

130

 

 

Signatories

Author

Judith Pascoe,         Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

Secretarial Note:  A Council decision is not required for the Part A reccomendation of item 8 of these minutes and the resolution has been directed to staff


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

18.    Shirley/Papanui Community Board Minutes - 15 June 2016

Reference:

16/745264

Contact:

Judith Pascoe

Judith.pascoe@ccc.govt.nz

941 5414

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Shirley/Papanui Community Board held a meeting on 15 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Shirley/Papanui Community Board meeting held 15 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Shirley/Papanui Community Board - 15 June 2016

138

 

 

Signatories

Author

Judith Pascoe,         Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board  – 20 May 2016

 

19.    Elected Members Information Exchange - Community Board Flier

Reference:

16/601348

Contact:

Faye Collins

faye.collins@ccc.govt.nz

941 5108

 

 

 

1.    Consideration

 

A proposal to distribute a single page flier to inform residents about Community Boards was discussed.

 

 

2.    Recommendation to Council

 

That the Board recommends that the Council requests staff  to investigate the development of a single page flier about Christchurch Community Boards, which can be obtained in libraries and service centres, as well as posted out with rates notices and other messages from the Christchurch City Council.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

20.    Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 20 May 2016

Reference:

16/601232

Contact:

Faye Collins

faye.collins@ccc.govt.nz

941 5108

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board held a meeting on 20 May 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board meeting held 20 May 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board - 20 May 2016

148

 

 

Signatories

Author

Faye Collins,             Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

21.    Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 8 June 2016

Reference:

16/673392

Contact:

Faye Collins

Faye.collins@ccc.govt.nz

941 5108

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board held a meeting on 8 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board meeting held 8 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board - 8 June 2016

156

 

 

Signatories

Author

Annette Wilson

Governance Support Officer

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

22.    Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 17 June 2016

Reference:

16/784992

Contact:

Faye Collins

Faye.collins@ccc.gmail.com

941 5108

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board held a meeting on 17 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board meeting held 17 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board - 17 June 2016

162

 

 

Signatories

Author

Annette Wilson,     Governance Support Officer

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Burwood/Pegasus Community Board  – 16 May 2016

 

23.    Mairehau Road Improvement Plan

Reference:

16/573136

Contact:

Peter Croucher

Peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

 

1.   Consideration

 

Philip Haythornthwaite, President of Canterbury Disabled Persons' Assembly Christchurch spoke to the Board regarding his submission on the Mairehau Road Improvement Plan.  Mr Haythornthwaite sought a change to the plan to ensure it meets all the needs of any person with a disability.  Staff advice was received on the points made in the deputation. 

 

2.   Decisions Under Delegation

 

Part B

 

That the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board:

1.    Notes that a report on the Mairehau Road Improvement Plan will be presented to the Board for a decision in June 2016.

2.    Thanks Philip Haythornthwaite for his deputation.

 

Chairperson Cummings/Member East                                                                                                   Carried

 

 

 

Part C

 

That the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board:

1.    Requests staff to provide assurance that all legal requirements for the needs of the disabled will be incorporated within the Mairehau Road Safety Improvements project.

 

Chairperson Cummings/Member East                                                                                                   Carried

 

3.   Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

 

That the Council:

1.    Ensures that the Disability Strategy and all other related policies are fully considered for each and every street works. 

 

 

Secretarial Note:  Staff have advised that on 1 May 2016 Chris Gregory, Head of Transport, met with Philip Haythornthwaite to discuss this issue and other more general concerns around bus stop facilities as they impact on the mobility impaired.  As a result of the meeting the shortcomings of the Mairehau Road bus stop will be addressed.  In addition, staff agreed to undertake ongoing regular liaison meetings with Philip to discuss the upcoming programme of work and any issues his organisation may have.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Burwood/Pegasus Community Board  – 20 June 2016

 

24.    Waterways Maintenance Contract Review

Reference:

16/743866

Contact:

Peter Croucher

peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

 

1.   Consideration

 

At its meeting on 20 June 2016 the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board noted that on occasion mowing of the overgrown riverbank vegetation does not extend down to the water’s edge and that the banks are maintained by two different teams – Land Drainage and Parks.

 

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

 

That the Council consider when the relevant waterways maintenance contract is reviewed, awarding the mowing contract of the river banks to a single contractor to cover from the water’s edge to the road/land side of the stopbanks.

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Burwood/Pegasus Community Board  – 20 June 2016

 

25.    Community Board Delegations - Levels of service and local contracts

Reference:

16/743895

Contact:

Peter Croucher

peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

 

1.   Consideration

 

At its meeting on 20 June 2016 the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board made the following recommendation to the Council.

 

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

 

That the Council consider as part of its review of delegations to Community Boards, giving Community Boards greater input into levels of service and the provision of local contracts.

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

26.    Burwood/Pegasus Community Board Minutes - 16 May 2016

Reference:

16/657459

Contact:

Peter Croucher

Peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Burwood/Pegasus Community Board held a meeting on 16 May 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board meeting held

16 May 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Burwood/Pegasus Community Board - 16 May 2016

176

 

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Croucher

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

27.    Burwood/Pegasus Community Board Minutes - 7 June 2016

Reference:

16/717368

Contact:

Peter Croucher

Peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Burwood/Pegasus Community Board held a meeting on 7 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board meeting held     7 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Burwood/Pegasus Community Board - 7 June 2016

186

 

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Croucher,     Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

28.    Burwood/Pegasus Community Board Minutes - 20 June 2016

Reference:

16/745644

Contact:

Peter Croucher

peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Burwood/Pegasus Community Board held a meeting on 20 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board meeting held 20 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Burwood/Pegasus Community Board - 20 June 2016

192

 

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Croucher,     Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

29.    Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board Minutes - 30 May 2016

Reference:

16/627066

Contact:

Edwina Cordwell

edwina.cordwell@ccc.govt.nz

03 941-6728

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board held a meeting on 30 May 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board meeting held 30 May 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board - 30 May 2016

202

 

 

Signatories

Author

Edwina Cordwell

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

30.    Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board Minutes - 13 June 2016

Reference:

16/680728

Contact:

Judith Pascoe

judith.pascoe@ccc.govt.nz

03 941-5414

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board held a meeting on 13 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board meeting held 13 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board - 13 June 2016

208

 

 

Signatories

Author

Judith Pascoe

Community Board Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Regulation and Consents Committee  – 16 June 2016

 

31.    Parks and Reserves Bylaw - report back on scattering of ashes

Reference:

16/723592

Contact:

Claire Bryant

Claire.bryant@ccc.govt.nz

941 8876

 

 

 

1.    Committee Comment

 

Staff requested that the Committee add a resolution to complete the Bylaw with the inclusion of recommendation 3 “Amend 13.3(c)(ii) of the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 to align with the recent Drone Policy “has a total flying weight of not more than 1.5kg; and”.

 

2.    Staff Comment

 

Owing to a delay in adopting the Bylaw, staff requested that the Council consider the following recommendation along with the Committee recommendation:

That the Council:

 

(a)       Notes that on 13 November 2014, the Council delegated various powers under the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014 to the Chief Executive, and that the Council approved the delegation on the basis that it did not take effect until the Council has made the Bylaw (refer resolutions 31.1.4 and 31.4); and

 

(b)       Confirms that the delegation will now take effect on 1 September 2016 in relation to the Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

 

That the Regulation and Consents Committee:

1.         Resolve that Parks Unit staff report back to the Council with:

a.    options for scattering ashes in cemeteries (current and/or future) and a draft amendment to the existing Cemeteries Handbook as required to enable scattering of ashes.

b.    designated sites for scattering of ashes within Council’s open space areas, with management guidelines for any agreed site to be developed with the relevant Rūnanga.

c.     draft guidelines explaining options and informing the public of best practice for scattering ashes taking account of cultural protocol and practices.

2.         Resolve to adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 (Attachment E) and:

a.   that the form of the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 is the most appropriate form, and that the bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

b.  that the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 comes into force on 1 September 2016.

c.   that staff are otherwise authorised to make any typographical changes or correct minor errors as the case may be before the Bylaw comes into force.

d.  that the Council give public notice that the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 has been made by the Council, that it comes into effect on 1 September 2016 and that copies of the bylaw may be inspected and obtained at the Council’s offices or on its website, without payment.

 

4.   Regulation and Consents Committee Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Resolve that Parks Unit staff report back to the Council with:

a.    options for scattering ashes in cemeteries (current and/or future) and a draft amendment to the existing Cemeteries Handbook as required to enable scattering of ashes

b.    designated sites for scattering of ashes within Council’s open space areas, with management guidelines for any agreed site to be developed with the relevant Rūnanga

c.     draft guidelines explaining options and informing the public of best practice for scattering ashes taking account of cultural protocol and practices.

2.         Resolve to adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 (Attachment E) and:

a.   that the form of the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 is the most appropriate form, and that the bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

b.  that the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 comes into force on 1 September 2016

c.   that staff are otherwise authorised to make any typographical changes or correct minor errors as the case may be before the Bylaw comes into force

d.  that the Council give public notice that the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 has been made by the Council, that it comes into effect on 1 September 2016 and that copies of the bylaw may be inspected and obtained at the Council’s offices or on its website, without payment.

3.         Amend 13.3(c)(ii) of the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 to align with the recent Drone Policy “has a total flying weight of not more than 1.5kg; and”.

Additional Staff Recommendations

That the Council:

a.   Notes that on 13 November 2014, the Council delegated various powers under the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014 to the Chief Executive, and that the Council approved the delegation on the basis that it did not take effect until the Council has made the Bylaw (refer resolutions 31.1.4 and 31.4); and

b.  Confirms that the delegation will now take effect on 1 September 2016 in relation to the Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Parks and Reserves Bylaw - report back on scattering of ashes

216

 

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A: Potential areas within parks for designating

229

b

Attachment B: Mahaanui Kurataiao report

234

c

Attachment C: Auckland Council flyer

242

d

Attachment D: Proposed bylaw showing Hearings Panel changes

244

e

Attachment E: final proposed bylaw with Hearings Panel changes incorporated

258

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Parks and Reserves Bylaw - report back on scattering of ashes

Reference:

16/564191

Contact:

Claire Bryant

claire.bryant@ccc.govt.nz

941-8876

 

 

1.       Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1          The purpose of this report is to recommend to the Council that it approve further steps in relation to the scattering of ashes on Council land and adopts the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016.

Origin of Report

1.2          This report is prepared in response to a memo from the Mayor of 10 July 2015 in relation to the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016:  "That staff consult further and report back to the Council as to possible resolutions for the outstanding issue in relation to the scattering and burial of ashes."

1.2.1     This report has been prepared for the Committee after undertaking targeted stakeholder consultation and immediately after receiving the Papatipu Rūnanga consultation report (Attachment B) from Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd in mid-May 2016.

2.       Significance

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

2.1.1     The overall level of significance is determined as medium.  Although the estimated number of ashes currently being scattered on Council land is low, the decision is considered to have medium-high significance with regard to the cultural impact of the decision on Maori and on the Council's relationship with Maori.

3.       Staff Recommendations

That the Regulation and Consents Committee:

1.              Resolve that Parks Unit staff report back to the Council with:

a.       options for scattering ashes in cemeteries (current and/or future) and a draft amendment to the existing Cemeteries Handbook as required to enable scattering of ashes

b.      designated sites for scattering of ashes within Council’s open space areas, with management guidelines for any agreed site to be developed with the relevant Rūnanga

c.       draft guidelines explaining options and informing the public of best practice for scattering ashes taking account of cultural protocol and practices.

2.              Resolve to adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 (Attachment E) and:

a.    that the form of the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 is the most appropriate form, and that the bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

c.     that the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 comes into force on 1 September 2016

d.    that staff are otherwise authorised to make any typographical changes or correct minor errors as the case may be before the Bylaw comes into force

e.    that the Council give public notice that the Christchurch City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 has been made by the Council, that it comes into effect on 1 September 2016 and that copies of the bylaw may be inspected and obtained at the Council’s offices or on its website, without payment.

 

4.       Key Points

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

4.1.1     Activity: Strategic Planning and  Policy

·                Level of Service: 17.0.19 Bylaws and regulatory policies are reviewed to meet statutory timeframes and changing needs

4.2          A non-regulatory and pro-active approach to the scattering of ashes is preferred - one that provides a range of choices and actively educates/informs the public about why it matters. The option of prohibiting the scattering of ashes in parks and gardens through the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw was not considered feasible due to the impracticality of enforcement.  The practice tends to happen on weekends and evenings when few staff are present and, although family and friends may gather for a period of time, the act of scattering can happen very quickly and may not be observed by staff.  Because of this, regardless of any bylaw prohibition, the Council would not be able to guarantee to the community and to iwi in particular that, in fact, there had been no ashes scattered in a particular park or garden. 

4.3          The following feasible options have been considered:

           Option 1 - Pro-active approach to scattering ashes and adopt the Parks and Reserves Bylaw (preferred option)

Investigate non-regulatory approaches such as scatter gardens in cemeteries (particularly any planned cemeteries in development) - a formal approach which enables name registration in the database for future genealogical searches; facilitate less formal ash scattering (e.g. no name registration in a database, no memorialisation) by identifying designated sites in Council open space areas and developing management guidelines for any site with the appropriate Rūnanga; develop a Code of Practice and publish public information about best practice for scattering ashes; and adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016.  (Note while the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw referred to 2014, it will now refer to 2016). The proposed bylaw is silent on the matter of scattering ashes in parks i.e. it does not prohibit the practice.

·                Option 2 – Proactive approach to scattering ashes and do not adopt the proposed bylaw

Investigate all non-regulatory alternatives (as outlined in Option 1) but do NOT adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw.  Not adopting the bylaw is an option as the Local Government Act merely requires existing bylaws to be reviewed every ten years to remain in force - they do not have to be changed.  However, this would mean the proposed amendments to the bylaw would not be adopted and not be considered again until the next review, due in 2023.  Option 2 retains the current 2008 bylaw, which is silent on scattering ashes.  The current 2008 bylaw is also silent on a range of nuisance issues in parks such as noise and parking; relying on other bylaws to manage these matters.  These latter matters have been remedied in the proposed bylaw.

·                Option 3 - Status quo - do nothing

Do not investigate non-regulatory options and do not adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016.  This is not a preferred option as all those consulted, particularly the Papatipu Rūnanga consultation report (Attachment A) from Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd, support the Council considering non-regulatory alternatives as outlined in Option 1.  Not adopting the proposed bylaw is a potential option for the Council but not preferred for the reasons outlined in Option 2.

4.1          Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.1.1     The advantages of this option include:

·                It takes an educative rather than regulatory approach to informing the public about considerate and responsible disposal of ashes/human remains and provides a range of alternatives other than scattering in a multi-use public park.

·                It plans for an expected increase in the number of cremations and resulting demand for ash scattering options taking account of cultural protocol and practices.

·                It allows staff to work through the complexity of meeting the requirements/ expectations of the Regional Land and Water Plan, the proposed Canterbury Air Regional Plan and the Iwi Management Plan when developing a range of options.

·                It enables staff to bring well-formulated alternatives to the Council for further consultation (if so directed).

·                It adopts the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 within the current term of the elected members using the findings from the special procedure consultation and Hearings Panel already undertaken.

4.1.2     The disadvantages of this option include:

·                Investigating these alternatives and developing new service delivery plans is complex, may take some time and may incur further costs for the Council.  These costs may be balanced by savings from using cemetery land more efficiently.  This report recommends that the costs and benefits of the alternatives are to be investigated by operational staff and reported back to the Council for further consideration.

 

5.       Context/Background

5.1          In mid-2014 the Council consulted the community on a proposed new Parks and Reserves Bylaw following completion of a review and considered the recommendations of the Hearings Panel in November 2014.  At this meeting the Council asked the Panel to further consider clause 6 relating to the scattering and burial of ashes in parks and reserves, as well as two other issues.  In March 2015 the Panel reported back with recommendations to remove reference to the scattering and burial of ashes from the proposed bylaw (Attachment D) and that the Council investigate options outside the regulatory bylaw framework.  The Hearings Panel also made recommendations to deal with the two other issues (the wording of the clause relating to vehicles in parks and the wording of the clause relating to aircraft).

5.2          The Council did not adopt the Panel's recommendation in relation to the scattering of ashes and the Mayor issued a memo directing staff to consult those who had submitted on the 'scattering and burial of ashes' during the bylaw consultation i.e. Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd on behalf of the Papatipu Rūnanga, the Hagley/Ferrymead and Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Boards and one individual submitter.  In addition, staff were directed to consult individual Rūnanga as advised by Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd, and other identified stakeholders such as the Funeral Directors Association of New Zealand (FDANZ) and the Canterbury Cremation Society.  Staff initiated consultation with the above parties between August and December 2015 and received the final report from Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd on their consultation with Papatipu Rūnanga in early May 2016.

5.3          The total number of deaths a year in the Christchurch City Council district was 2,870 in 2015.  This number is forecast to increase to 3,550 a year by 2036 in line with current demographics (the ageing population).  The trend in New Zealand is towards a preference for cremation (70% of all deaths in New Zealand result in cremation) and, given the forecast moderate increase in demand for cemetery space, support for practical, acceptable options for dealing with ashes addresses both a community need and a potential benefit for the Council (scattering ashes rather than burials extends the use of scarce and expensive-to-provide cemetery space).

5.4          The Cremation Society of Christchurch have two sites, at Linwood and Harewood, and provide 1800 cremations a year of which 1200 are memorialised in their own cemetery gardens (both sites provide designated areas where people can scatter ashes at a cost of $95).  Given the 1200 ashes accounted for by Linwood and Harewood, and the approximate 266 annual ash interments in Council's cemeteries, a few hundred ash urns remain 'unaccounted for' within Christchurch City each year.  While some people may choose to scatter these ashes in Council parks, they have a range of other options including interment or scattering on private property; scattering outside city boundaries in natural environments; or to keeping the ashes in their urn.

5.5          While there is a forecast moderate increase in demand, the majority of ashes are being provided for (mainly interment with the Cremation Society of Christchurch) therefore this report recommends the Council investigate providing moderate additional options:

·                Identify 1-2 sites in open spaces to designate for scattering of ashes as some families may prefer this less formal approach - there will be no database record or memorialisation available in these areas (other than what is agreed to in the management guidelines with Rūnanga).

·                Identify 1-2 options to develop options for scattering ashes in existing or future planned cemeteries as some people may prefer some memorialisation and having their name recorded in the cemetery database for future genealogical searches.

6.       Consultation Feedback

6.1          The parties were consulted on the following options relating to the scattering of ashes:

·                Status quo - do not regulate against scattering of ashes.

·                Identify areas where the scattering of ashes is prohibited.

·                Identify designated areas where the scattering of ashes may occur. 

6.2          The designated parks and specific areas within each park (the orange hatched areas in Attachment A) were selected based on the following criteria:

·                Not within the most visited parks and reserves such as Garden and Heritage Parks (for example, the Botanic Gardens and Mona Vale have high amenity value and scattering ashes could potentially be offensive or a nuisance to other people using the area).

·                Not within Community Parks as these are often used for picnics or food gathering (for example, edible gardens).

·                Not within Sports Parks as these are used for active games and there is risk of inhaling or imbibing ashes scattered on the sports ground.

·                Not within 50 metres of known picnic assets (such as picnic tables and chairs).

·                Not within 50 metres of waterways as these may be food gathering sites.  

·                Not within wahi tapu sites based on silent file areas.

6.3          Based on these criteria five regional parks were identified as suitable (Barnett Park, Halswell Quarry Park, Victoria Park, Bottle Lake Forest Park and Stanbury Park) and were the subject of consultation with the Community Boards and Rūnanga.  Each of these Parks have specific areas within them that could be designated for the scattering of ashes (Attachment A). 

6.4          The relevant Papatipu Rūnanga for these parks, Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga and Ōnuku Rūnanga, have provided feedback on these options, facilitated by Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd (Attachment B).

6.5          Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga initially submitted on the Parks and Reserves Bylaw review seeking a complete prohibition on the scattering of ashes in Council parks and reserves.  The Rūnanga have amended their position and are now supportive of the Council identifying designated sites.  If the Council decide not to proceed with designated sites Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd strongly recommend that the Council advises Ngā Rūnanga and Mahaanui Kurataiao of this decision and detail the reasons for the decision.

6.6          The consultation with the Community Boards elicited a range of responses, reflecting the divergent views within the community on this issue.  All Boards support the provision of guidelines and educative material and 'other methods' such as the provision of scatter gardens as part of Council's cemetery services and buy-a-tree afforestation packages.  While not one of the 'main' options, staff note that none of the community boards expressed support for a complete prohibition of the scattering of ashes in parks and reserves. 

6.7          Four Community Boards strongly preferred the status quo of no regulation and of the regulatory options they preferred a bylaw provision which identified prohibited areas.  By contrast, the Lyttelton/Mt Herbert, Hagley/Ferrymead and Akaroa/Wairewa Community Board’s considered that the Bylaw should designate (a limited number of) sites where the scattering of ashes would be allowed.

6.8          In terms of consultation with the funeral 'industry', staff sought the views of the chief executives of the Funeral Directors Association of New Zealand (FDANZ) and of the Cremation Society of Christchurch which operates the Linwood and Harewood crematoria and memorial gardens. 

6.9          The Chief Executive of the FDANZ expressed a clear preference for the Council not to regulate using the bylaw.  The FDANZ considers that there is not enough evidence of a problem to justify a regulatory response and also questioned the Council's ability to effectively enforce a bylaw.  In 2014 the FDANZ strongly opposed an Auckland Council proposal to regulate the scattering of ashes by requiring a permit for the scattering of ashes in their draft Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw.  The FDANZ instead proposed the Council adopt guidelines and a Code of Practice, and this is the approach that has been adopted by Auckland Council (see more below).

6.10       The Chief Executive of the Cremation Society of Christchurch considered this to be a multi-layered issue requiring careful consideration.  She supported identification of prohibited areas and expressed strong support for an informative flyer setting out Council's final policy which she would recommend be distributed with each ash urn.  She also queried whether the Council could provide options rather than restrictions and suggested that the Council investigate allowing ash scattering within cemeteries with the name of the deceased entered into our database (thereby enabling genealogical searches at a later date).

6.11       Staff also undertook further internal consultation with Council staff who have primary responsibility for the operational delivery of the bylaw and park planning.  Most prefer no bylaw regulation of ashes, with designation of prohibited areas a second choice option.  Staff did not immediately favour designated sites because of potential management challenges such as ensuring that sites don't become de-facto cemeteries, preventing an undesirable concentration of ashes within one area and ensuring that the designation of a site doesn't compromise future development of a reserve.  However, staff see merit in allowing the scattering of ashes in some places – for example, similar to the Port Hills Placenta Tree Planting "May your memories grow with the trees" policy   http://www.ccc.govt.nz/services/cemeteries/casket-and-ash-burials-interments/interments/port-hills-placenta-tree-planting/.

Table 1: summary consultation feedback

Consulted agency

Feedback

Indicates support for which consulted  option

New Zealand Funeral Directors Association

Prefer non-regulatory responses e.g. Code of Practice etc

Do not regulate against scattering of ashes - adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014

Council operational staff

Non-regulatory responses e.g. Code of Practice etc, with designated sites a second choice option

Do not regulate against scattering of ashes - adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014

Community Boards overall

All support educative responses, 4 of 7 prefer non-regulatory response

Majority support for not regulating against scattering of ashes - adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014

Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board

Designate (a limited number of) sites where the scattering of ashes would be allowed

Revise the proposed bylaw, to regulate to allow the scattering of ashes in only a relatively few designated sites.

Lyttelton/Mt Herbert Community Board

Designate (a limited number of) sites where the scattering of ashes would be allowed

Revise the proposed bylaw, to regulate to allow the scattering of ashes in only a relatively few designated sites.

Papatipu Rūnanga

Designate (a limited number of) sites where the scattering of ashes would be allowed

Revise the proposed bylaw, to regulate to allow the scattering of ashes in only a relatively few designated sites.

One individual submitter

Declined to provide any further feedback on the options

N/A

Cremation Society of Christchurch

Identify prohibited areas; provide range of alternative options and education/information

Revise the proposed bylaw to regulate to prohibit the scattering of ashes in certain areas.


 

7.       Territorial/National organisation responses

7.1          Environment Canterbury (ECan) have been consulted on the matter of resource consents for scattering of ashes in existing cemeteries under the proposed Canterbury Air Regional Plan and the Regional Land and Water Plan.  Early advice received from ECan indicated that any scattering of ashes is a discharge to air and therefore a "discretionary activity for which a resource consent needs to be applied for."  Subsequent inquiries resulted in expanded and clearer advice which is summarized below in Table 2.

Table 2: Environment Canterbury resource consent advice

Option

Environment Canterbury advice

Members of the public scattering ashes in parks and reserves as an individual choice in any park or reserve

The proposed Canterbury Air Plan is silent on this matter and therefore the public do not require a resource consent to scatter ashes in any public place in Canterbury.

The Council establishing areas for scattering ashes in our existing cemeteries for members of the public to use

The spreading ashes…on land already being used for cemetery will be permitted under the Rule 5.81 of the Land and Water Regional Plan.

The Council establishing areas for scattering ashes in future cemeteries for members of the public to use

The use of land for a new cemetery or an extension to a cemetery will be permitted under Rule 5.82, provided that the conditions in the rule can be met.

The Council establishing designated sites in parks for members of the public to use to scatter ashes

This is a permitted activity under the proposed Canterbury Air Regional Plan provided that no ashes were 'blown away' over the designated boundary to become an "offensive or objectionable discharge"… and become a non-complying activity.  This might be achieved, for example, with significant border plantings or a resource consent may be sought to provide certainty.

 

7.2          Resolving the options may take some time and cost to work through and further advice will have to be sought from Environment Canterbury, Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd, and Council planners.  Designating new sites for scattering ashes (such as new sites in parks or for re-vegetation projects) may require resource consents.  The associated development costs may be balanced over time by the cost benefit of extending the use of existing cemeteries.  Option 1 enables planning work to be undertaken by operational staff AND the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 to be adopted.

7.3          The New Zealand Law Commission undertook a review of the Death, Burial and Cremation Act in 2014-15 and, rather unhelpfully, did not rule on the matter of scattering of ashes.  Instead the Commission noted in their final report that "there are a number of competing interests affected by the scattering of ashes, including the interests of the family in scattering the ashes in a location significant to the deceased person, the impact of the ashes on plants and the soil and the interests of tikanga Māori when ashes are scattered near a sacred site.  We agree that guidance is needed on the appropriate locations for the scattering of ashes so as to minimise problems, including offence to other people and cultures.  However, we do not consider that this is a matter that can be controlled nationally.”  The Commission recommended the Auckland Council approach.

7.4          Auckland Council’s Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 does not require the public to seek approval for the scattering of ashes in public places.  However, the Council has adopted a Code of Practice for ashes which includes the following explanation "Scattering human ashes on sports fields, play areas and parts of public gardens is not appropriate.  Signage at public places such as sports fields, or public gardens where scattering ashes is popular and potentially harmful to the environmental surrounds such as some public gardens, will be maintained/installed to inform the public.  Consideration must be given to the dispersal of human ashes into waterways as it is considered to be culturally inappropriate unless it is in an area specifically agreed to by tangata whenua."  The Council provides educative flyers (Attachment C).

7.5          The Wellington City Council's 'Commemorative Policy' aims to permit some practice but in a culturally sensitive and managed framework which includes a 'permission required' process and a GPS reference for future family visits.  The only approved public places for scattering or interring ashes are Willowbank Park and Charles Plimmer Park.  Under their policy the Council, the Wellington Tenths Trust and Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira Incorporated will identify suitable public sites for the scattering or interment of ashes on a case-by-case basis, on request, but these are restricted to re-vegetation areas or parks and reserves that have low to moderate public use. 

8.       Option 1 – Proactive and non-regulatory approach to scattering ashes and adopt the bylaw (preferred)

Option Description

8.1          Investigate options for scattering ashes in cemeteries (particularly any planned cemeteries in development) and re-afforestation sites; develop a Code of Practice and publish public information about best practice for scattering ashes; identify designated sites and develop management guidelines for any site with the appropriate Rūnanga; adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

8.3          This option does involve a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Māori, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

8.4          Targeted stakeholders as defined by the Council are specifically affected by this option due to their cultural, commercial or democratic interest in the topic.  Their views are covered in Table 1 and 2 and Attachment B.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

8.5.1     Cost of Implementation - staff time (approximately 1 month FTE) to undertake an investigation and report back to the Council with the costs of establishing areas for scattering ashes (either in future cemeteries or re-vegetation packages); developing and publishing educational material; and establishing designated areas in suitable areas. 

8.5.2     Maintenance/Ongoing Costs - to be determined in future reports.

8.5.3     Funding source - the costs of investigating options will come from operational budgets.

Legal Implications

8.6       There are limited legal implications in adopting a non-regulatory approach towards the scattering of ashes.  Depending on whether the Council proceeds to designate some sites for the scattering of ashes, it may have to comply with various environmental and resource consent requirements.  This option allows for the Council to proceed to make the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw that was initially consulted on in 2014 and further refined in 2015.  Staff consider that the issues to be addressed in the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw remain the same and the views and preferences that were obtained during the consultation on that proposed Bylaw remain current.  It would be desirable for these issues to be addressed by the Council in making this Bylaw before the end of the current Council’s term.    

Risks and Mitigations

8.7          The New Zealand Funeral Directors Association preference is not to designate sites.  The mitigation is to explain that the proposed Bylaw does not regulate against scattering ashes on parks and gardens.

Implementation

8.8          Implementation dependencies  - N/A

8.9          Implementation timeframe - N/A

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.10       The advantages of this option include:

·                It takes an educative, rather than regulatory approach, to informing the public about considerate and responsible disposal of ashes/human remains and provides a range of alternatives other than scattering in a multi-use public park.

·                It slans for the expected increase in the number of cremations and resulting demand for ash scattering options taking account of cultural protocol and practices.

·                It allows staff to work through the complexity of meeting the requirements/expectations of the Regional Land and Water Plan, the proposed Canterbury Air Regional Plan and the Iwi Management Plan when developing a range of options.

·                It enables staff to bring well-formulated alternatives to the Council for further consultation.

·                It adopts the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016 within the current term of the elected members using the findings from the special procedure consultation and Hearings Panel already undertaken.

8.11       The disadvantages of this option include:

·                Investigating these alternatives and developing new service delivery plans is complex, may take some time and may incur further costs for the Council.  These costs may be balanced by savings from using cemetery land more efficiently.  This report recommends that the costs and benefits of the alternatives are to be investigated and reported back to the Council for further consideration.

9.       Option 2 – Proactive and non-regulatory approach to scattering ashes and do not adopt the proposed bylaw

Option Description

9.1          Investigate options for scattering ashes in cemeteries (particularly any planned cemeteries in development) and re-afforestation sites; develop a Code of Practice and publish public information about best practice for scattering ashes; identify designated sites and develop management guidelines for any site with the appropriate Rūnanga; and do not adopt the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014.

Significance

9.2          The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are targeted consultation.

Impact on Mana Whenua

9.3          This option does involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Māori, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

9.4          Targeted stakeholders as defined by the Council are specifically affected by this option due to their cultural, commercial or democratic interest in the topic.  Their views are covered in Table 1 and 2 and Attachment A.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

9.5          This option is not inconsistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

9.6          Cost of Implementation - staff time (approximately 1 month FTE) to undertake an investigation and report back to the Council.  The lost cost of the bylaw review consultation.

9.7          Maintenance/Ongoing Costs - N/A

9.8          Funding source - the costs of investigating options will come from operational budgets.

Legal Implications

9.9       There are no particular legal implications with adopting a non-regulatory approach with respect to the scattering of ashes.  The Council will be able to continue to rely on the Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2008 because it completed the legal requirement for a review under section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002 in 2014.  However, the proposed new Parks and Reserves Bylaw did address a number of issues that arose as a result of that review, and in the long term it would be desirable to address those issues through the new proposed Bylaw in this Council’s current term. 

Risks and Mitigations

9.10        If the Council decides not to proceed with designated sites Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd has strongly recommended that the Council "advises Ngā Rūnanga and Mahaanui Kurataiao of this decision and detail the reasons for the decision".  This option may be viewed negatively by Rūnanga.  The mitigation is to provide reasonable rationale for adopting this option (e.g. 4.2 - difficult to enforce so that even with regulation the Council cannot guarantee no ashes are being scattered.) 

Implementation

9.11       Implementation dependencies  - N/A

9.12       Implementation timeframe - N/A

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

9.13       The advantages of this option include:

·                It takes an educative, rather than regulatory, approach to informing the public about considerate and responsible disposal of ashes/human remains and provides a range of alternatives other than scattering in a multi-use public park.

·                Plans for the expected increase in the number of cremations and resulting demand for ash scattering options taking account of cultural protocol and practices.

·                It allows staff to work through the complexity of meeting the requirements/expectations of the Regional Land and Water Plan, the proposed Canterbury Air Regional Plan and the Iwi Management Plan when developing a range of options.

·                It enables staff to bring well-formulated alternatives to the Council for further consultation (if so directed).

9.14       The disadvantages of this option include:

·                It misses the opportunity to adopt the changes outlined in the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014 until the next time the bylaw is reviewed. The current 2008 bylaw is silent on a range of nuisance issues in parks such as noise and parking; relying on other bylaws to manage these matters. 

·                Investigating these alternatives and developing new service delivery plans is complex, may take some time and may incur further costs for the Council.  These costs may be balanced by savings from using cemetery land more efficiently.  This report recommends that the costs and benefits of the alternatives are to be investigated and reported back to the Council for further consideration.

10.  Status Quo - do nothing

Option Description

10.1       Do not investigate options for scattering ashes; educational material, or a Code of Practice and do not reconsider the proposed Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2014.

Significance

10.2       The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are targeted consultation.

Impact on Mana Whenua

10.3       This option does involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Māori, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

10.4       Targeted stakeholders as defined by the Council are specifically affected by this option due to their cultural, commercial or democratic interest in the topic.  Their views are covered in Table 1 and 2 and Attachment A.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

10.5       This option is not inconsistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

10.6       Cost of Implementation - no costs (other than lost cost of the bylaw review consultation)

10.7       Maintenance/Ongoing Costs - N/A

10.8       Funding source - N/A

Legal Implications

10.9    The legal implications are the same as those set out in paragraph 9.9 above.

Risks and Mitigations

10.10   If the Council decides not to proceed with designated sites Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd has strongly recommended that the Council "advises Ngā Rūnanga and Mahaanui Kurataiao of this decision and detail the reasons for the decision".  This option may be viewed negatively by Rūnanga.  The mitigation is to provide reasonable rationale for adopting this option (e.g. difficult to enforce so that even with regulation the Council cannot guarantee no ashes are being scattered.) 

Implementation

10.11   Implementation dependencies  - N/A

10.12   Implementation timeframe - N/A

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

10.13   The advantages of this option include:

·                No further investigation costs are incurred.

10.14   The disadvantages of this option include:

·                Key stakeholders (Papatipu Rūnanga) may view the option not to identify designated sites, and not to regulate against scattering of ashes, as a negative outcome.  

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a 

Attachment A: Potential areas within parks for designating

 

b 

Attachment B: Mahaanui Kurataiao report

 

c 

Attachment C: Auckland Council flyer

 

d 

Attachment D: Proposed bylaw showing Hearings Panel changes

 

e 

Attachment E: final proposed bylaw with Hearings Panel changes incorporated

 

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

(iv)  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

Claire Bryant

Vivienne Wilson

Team Leader Policy

Senior Solicitor

Approved By

Helen Beaumont

Andrew Rutledge

Brendan Anstiss

Head of Strategic Policy

Head of Parks

General Manager Strategy and Transformation

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 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


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 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


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Regulation and Consents Committee  – 16 June 2016

 

32.    Temporary Alcohol Ban in Riccarton Park Areas on New Zealand Cup Day 2016

Reference:

16/723580

Contact:

Evangeline Emerenciana

Evangeline.Emerenciana@ccc.govt.nz

941 8579

 

 

 

 

1.   Regulation and Consents Committee Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Resolve it is satisfied that:

a.         There is evidence that the area to which the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2009 (the Bylaw) applies has experienced a high level of crime or disorder and that this can be shown to have been caused or made worse by alcohol consumption in the area; and

b.         The Bylaw, as applied by the resolution:

·     is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence; and

·     can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms.

2.         Resolve to impose a temporary alcohol ban from 7am to 12 midnight on 12 November 2016 (New Zealand Cup Day 2016) in areas surrounding Riccarton Park Racecourse, namely:  both sides of the streets of Yaldhurst Road to Middlepark Road; Epsom Road to Racecourse Road; Buchanans Road to Masham Road; and Masham Road to Yaldhurst Road (see Attachment A - map).

3.         Place a Public Notice in the newspaper and provide signage in key public places covered by the alcohol ban.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Temporary Alcohol Ban in Riccarton Park Areas on New Zealand Cup Day 2016

274

 

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A - Map showing the proposed Riccarton Park Racecourse Temporary Alcohol Ban Area

284

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Temporary Alcohol Ban in Riccarton Park Areas on New Zealand Cup Day 2016

Reference:

16/493908

Contact:

Evangeline Emerenciana

Evangeline.Emerenciana@ccc.govt.nz

941 8579

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Regulation and Consents Committee to consider recommending a temporary alcohol ban in the Riccarton Park Racecourse neighbourhood on 12 November 2016 from 7am to 12 midnight (New Zealand Cup Day event).

Origin of Report

1.2       The Council resolved (CNCL/2016/00231) at the 12 May 2016 meeting to investigate a temporary alcohol ban in the immediate area of the Riccarton Park Racecourse, namely:  Yaldhurst Road to Middlepark Road, Epsom Road to Racecourse Road, Buchanans Road to Masham Road and Masham Road to Yaldhurst Road (Attachment A - map) for New Zealand Cup Day on Saturday, 12 November 2016 from 12am to 12 midnight, and to report back to the Council by July 2016 through the Regulation and Consents Committee.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  Therefore, targeted consultation was undertaken.

2.2       The community engagement and consultation included emails, letters, and phone calls to the majority of local on and off-license premises and non-alcohol businesses located in areas surrounding the Riccarton Park.  Residents’ associations/community groups and some residents and schools in the area were consulted through emails.  The consultation also included face-to-face meetings with the New Zealand Police, the Alcohol Tri-Agency Group, and management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing Jockey Club.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Regulation and Consents Committee recommends the Council:

1.         Resolve it is satisfied that:

a.         There is evidence that the area to which the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2009 (the Bylaw) applies has experienced a high level of crime or disorder and that this can be shown to have been caused or made worse by alcohol consumption in the area; and

b.         The Bylaw, as applied by the resolution:

·     is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence; and

·     can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms.

2.         Resolve to impose a temporary alcohol ban from 7am to 12 midnight on 12 November 2016 (New Zealand Cup Day 2016) in areas surrounding Riccarton Park Racecourse, namely:  both sides of the streets of Yaldhurst Road to Middlepark Road; Epsom Road to Racecourse Road; Buchanans Road to Masham Road; and Masham Road to Yaldhurst Road (see Attachment A - map).

3.         Place a Public Notice in the newspaper and provide signage in key public places covered by the alcohol ban.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1      Activity:  Strategic Planning and Policy

·        Level of Service:  17.0.9 Provision of strategic advice on the social and economic issues facing the city

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·        Option 1 (preferred option) - impose a Temporary Alcohol Ban on New Zealand Cup Day 2016 in the designated public places (see Attachment A - map) around Riccarton Park Racecourse from 7am to 12 midnight on 12 November 2016.

·        Option 2 - impose a Temporary Alcohol Ban on New Zealand Cup Day 2016 in the designated public places (see Attachment A – map) around Riccarton Park Racecourse from 12am to 12 midnight on 12 November 2016.

·        Option 3 - Do not impose a Temporary Alcohol Ban on New Zealand Cup Day 2016 in the designated public places (see Attachment A - map) around Riccarton Park Racecourse area on 12 November 2016.

4.3       Alcohol Ban Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages of Option 1 (Preferred Option)

4.3.1      The advantages of this preferred option include:

·        New Zealand Police support the 7am to 12 midnight ban hours and have agreed to deploy staff and monitor these hours.

·        The risk of alcohol-induced crime and disorder related behaviour in the immediate area surrounding the venue is reduced.

·        Nuisance and general safety will be improved for all Cup Day attendees and will promote a safe environment for the neighbouring residents.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·        The ban reduces choices for responsible alcohol consumers.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       The Council, at its 12 May 2016 meeting, adopted recommendations from the Riccarton/Wigram Community Board regarding a temporary alcohol ban in the vicinity of the Riccarton Racecourse.  The Council resolved to have staff investigate the practicality of imposing a temporary alcohol ban in the Riccarton Racecourse Area on Saturday 12 November 2016 New Zealand Cup Day event, and to report back to the Council by July 2016 through the Regulation and Consents Committee.

5.2       The Community Board's recommendations to the Council for an investigation were made following correspondence received by the Board at its 14 April 2016 meeting from the management of the Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing Jockey Club requesting an alcohol ban in areas associated with Racecourse New Zealand Cup Day 2016.  It is their opinion that imposing a ban will provide a safer environment for the public and residents surrounding Riccarton Park Racecourse on Cup Day event. 

5.3       A similar request was made in 2015 by the Manager of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Chief Executive of Canterbury Racing Jockey Club to the Riccarton/Wigram Community Board through a deputation on 4 August 2015.  The Regulation and Consents Committee at its 17 September 2015 meeting decided to recommend the Council impose a temporary alcohol ban in surrounding public places associated with Racecourse New Zealand Cup Day event.  The Council, at its 15 October 2015 meeting, resolved to impose a temporary alcohol ban in public places around the Riccarton Park area on 14 November 2015 NZ Cup Day, from 7am to 12 midnight.

5.4       The New Zealand Police monitored the crowd of 20,000 at last year's NZ Cup Day.  They reported that the percentage of people drinking in and around Riccarton Park Raceway was less in 2015 compared to previous years when no ban was in place.  Police report that on the day they made twelve arrests and evicted 40 people from the event venue.

5.5       At the Tri-agency Cup Day Debriefs (attended by Riccarton Park Function Centre, Canterbury Racing Jockey Club management, New Zealand Police, Council Licensing Inspector, and Community Public Health Licensing staff) improving the management of 2016 Cup Day event in terms of compliance inside the racecourse area had been raised by the Tri-Agency Group (Council and Community Public Health Licensing staff, and New Zealand Police).  This includes ways the alcohol is sold or supplied, and the risks involved with the various areas of the event venue.

5.6       An alcohol ban was also introduced for the Addington event several years ago and is now a permanent ban.  This has proved to be a useful tool in reducing preloading and in changing people's behaviour before they get to the event.  The success of the Addington alcohol ban has encouraged Canterbury Jockey Club to propose to have a similar ban at Riccarton.  This is supported by New Zealand Police.

5.7       Local businesses and residents in the area, Residents Associations, Riccarton/Wigram Community Board, community organisations, management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing, and the Tri-Agency Group are specifically affected by the alcohol ban due to the impact of alcohol-related problems or preloading on Racecourse New Zealand Cup Day and were consulted and all support the temporary ban.

6.   Option 1 - Impose a Temporary Alcohol Ban from 7am to 12 midnight on 12 November New Zealand Cup Day 2016 (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       The Council resolves to apply a temporary alcohol ban in areas surrounding Riccarton Park Racecourse from 7am to 12midnight on 12 November New Zealand Cup Day 2016 Event.

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 low.  Stakeholders were contacted to inform them of the proposed ban through face to face meetings, emails, and phone calls.

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.

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       About 71 stakeholders were consulted, 31 have expressed inputs and support.  Their views are shown below.

6.4.1      The Riccarton/Wigram Community Board received the correspondence from Canterbury Racing and Riccarton Park Function Centre and New Zealand Police, and recommended to the Council to direct staff to investigate imposing a temporary alcohol ban this year, similar to that in 2015.

6.4.2      Staff consulted New Zealand Police to ascertain their support for the proposed temporary alcohol ban.  The Police unequivocally support another temporary alcohol ban for this year's New Zealand Cup Day.  New Zealand Police support enforcing the ban from 7am on 12 November 2016 when a number of people attending the event turn up after champagne breakfasts, and to end at 12 midnight.

6.4.3      New Zealand Police note while compliance levels with the alcohol ban at last year’s event were not good, there were considerably fewer people drinking on the way to the racecourse compared to previous years.  They believe the 2015 ban, being the first in Riccarton Park area, will set an example to many who witnessed it.  They expect the ban will reduce preloading and place some expectations on peoples' behaviour before they get to the event.

6.4.4      For this year, Police intend to deploy more staff to ensure better monitoring, road policing, and post event capability to deal with the aftermath across the city.  They believe that in the long term they should be able to reduce their staffing demand if other measures to reduce alcohol related harm come in to play.  They have suggested the Canterbury Jockey Club to produce identical signs to those of the Council to keep visitors informed of the ban.

6.4.5      The Council Alcohol Licensing Inspector and Community and Public Health Licensing Staff support imposing the temporary alcohol ban this year.  They agree with the Police that the ban be imposed from 7am to 12 midnight on the Cup Day event.  The Council Licensing Inspector believes the alcohol ban on Riccarton Cup Day is important where a high level of non-compliant alcohol drinkers still raise concerns, and there are more problems of misbehaviour than in at the Addington Trotting Cup Day.

6.4.6      Both Alcohol Licensing teams would like to see the temporary alcohol ban progress to a permanent ban applied on Cup Day each year.

6.4.7      Staff consulted the management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing Club as being the Cup Day event organisers.  Both believe imposing an alcohol ban again for this year’s Cup Day will further reduce the risks of preloading.  They highlight the ban on the 2015 Cup Day event worked well compared to the years with no ban.  Unlike the 2014 Cup Day when the organisers received a number of alcohol-related complaints, they confirmed no complaints for alcohol related disorder were received in 2015.

6.4.8      Staff consulted eight alcohol licensees (three on-licence, three off-licence and two both on- and off-licence premises) located in the area. Of these, five licenced businesses support another temporary ban this year.  They thought imposing the ban in the same area and time as in 2015 is reasonable.  Staff were unable to contact the remaining three.

6.4.9      Non-alcohol businesses in the area were also consulted.  Four non-alcohol businesses, including a Kindercare Centre support another alcohol ban the same as last year. 

6.4.10    Staff consulted the community organisations (i.e., Neighbourhood Support, and residents' associations) in the area.  Three community organisations support the ban and suggest the need to have more enforcement of the alcohol bans, including this year's Cup Day.  They would like to see the ban applied yearly to increase the awareness of the people participating in the event.

6.4.11    Staff contacted residents around the proposed ban area by way of email.  Fourteen residents fully support an alcohol ban similar to 2015.  They expect this year's ban will be much better.  They mention having found only a fraction of the bottles, cans, rubbish and broken glass left behind on streets following the 2015 Cup Day event compared to 2014.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.6       Cost of Implementation - The approximate cost of $3000 (public notices, updating previous signage) will be met from existing budgets.

6.7       Maintenance/Ongoing Costs - The cost of enforcement rests with the New Zealand Police under powers in the Local Government Act 2002.

6.8       Funding source - The City and Community Long Term Policy and Planning Activity budget.

Legal Implications

6.9       Before making a resolution, using the Council's Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places 2009 (the Bylaw), the Local Government Act 2002 (s147b) requires that the Council must be satisfied that -

(a)          There is evidence that the area to which the bylaw applies (or will apply by virtue of the resolution) has experienced a high level of crime or disorder that can be shown to have been caused or made worse by alcohol consumption in the area; and

(b)          The bylaw, as applied by the resolution, -

(i)        Is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence; and

(ii)       Can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms.

The information that covers these matters is included below in 6.10.2.

6.10    The Christchurch City Council Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2009 (the Bylaw) allows the Council to put a Temporary Alcohol Ban Area in place by resolution.  Clause 5 of the Bylaw specifies a number of matters the Council must consider before it imposes a Temporary Alcohol Ban - that the resolution must describe the specific area of the Temporary Alcohol Ban Area and the times, days or dates during which the alcohol restrictions apply to any public places in the area.

6.10.1    In accordance with Clause 5(1) of the Bylaw, the proposed resolution describes the specific area to which the Temporary Alcohol Ban will apply and the times and date that will apply.  The specific area is outlined in the Attachment A - Map.  The ban will apply on 12 November 2016 (New Zealand Cup Day 2016) from 12am to 12 midnight.

6.10.2    With respect to the consideration in Clause 5(2) of the Bylaw, the following is noted:

·        Clause 5(2)a - whether the proposed bans relate to events

This proposed Temporary Alcohol Ban on 12 November 2016 relates to New Zealand Cup Day in the area surrounding Riccarton Park Racecourse. 

The Riccarton ‘Cup Day’ has grown each year and is now a sell-out event attracting around 20,000 people.  It is now a bigger event than Cup Day at Addington in terms of numbers.  Prior to 2015, attendance to the annual Cup Day event recorded were 21,000 in 2012, and 18,000 in both 2013 and 2014.

·        Clause 5 (2)(b) - the nature and history of alcohol-related problems usually associated with the areas, together with any anticipated alcohol-related problems

The Riccarton Park and Canterbury Racing management host race meetings throughout the year and it is only the Cup Day event that gives rise to alcohol-related risks and preloading issues.

Prior to 2015 increasing incidence of preloading and misbehaviour as well as open alcohol bottles being carried on the streets around the Riccarton Park  have been reported on New Zealand Cup Day.  The problems associated with preloading typically manifest as violence, property damage, antisocial and disorderly behaviour and littering.

On the 2015 Cup Day when the alcohol ban was first imposed, there were still a significant number of people breaching the ban with high levels of intoxication occurring.  However, the number of alcohol-related crimes such as assaults, disorderly and antisocial behaviour reduced. 

·        Clause 5(2)(c) - whether the benefits to local residents and to the city would outweigh the restrictions the resolution would impose on local residents and other people, including those who may be attending any events, in the area covered by the resolution

Local residents have expressed benefits from the alcohol restrictions put in place last year.  Staff consider the benefits to local residents, visitors and to the city outweigh the restrictions imposed on Cup Day patrons, residents and other people in the area.  There has been little evidence of alcohol-related problems in the public places surrounding the Riccarton Park when the ban was imposed last year.

With the growing attendees to the event, Police consider the alcohol restriction a useful tool in minimising alcohol related harm and provides an early intervention point for police that otherwise would not exist.  

The concept of Alcohol Bans in Christchurch is well understood so compliance will increase over time.

·        Clause 5(2)(d) - any information from the Police and other sources about the proposed dates, the event or the area to be covered by the resolution

New Zealand Police recommend the temporary alcohol ban be made permanent, to occur yearly, as it does for the Addington Trotting Cup Day.  Council staff will investigate the option of this becoming a permanent ban in 2018 as part of the timetabled review of the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2009.

The New Zealand Police believe the area defined by the 2015 temporary ban was well thought-out and practical in terms of being able to define it by streets.  They strongly suggest the Council retains the number of signs erected last year in strategic locations covering the ban public places.  New Zealand Police also requested the management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing install similar signs within the Racecourse to keep visitors informed of the ban and improve compliance.

This year the event will be run under the provisions of a Special Licence with conditions on how alcohol is sold and supplied to ensure that consumption of alcohol is appropriately monitored and managed, and the risk of alcohol related harm is minimised.

6.10.3    Any other information the Council considers relevant 

·        There were newspaper reports of alcohol-related incidents on Racecourse NZ Cup Day 2015.  An excerpt of The Press dated 17 November 2015 cited that -

"NZ Police made 12 arrests and evicted 40 people at Saturday's popular annual race meeting, raising concerns about drunkenness and alcohol management.”

“The level of intoxication, generally, of that [Riccarton] crowd is too high." 

·        The management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing believe the ban will improve compliance as the ban becomes an accepted norm for visitors attending Cup Day.  They would also like the temporary alcohol ban to become permanent.

The event organisers also aim to help alcohol ban information reach a wider public via their Facebook or social media, online ticketing sales webpage, or other marketing portfolio (i.e. nomination, press release, etc.) to raise the level of ban compliance.

Risks and Mitigations

6.11    The risk for this option is stakeholders are not well informed of the ban.  To mitigate the risk, the Council will ensure good communication and information (i.e. through social media), media release provided to stakeholders.

Implementation

6.12    Implementation dependencies - New Zealand Police have powers to enforce the Bylaw, including the power to search containers and vehicles in public places for alcohol, seize and remove alcohol, and arrest any person who is found to be breaching the Bylaw.  The alcohol restrictions apply to public places such as streets, reserves and walkways over which the Council has control.

6.13    Implementation timeframe - If Council imposes a temporary alcohol ban, council staff have 15 weeks to implement the decision (including media release, public notice, putting alcohol ban signs, and ban enforcement).

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.14    The advantages of this option include:

·        New Zealand Police can control inappropriate consumption of alcohol in public places around Riccarton Park Racecourse on NZ Cup Day 2016.

·        Reduce misbehaviour problems with people preloading in public places and encourage people to celebrate responsibly.

·        Nuisance and general safety will be improved for all Cup Day attendees and promote safe environment for the neighbouring residents.

6.15    The disadvantages of this option include:

·        The ban reduces choices for responsible alcohol consumers.

7.   Option 2 - Impose Temporary Alcohol Ban from 12am to 12midnight on 12 November Racecourse NZ Cup Day 2016

Option Description

7.1       The Council resolves to impose a temporary alcohol ban in designated areas associated with the Riccarton Racecourse New Zealand Cup Day Event, from 12am to 12 midnight on 12 November 2016.

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 low.  Stakeholders were contacted to inform them of the proposed ban through face to face meetings, emails, and phone calls.

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       Of the 71 stakeholders contacted only 31 have commented on the proposed ban.  Their views as follows:

7.4.1      Stakeholders who submitted comments support imposing temporary ban similar as last year, from 7am to 12 midnight on New Zealand Cup Day event. 

7.4.2      New Zealand Police believe that a 17-hour alcohol restriction on Cup Day is a considerable period for Police to enforce the ban.  They prefer to impose the ban starting at 7am when a number of visitors attending the Cup Day event turn up after champagne breakfasts.

7.4.3      Council Licensing Inspectors and Community Public Health Licensing Staff agreed when consulted that a 7am start for the ban enforcement is realistic and reasonable in ensuring public safety.  In deciding the time to start the ban enforcement, they have considered that Cup Day event venue main gate opens at 9am on 12 November.

7.4.4      The management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing have confirmed that they requested a 24-hour alcohol ban from 12am to 12midnight on NZ Cup Day 2016.  They agree, however, that alcohol ban enforcement could start at 7am and end at 12midnight as supported by the Tri-agency Group.  The management have stressed that no complaints about the alcohol ban that applied from 7am to 12 midnight on Racecourse NZ Cup Day 2015 were received.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.6       Cost of Implementation - If the temporary ban is imposed, public notices, and appropriate signage are required by law. The approximate cost of $3000 will be met from existing budgets.

7.7       Maintenance/Ongoing Costs - The cost of enforcement rests with the New Zealand Police under powers in the Local Government Act 2002.

7.8       Funding source - The City and Community Long Term Policy and Planning Activity budget.

Legal Implications

7.9       Detailed information that covers these matters is as above, in 6.9 and 6.10.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    The risk for this option is stakeholders may be confused if the ban is enforced for 24 hours and not from 7am to 12midnight which was the time period for the ban in 2015.  To mitigate the risk, Council will ensure good communication and information (i.e. through social media), media release provided to stakeholders.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies - New Zealand Police have powers to enforce the Bylaw, including the power to search containers and vehicles in public places for alcohol, seize and remove alcohol, and arrest any person who is found to be breaching the Bylaw.  The alcohol restrictions apply to public places such as streets, reserves and walkways over which the Council has control.

7.12    Implementation timeframe - If Council imposes a temporary alcohol ban, council staff have 15 weeks to implement the decision (including media release, public notice, putting alcohol ban signs, and ban enforcement).

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·        All the advantages as outlined in Option 1.

·        New Zealand Police can control consumption of alcohol around Riccarton Park Racecourse for a longer period, 24 hours on 12 November 2016.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·        The risk as outlined in 7.10.

·        New Zealand Police will not be able to effectively enforce the ban for 24 hours.  Police prefer to put more of their resources at the event itself, road policing and post event incidents.

8.   Option 3 - Do not impose Temporary Alcohol Ban on Racecourse NZ Cup Day 2016

Option Description

8.1       The Council resolves not to impose a temporary alcohol restriction in designated ban areas at Riccarton Park Racecourse anytime on 12 November 2016 New Zealand Cup Day Event.

Significance

8.2       The level of significance of this option is relatively low consistent with the analysis as per the Significance and Engagement Policy.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance are low for stakeholders who will be directly affected with the risks that individuals or groups will drink in public places.  Stakeholders were informed and contacted to ask their views of the proposed ban through face to face meetings, emails, phone calls, and letter. 

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       All stakeholders consulted support imposing another temporary ban.  The management of Riccarton Park Function Centre and Canterbury Racing confirm they haven't received any complaints regarding the ban imposed in 2015.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

8.6       Cost of Implementation - No cost is required for this option.

8.7       Maintenance/Ongoing Costs - Not applicable.

8.8       Funding source - Not applicable

Legal Implications

8.9       There are no legal implications as the Council does not impose a temporary ban.

Risks and Mitigations

8.10    The risk of not imposing an alcohol ban is that residents in the area will again feel the effects associated with the alcohol-related nuisance of those attending the event.  The mitigation is that the Police may be able to manage some of the behaviour although they will be minus a key tool they say makes a valuable contribution to policing.

Implementation

8.11    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable

8.12    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.13    The advantages of this option include:

·        No costs to the Council as there is no need for communications or signage.

8.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·        Continuing alcohol-related misbehaviour and effects on local residents and visitors attending the Riccarton NZ Cup Day event.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a 

Attachment A - Map showing the proposed Riccarton Park Racecourse Temporary Alcohol Ban Area

 

 

 

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

Evangeline Emerenciana

Policy Analyst

Approved By

Helen Beaumont

Brendan Anstiss

Head of Strategic Policy

General Manager Strategy and Transformation

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

33.    Regulation and Consents Committee Minutes - 16 June 2016

Reference:

16/723446

Contact:

Petrea Downey

Petrea.downey@ccc.govt.nz

941 8999

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Regulation and Consents Committee held a meeting on 16 June 2016 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for their information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Regulation and Consents Committee meeting held 16 June 2016.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Minutes Regulation and Consents Committee - 16 June 2016

286

 

 

Signatories

Author

Petrea Downey,     Committee Advisor

  


Council

14 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Strategy and Finance Committee  – 16 June 2016

 

34.    Council Controlled Organisations - Half Year Financial Statements - Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust

Reference:

16/705350

Contact:

Patricia Christie

Patricia.christie@ccc.govt.nz

941 8113

 

 

 

 

1.   Strategy and Finance Committee Consideration

 

The Committee considered a report seeking its recommendation to the Council that it review and receive the financial statements for the six months to 31 December 2015 for the Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

 

That the Strategy and Finance Committee:

1.         Recommend to the Council that it receive the half-year report for Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust.

 

3.   Strategy and Finance Committee Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Receive the half-year report for Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Council Controlled Organisations - Half Year Financial Statements - Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust

292

 

No.

Title

Page

a

Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust Half Year Report

295

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Council Controlled Organisations - Half Year Financial Statements - Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust

Reference:

16/394519

Contact:

Patricia Christie

Patricia.christie@ccc.govt.nz

941 8113

 

 

1.       Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1          This report presents for review the financial statements for the six months to 31 December 2015 for Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust (RDBPT) which is a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO).

Origin of Report

1.2          The origin of this report is the Local Government Act 2002, which requires that the financial statements of CCOs be provided to the shareholder/stakeholder within two months of the end of the first half of the financial year (29 February).

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 the impact of the decisions on Council and the community.

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

 

3.       Staff Recommendations

That the Strategy and Finance Committee:

1.              Recommend to the Council that it receive the half-year report for Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust.

 

 

4.       Key Points

4.1          The Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust’s financial statements for the six months to 31 December 2015 is attached for information.

4.2          RDBPT is required under section 66 of the Local Government Act 2002 to submit half year reports within two months of the end of the first half of the financial year. This requirement has not been met for the half year ended 31 December 2015.

4.3          A half year report must contain the information required by each organisation's Statement of Intent (SOI). For the above organisation this includes financial statements prepared in accordance with New Zealand accounting standards and generally accepted accounting policies.

 

5.       Context/Background

Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust

5.1          RDBPT was formed by the Council with the objective of promoting sustainable management and conservation of Banks Peninsula’s natural environment and associated recreation.

5.2          RDBPT has been very active in the six months to 31 December 2015 with the following projects:

·      Summit Walkway

·      Purple Peak Curry Reserve

·      Banks Peninsula Walking Festival

·      Panama Reserve land purchase

·      Walking Maps and Brochures and website

·      Lyttelton Head to Head Walkway

·      Support for Orton Bradley Park (OBP)

·      Support for Banks Peninsula Conservation Trust (BPCT)

·      Paihere GeoPark

·      Le Bons Bay Environment Centre.

5.3          For the six months to 31 December 2015, RDBPT made a net deficit of $44,401 compared to a profit of $3,430 for the six months to 31 December 2014. The reduced profit is mainly due to increased professional fees ($18,055), increased other expenses ($17,534) and reduced interest revenue ($10,528), and is slightly offset by an increase in other revenue ($5,000).

5.4          RDBPT's net deficit for the six months was $24,342 worse than its SOI targets. Operational expenditure is $43,312 higher than forecast because of an increase in management fees to include management expenses for two major projects (Purple Peak Curry Reserve and Summit Walkway) and the additional cost of running the Trust's tramping hut. Committed grants expenditure was $15,125 higher than forecast due to the extension of its grant to the Banks Peninsula Conservation Trust and an increase in the annual grant amount. These unfavourable movements are partially offset by a $13,704 decrease in minor projects expense and a $20,392 increase in revenue.

5.5          RDBPT is on track to achieve all of its non-financial performance targets.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a 

Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust Half Year Report

 

 

 

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

Patricia Christie

Daisy Yu

Manager External Reporting & Governance

Financial Accountant

Approved By

Diane Brandish

Peter Gudsell

Head of Financial Management

General Manager Finance & Commercial

 


Council

14 July 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


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

14 July 2016

 

Report from Strategy and Finance Committee  – 16 June 2016

 

35.    Vbase Limited - Amendment to Constitution

Reference:

16/705395

Contact:

Patricia Christie

Patricia.christie@ccc.govt.nz

941 8113

 

 

 

 

1.   Strategy and Finance Committee Consideration

 

The Committee considered a report seeking its recommendation to the Council that it approve an amendment to the Vbase Limited company constitution.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

 

That the Strategy and Finance Committee recommend to Council that it:

1.         Approve the amendment of the Vbase Limited constitution by:

a.         deleting existing clauses 11.1 to 11.6;

b.         inserting a new clause 11.1 as follows:

“11.1      Statement of intent: The Company shall have a statement of intent which complies with the Local Government Act 2002 or any subsequent amending or replacing legislation”; and

c.         re-numbering the existing clause 11.7 to clause 11.2

2.         Authorise the General Manager Finance and Commercial to sign the shareholders resolution authorising this change on the behalf of Council.

 

3.   Strategy and Finance Committee Recommendation to Council

 

Part A

That the Council:

1.         Approve the amendment of the Vbase Limited constitution by:

a.         deleting existing clauses 11.1 to 11.6;

b.         inserting a new clause 11.1 as follows:

“11.1      Statement of intent: The Company shall have a statement of intent which complies with the Local Government Act 2002 or any subsequent amending or replacing legislation”; and

c.         re-numbering the existing clause 11.7 to clause 11.2

2.         Authorise the General Manager Finance and Commercial to sign the shareholders resolution authorising this change on the behalf of Council.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Vbase Limited - Amendment to Constitution

323

 

No.

Title

Page

a

Shareholder resolution to amend constitution

327

 

 


Council

14 July 2016

 

 

Vbase Limited - Amendment to Constitution

Reference:

16/605577

Contact:

Patricia Christie

Patricia.christie@ccc.govt.nz

941 8113

 

 

1.       Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1          The purpose of this report is for the Strategy and Finance Committee to recommend to Council that it approve an amendment to the Vbase Limited (Vbase) company constitution.

Origin of Report

1.2          This report is staff generated to correct an inconsistency between the Vbase constitution and the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requirements.

2.       Significance

2.1          The decision(s) in this report is of a 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 impact of decision on the community.

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

 

3.       Staff Recommendations

That the Strategy and Finance Committee recommend to Council that it:

1.              Approve the amendment of the Vbase Limited constitution by:

a.              deleting existing clauses 11.1 to 11.6;

b.             inserting a new clause 11.1 as follows:

“11.1      Statement of intent: The Company shall have a statement of intent which complies with the Local Government Act 2002 or any subsequent amending or replacing legislation”; and

c.              re-numbering the existing clause 11.7 to clause 11.2

2.              Authorise the General Manager Finance & Commercial to sign the shareholders resolution authorising this change on the behalf of Council.

 

 

 

4.       Key Points

4.1          An inconsistency has been identified between the Vbase constitution and the requirements of a council controlled organisation under the LGA.

4.2          To correct this inconsistency, an amendment to the constitution of Vbase is proposed as outlined in paragraph 5.5 below.

4.2.1     This amendment has been discussed by the Vbase board and they are supportive of it.

4.2.2     A special resolution of the shareholder is required to approve the change. This is included as Attachment A.

 

 

5.       Context/Background

5.1          As part of an internal audit review of subsidiary governance processes undertaken by Council it was identified that the Vbase constitution needed to be amended as it referred to the requirement for a Statement of Corporate Intent under section 128 of the Companies Act 1993.

5.2          Vbase as a council controlled organisation is required under section 64 of the LGA to have a statement of intent. While a statement of corporate intent and statement of intent are similar documents, it is considered more appropriate for the company constitution to refer to the LGA requirement.

5.3          Anderson Lloyd were engaged by Council to draft the amendment to the constitution and the Vbase shareholder resolution to agree the change.

Proposed Amendment

5.4          The existing clauses 11.1 to 11.6 of the Vbase constitution are copied below:

5.5          To prevent future constitution changes with changes in the LGA is was considered prudent to simply require Vbase to meet its reporting obligations as laid out in the LGA. As a result, the following was proposed.

5.5.1     Delete the existing clauses 11.1 to 11.6.

5.5.2     Insert a new clause 11.1 as follows:

"11.1  Statement of intent:  The Company shall have a statement of intent which complies with the Local Government Act 2002 or any subsequent amending or replacing legislation."

5.5.3     Re-number the existing clause 11.7 to clause 11.2.

5.6          The Vbase board considered this proposed amendment at its May board meeting and were supportive of the change.

Implementing Change

5.7          To effect a change in the Vbase constitution, a special resolution of the shareholder (Council) is required.

5.8          The shareholder resolution is attached as Attachment A.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a 

Shareholder resolution to amend constitution

 

 

 

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

Patricia Christie

Manager External Reporting & Governance

Approved By

Diane Brandish

Peter Gudsell

Head of Financial Management

General Manager Finance & Commercial

 


Council

14 July 2016