Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 19 July 2017

Time:                                    10am

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sally Buck

Jake McLellan

Alexandra Davids

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Brenda Lowe-Johnson

Deon Swiggs

Sara Templeton

 

 

12 July 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Shupayi Mpunga

Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

941 6605

shupayi.mpunga@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

 


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

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

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

B       4.       Public Forum.................................................................................................................... 4

B       5.       Deputations by Appointment........................................................................................ 4

B       6.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 4  

B       7.       Staff Briefing.................................................................................................................. 13

STAFF REPORTS

CA     8.       Orbiter Public Transport Route: Ensors Road Public Transport Priority Project.... 15

C       9.       Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report................................... 29

B       10.     Elected Members’ Information Exchange.................................................................... 36 

 

 


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

1.   Apologies

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

2.   Declarations of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant and 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 Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Monday, 3 July 2017 be confirmed (refer page 5).

4.   Public Forum

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

It is intended that the public forum session will be held at <Approximate Time>

OR

There will be no public forum at this meeting

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Deputations may be heard on a matter or matters covered by a report on this agenda and approved by the Chairperson.

5.1

Richmond Community Garden Group

Hayley Guglietta will speak on behalf of Richmond Community Garden Group, based at Avebury House regarding their two year lease on Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) land. 

 

5.2

Moa Kids Community Early Learning Centre Incorporated

Hayley Strachan will speak on behalf of Moa Kids Community Early Learning Centre Incorporated regarding their use of a Discretionary Response Fund grant towards emergency preparedness.

 

5.3

Safety Issues in Phillipstown

Richard Tankersley, Chairperson, Phillipstown Safety Panel, and Maryann Bell, Community Development Worker will speak on behalf of Phillipstown Safety Panel regarding safety issues in Phillipstown.

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

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


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

 

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Monday 3 July 2017

Time:                                    3pm

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sally Buck

Jake McLellan

Alexandra Davids

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Deon Swiggs

Sara Templeton

 

 

3 July 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Shupayi Mpunga

Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

941 6605

shupayi.mpunga@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00083

That the apology for absence from Brenda Lowe-Johnson be accepted.

Sally Buck/Jake McLellan                                                                                                                                          Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

Tim Lindley and Jake McLellan declared an interest in Item 9 (Clifton Terrace, Clifton – Proposed Parking Improvements) and took no part in the Board’s discussion and voting on the matter.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00084

That the minutes of the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Wednesday, 14 June 2017 be confirmed.

Darrell Latham/Alexandra Davids                                                                                                                         Carried

 

4.   Public Forum

Part B

There were no public forum presentations.

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

5.1       Englefield Residents Group

Irinka Britnell and representatives of the Englefield Residents’ Group addressed the Board regarding the work and needs of the Englefield Neighbourhood.

             After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Irinka Britnell and representatives of the Engelfield Residents’ Association for their presentation.

 

5.2       Linwood Park

             The scheduled deputation did not take place.

 

5.3       St Andrews Hill/Bridge Path/Main Road Intersection

The following residents addressed the Board regarding the St Andrews Hill/Bridle Path Road Intersection.  Item 8 of this agenda refers.

1.         Jennie Bridges, resident of St Andrews Hill.

2.         Mike Morrison, local resident.

             After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Jenny Bridges and Mike Morrison for their presentations.

 

5.4       Clifton Terrace

Mr Justin Prain, a local resident, addressed the Board regarding the Clifton Terrace Proposed Parking Improvements report.  Item 9 of this agenda refers.

             After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Justin Prain for his presentation.

 

5.5       Ruru Road, Bromley - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

             The scheduled deputation did not take place.

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.  

7.   Correspondence

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00085 (Staff Recommendation adopted without change)

Part B

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board decided to:

1.         Receive the information in the Correspondence Report dated 3 July 2017 from Valerie Fletcher regarding the St Andrews Hill Road/Bridle Path Road/Main Road intersection report.

Sara Templeton/Tim Lindley                                                                                                                                   Carried

 

 

 

8.   St Andrews Hill Road / Bridle Path Road / Main Road Intersection Consultation Feedback

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receives the information on the consultation undertaken within the community on the options for traffic control at the St Andrews Hill Road/Bridle Path Road/Main Road intersection.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00086

Part C

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the information on the consultation undertaken within the community on the options for traffic control at the St Andrews Hill Road/Bridle Path Road/Main Road intersection.

2.         Acknowledge the lack of funding in the Council’s Long Term Plan and the lack of recorded crashes at this intersection.

3.         Request:

a)         That staff trial a traffic light phasing change for three months to allow traffic from St Andrews Hill to exit with a clear path. 

b)        That appropriate signage be installed to slow traffic and advise on intersection ahead on Bridlepath Road. 

c)         That the Board be advised of other minor changes that would address safety concerns raised by the community.

d)        That staff advise the Board on the outcome of the trial prior to the Board’s final submission to the Council’s Long Term Plan.

Sara Templeton/Sally Buck                                                                                                                                      Carried

Deon Swiggs abstained from voting

 

 

9.   Clifton Terrace, Clifton - Proposed Parking Improvements

 

Board Comment

The Board had regard to the deputation made in item 5.4 above.

 

Staff Recommendations 

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Install Parking Ticks to mark four individual parking spaces within the unmarked bay adjacent to 11 Clifton Terrace.

 

Community Board Recommendation

Part C

Yani Johanson moved that the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolve:

1.         That the staff report be received.

2.         Agree to Install Parking Ticks to mark four individual parking spaces within the unmarked bay adjacent to 11 Clifton Terrace.

3.         Agree to install Residents only parking signage as per Council policy.

4.         Support Clifton Terrace residents to apply for residents’ only parking pursuant to the Council’s Resident’s Parking Permit Policy.

 

The motion was seconded by Sally Buck and on being put to the meeting was declared lost.

Yani Johanson/Sally Buck                                                                                                                                                Lost

There being no further resolutions put to the meeting the status quo remains.

 

 

10. Ruru Road Bromley - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

 

Staff Recommendations 

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approve the No Stopping Restriction on the north side of Ruru Road commencing at a point 91m east of its intersection with Maces Road and extending in an easterly direction for 28 metres.

2.         Approve the No Stopping Restriction on the north side of Ruru Road commencing at a point 204m east of its intersection with Maces Road and extending in an easterly direction for 8 metres.

3.         Approve the No Stopping Restriction on the north side of Ruru Road commencing at a point 210m east of its intersection with Maces Road and extending in an easterly direction for 8 metres.

4.         Approve the No Stopping Restriction on the south side of Ruru Road commencing at a point 85m east of its intersection with Maces Road and extending in an easterly direction for 11 metres.

5.         Approve the No Stopping Restriction on the south side of Ruru Road commencing at a point 110m east of its intersection with Maces Road and extending in an easterly direction for 81 metres.

6.         Approve the No Stopping Restriction on the south side of Ruru Road commencing at a point 196m east of its intersection with Maces Road and extending in an easterly direction for 18 metres.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00087

Part C

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Lay the report on the table until details of proposed scheme modifications are complete.

Tim Lindley/Alexandra Davids                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

11. Roxburgh Street - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00088 (Staff Recommendation adopted without change)

Part C

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southern side of
Roxburgh Street commencing at a point 64 metres west of its intersection with Colombo Street and extending in a westerly direction for 12 metres.

Jake McLellan/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

12. 433 St Asaph Street, Phillipstown - Proposed P30 Parking Restriction

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00089 (Staff Recommendation adopted without change)

Part C

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to 30 minutes between Monday and Friday on the north side of St Asaph Street commencing at a point 138 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for 11 metres.  

Sara Templeton/Tim Lindley                                                                                                                                   Carried

Deon Swiggs abstained from voting

 

 

13. Property Review Process

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in this report.

2.         Commence the Board’s review process to identify if the properties in Attachments B, C and D should be retained for alternative public uses, retained for strategic purposes/future decisions or considered for disposal.

3.         Being of the view that the sites listed below are unlikely to have alternative public uses or strategic purposes, and that the Board has sufficient information to form this preliminary view, recommends that Council directs officers to commence investigation processes regarding the potential to dispose of the sites:

a.         ______________

4.         To allow for the inclusion of advice in a report to Council, conclude this review and provide comment to staff, within six months of resolving to commence the process.

5.         Note that the final report containing the outcome of the process will come back to the Board for recommendation to Council.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00090

Part C

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the report.

2.         Lay the report on the table until a Board workshop has been held to commence the Board’s consideration of the Council Property Review Process in the Linwood-Central-Heathcote wards.

Yani Johanson/Sally Buck                                                                                                                                         Carried

 

 

Meeting adjourned at 4.38pm.  The meeting reconvened at 4.47pm

 

Sara Templeton left the meeting at 4.53pm

 

14. Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report

 

Board Consideration

The Board considered the Area Report and a memorandum that had been circulated prior to the meeting providing additional information relating to the 2017/18 Discretionary Response Fund and three funding applications to the Board’s Discretionary Response and Youth Development Funds. 

The Board believes it had sufficient information to make a decision on the making of grants to the funding applications received from:

             a.         Redcliff Residents’ Association, 2017/18 Discretionary Response Fund;

             b.         Jake Cownie Koekemor, 2017/18 Youth Development Fund.

 

 

Staff Recommendations 

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the Area Update.

2.         Decide on implementing a public forum as pursuant to Standing Orders and the frequency of the forum.

3.         Appoint a Community Board representative for the Taylors Mistake Baches Working Party.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00091

Part B

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board decided to:

1.         Receive the Area Update.

2.         Implement a public forum as pursuant to Standing Orders at the beginning of each Board meeting.

3.         Appoint Jake McLellan as the Community Board representative for the Taylors Mistake Baches Working Party.

4.         Delegate the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson to make a decision on the funding application for Arts Voice Christchurch Trust and report back to the Board for record purposes.

Darrell Latham/Jake McLellan                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00092

Part C

The Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to:

5.         Approve a grant of $587 from its 2017/18 Discretionary Response Fund to Redcliff Residents’ Association towards administration and newsletter boxes; and

6.         Approve a grant of $1,500 from its 2017/18 Discretionary Response Fund to Redcliff Residents’ Association towards instruments for the Sumner Silver Band.

Darrell Latham/Tim Lindley                                                                                                                                     Carried

 

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2017/00093

Part C

The Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to:

7.         Approve a grant of $500 from its 2017/18 Discretionary Response Fund to Jake Koekemoer towards competing in the 2017/18 ICF Canoe Sprint Junior and U23 World Championships in Pitesti, Romania.

Tim Lindley/Sally Buck                                                                                                                                               Carried

 

 Yani Johanson left the meeting at 5.23pm

15. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Part B

The Board received and noted the following information from members:

1.         Inner City East – The Board were advised on the Council’s resolution to ask staff to work with the Board on Inner City East.  The Board noted that the Community Governance Team are involved, however the Board want to ensure that the community, business community, the Community Board, the Council and Regenerate Christchurch are working as partners. 

2.         The Natural Heritage Workshop – The Board were updated on the recently held Natural Heritage Workshop which discussed new trends and orientation in activities being sought.  The Workshop noted that the recreational landscape is also changing.

 

 

 

   

Meeting concluded at 5.35pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 19TH DAY OF JULY 2017

 

Sally Buck

Chairperson

  


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

7.        Staff Briefing

Reference:

17/742575

Contact:

Kelly Griffiths

Kelly.griffiths@ccc.govt.nz

941 8767

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Board will be briefed on the following:

Subject

Presenter(s)

Ferry Road at Woolston Village - WL1

Kelly Griffiths, Project Manager - Transport

Josh Neville, Planner – Urban Regeneration

Bill Homewood, Traffic Engineer Investigation & Design

 

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Notes the information supplied during the Staff Briefings.

2.         Notes that staff will present an update on the progress of the Ferry Road at Woolston Village – WL1 project, and the potential interactions with other projects, including the Local Cycleway: Ferry/St Johns project and the St Annes School Speed Zone.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

  


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

8.        Orbiter Public Transport Route: Ensors Road Public Transport Priority Project

Reference:

17/331451

Contact:

Kirsty Mahoney

kirsty.mahoney@ccc.govt.nz

03 941 5330

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to advise the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board on the outcome of community consultation and request that the Board recommend to the Council to approve the Orbiter Public Transport (PT) Route: Ensors Road PT Priority Project to proceed to detailed design and implementation.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated.  A briefing was held in relation to this project with the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board on 12 December 2016, prior to going to public consultation on the Preferred Option between 3 March 2017 and 3 April 2017. 

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.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by comparing factors relating to this decision against the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommends to the Council to:

Ensors Road – Opawa Road to Brougham Street– New Traffic Control

1.         Approve that a special vehicle lane for the use of north-eastbound cycles only, be established on the northwest side of Ensors Road, located against the kerb, commencing at its intersection with Opawa Road, and extending in a north-easterly direction for a distance of 164 metres, as detailed on Attachment A.

2.         Approve that a special vehicle lane for the use of south-westbound cycles only, be established on the southeast side of Ensors Road, located against the kerb, commencing at its intersection with Opawa Road, and extending in a north-easterly direction for a distance of 165 metres, as detailed on Attachment A.

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board approves to:

Intersection – Ensors Road/ Opawa Road– Existing Traffic Control

3.      Revoke all traffic controls except for the speed limit at the intersection of Ensors Road and Opawa Road.

Ensors Road – Opawa Road to Brougham Street– Existing Traffic Control

4.         Revoke all traffic controls except for the speed limit on Ensors Road commencing at its intersection with Opawa Road to its intersection with Brougham Street. 

Ensors Road – Brougham Street to North Eastern Extent – Existing Traffic Control

5.         Revoke all traffic controls except for the speed limit on Ensors Road commencing at its intersection with Brougham Street eastbound straight-ahead lane and extending in a north-easterly direction for a distance of 59 metres. 

Opawa Road – Ensors Road to South Eastern Extent – Existing Parking and Stopping Restrictions

6.         Revoke all parking and stopping restrictions on northeast side of Opawa Road commencing at its intersection with Ensors Road and extending in a south-easterly direction for a distance of 39 metres.

7.         Revoke all parking and stopping restrictions on southwest side of Opawa Road commencing at its intersection with Ensors Road and extending in a south-easterly direction for a distance of 22 metres.

Ensors Road – Opawa Road to South Western Extent – Existing Parking and Stopping Restrictions

8.         Revoke all parking and stopping restrictions on northwest side of Ensors Road commencing at its intersection with Opawa Road and extending in a south-westerly direction for a distance of 30 metres.

9.         Revoke all parking and stopping restrictions on southeast side of Ensors Road commencing at its intersection with Opawa Road and extending in a south-westerly direction for a distance of 22 metres.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Public Transport Infrastructure

·     Level of Service: 10.4.3 Provide journey reliability on high frequency core services

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – Option 5A : Northbound Two Laning and Cycling Improvements (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – Option 5B : Northbound Two Laning and Revised Cycling Improvements

·     Option 3 – Do Nothing

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Greatest level of bus journey time improvement of all 12 options considered

·     Meets key objectives of maintaining vehicle travel times and reliability on Brougham Street, and maintaining walking and cycling safety and access.

·     Increased cycling infrastructure will also help to increase safety for cyclists within the project area.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     As with all options, there will be a requirement for temporary traffic management and some limited disruption to traffic flows through the Ensors Road / Brougham Street intersection during construction.

 

5.   Context/Background

Introduction

5.1       The Orbiter bus service travels in a circular route around the outskirts of the Christchurch city centre and provides interconnectivity among most of the bus services within the city.  The bus service has a frequency of six vehicles / hour from 6am until 7pm.  The Orbiter bus service has been experiencing delays in the AM and PM peak travel periods (in both directions) in this location.  The delay in the northbound direction on Ensors Road can at times be more than two minutes, while the southbound direction experiences delays of up to 30 seconds at the northern approaches to the Ensors Road / Opawa Road roundabout.

5.2       The proximity of the Ensors Road / Brougham Street signalised intersection to the Opawa Road / Ensors Road roundabout appears to be the main cause of the delays as the queues from this intersection extend into the roundabout in the northbound direction.  While the impact of this is not as severe in the southbound direction, some delay is still experienced by the Orbiter bus service during the peak periods when a large volume of through traffic entering Ensors Road towards the roundabout is released from the signalised intersection.

5.3       Delays to the bus service are exacerbated by the rail crossing directly to the north of the Brougham Street / Opawa Road / Ensors Road intersections.  When the rail crossing barrier is down, the traffic signal at Brougham Street / Ensors Road intersection only permits the Brougham Street’s movements until the train has passed.  When this occurs during the peak travel period, queue lengths quickly extend in both directions on Ensors Road.

5.4       Therefore, this project aims to improve the reliability of the Orbiter bus service travel time and reduce delays to the bus service within the section of Ensors Road between Opawa Road and Brougham Street.

5.5       This project lies within the Opawa suburb, and is mainly surrounded by residential areas bordered by an industrial area to the north of Brougham Street.  The Ara Institute campus is located in the north-east corner of the Brougham Street / Ensors Road intersection, and there are various industries and facilities located within 500 metres of the intersection, including an aggregate sales and quarry business, offices, service facilities, recreational facilities, a community centre and education providers.

5.6       The existing transport environment includes the intersection of Brougham Street and Ensors Road, which is controlled by traffic signals with a set of signalised pedestrian crossings on the east, west and south sides of the intersection.  There are footpaths on all approaches to the intersection.

5.7       The signals at this intersection prioritise east-west movements on the Brougham Street major arterial route.  The signalised intersections along the Brougham Street corridor are also co-ordinated in both directions.

5.8       The Ensors Road / Opawa Road roundabout has a single lane with a pedestrian splitter island on all approaches.   There are footpaths on all approaches to the roundabout.

Objectives

5.9       The objectives of this project are to:

·   Improve bus travel times and bus journey reliability during peak periods within the project area

·   Maintain vehicle travel times and reliability on Brougham Street within the project area

·   Maintain walking and cycling safety and access within the project area

·   Complete the project on time

·   Complete the project within budget.

Options

5.10    A total of twelve options including the “Do Nothing” option were identified by the project team, as listed below:

·    Banning of the right turn on Ensors Road southern approach to the intersection

·    Banning of the left turning traffic on Ensors Road southern approach to the intersection

·    Adding a short left turning lane in addition to a northbound bus lane to the existing lanes on Ensors Road southern approach to the intersection

·    Diamond right turn phase for Ensors Road (northbound and southbound approaches) at the intersection with Brougham Street

·    Do Nothing

·    Option 1 - Do Minimum (north and southbound bus priority lanes)

·    Option 2 - Road Widening (providing bus priority segments road widening)

·    Option 3 - Opawa Roundabout to Signal Conversion

·    Option 4 - Northbound Downstream Two Laning and Southbound Bus Priority

·    Option 5 - Northbound Downstream Two Laning

·    Option 5A - Northbound Two Laning and Cycling Improvements

·    Option 5B - Northbound Two Laning and Revised Cycling Improvements

5.11    The first four options were not taken further for investigation, as the benefits were outweighed by the dis-benefits.  The remaining options, including the Do Nothing option were considered for further detailed analysis, including modelling.

5.12    S-Paramics was used as the primary modelling package for the project as it is a microsimulation model capable of modelling complex junctions, in particular the railway crossing on Ensors Road north of the site, and interaction between the signals at Brougham Street / Ensors Road and the roundabout at Ensors Road / Opawa Road.  All of the options (1 through to 5B) were modelled and the impacts of each option on the Orbiter bus service, as well as general traffic, were assessed.

5.13    The general findings of the modelling showed that the project area is strongly influenced by the operation of the Brougham Street / Opawa Road intersection, and the railway crossing, which results in high variability of north and south bound traffic, including the Orbiter bus service.  Following the passage of a train, the queues that have built up while the barrier arms are down take some time to clear, leaving the network with higher delays, queues and travel times.

5.14    The configuration of the signals at the Brougham Street / Ensors Road intersection has a limited effect on the impacts of the train movements, which are the predominant source of journey time delay and unreliability.

5.15    Options 1 – 4 provided a mix of benefits and dis-benefits to travel time and reliability for the Orbiter bus service, and did not wholly meet the objectives of the project.  Option 5 performed well against the key objectives of reducing bus travel time and increasing reliability.  This option also resulted in additional benefits for general traffic movements in the project area, and avoided adverse impacts upon the operation of Brougham Street.  Option 5 was configured to incorporate improved cycle facilities, leading to the development of Options 5A and 5B.

5.16    Option 5A is the preferred option, and its key features are outlined below.


 

6.   Option 1 – Option 5A – Northbound Two Laning and Cycling Improvements (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       The preferred option, Option 5A, provides an additional northbound straight ahead lane on Ensors Road at the Brougham Street intersection, thereby providing two lanes for traffic heading northbound along Ensors Road.  As a result, the median is reduced to 0.8m width, and the lighting poles are relocated from the median to the berms on each side of the road. 

6.2       The additional width also allows for 2 metre wide cycle lanes along this section of Ensors Road in both directions.  Flexi-posts will be installed between the traffic and cycle lanes on Ensors Road northbound to Brougham Street.

6.3       This option also converts the continuous left-turn movement from Brougham Street west towards Ensors Road north into a Give Way controlled access.  The signal box that is currently located on the island by the left turn on Brougham Street, will be relocated to the berm.

6.4       A southbound cycle lane is provided along Ensors Road between the intersections with Brougham Street and Opawa Road.

6.5       In addition to the above changes, the preferred option includes changes to the signal phasing to derive increased benefits from the option.

6.6       Bollards will be installed along the grassed area by the frontages of 32, 34 and 38 Ensors Road to prevent vehicles from short-cutting across the grass to bypass the roundabout, parking in the grassed area, and protect the notable tree on the corner of Ensors Road / Opawa Road.

6.7       There are no major safety issues associated with the preferred option.  The proposed Give Way control will provide higher pedestrian safety because it will reduce the vehicle speeds at the Give Way line.  Cycling safety is improved because it gives priority to the cyclists at the Give Way line.  In addition, the northbound and southbound cycleways through Ensors Road provide a safe path for cyclists.

Significance

6.8       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.

6.9       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are low.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.10    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

6.11    Community consultation on the Ensors Road Passenger Transport Improvements was undertaken from Monday 3 March 2017 to Monday 3 April 2017.

6.12    A total of 450 leaflets were hand delivered to properties on Ensors Road between Laurence Street and Sullivan Avenue in the north and Fifield Terrace to the south and surrounding streets including Cholmondeley Avenue, Hornbrook Street, Lorcarno Street, Manatu Lane, Opawa Road (between Wilsons Road and Cholmondeley Avenue), Osborne Street, Raycroft Street, Sullivan Avenue (between Ensors Road and Whittington Avenue), Vincent Place, Whittington Avenue, Wilsons Road North, York Street.  The leaflet was also sent to 63 key stakeholders and 150 absentee owners.  Additional leaflets were made available at Civic Offices, Beckenham Service Centre and Linwood Service Centre.

6.13    During the course of the engagement, Council received 32 submissions.  Of the 32 submissions received, 14 submitters were in support, 16 were in support but had some concerns, and two did not state their preference. No submissions were received against the proposal.

6.14    The following summarises feedback received in support of the proposal:

Enthusiasm for the project

·    Excellent that this is happening...

·    ….This alternation should see significant improvement…. A good plan.

·    …the final plan you have presented is very good in my opinion.

·    Looks good to me and certainly an improvement….

·    …Can’t wait for it to proceed!

·    This will help relieve the problem…

·    Proposal looks good….

Congestion

·    Concern about congestion around the roundabout.

·    Time restrictions on parking spaces will encourage visitors to the area over local residents parking there all day.

·    This will relieve the queues at peak times…..

·    This plan will improve the congestion at peak traffic flows….

Cycle lanes

·    Suggestion for a cycle lane on Opawa Road. The inclusion of a cycle lane on Opawa Road is beyond the scope of this project; however, this issue has been referred to the Area Traffic Engineer for investigation.

·    …I am also pleased to see the addition of cycle lanes.

Additional requests

·    Requested a review of the timing of the traffic lights. This is beyond the scope of this project; however, this issue has been referred to the Area Traffic Engineer for further discussion with CTOC.

·    Suggestion to amend the median strip to extend the two lanes. This is beyond the scope of this project; however, this has been referred to the Area Traffic Engineer for investigation.

·    Request for Ensors Road northbound (between the Heathcote River Bridge and Opawa Road roundabout) to be double laned. This was beyond the scope of the project; however, this issue has been referred to the Area Traffic Engineer for investigation.

6.15    The following summarises feedback received in support of the proposal but detailed some concerns:

Congestion

·    Concern over cars blocking the roundabout.

·    Concerns about congestion on Ensors Road backing up to the Heathcote River Bridge making it difficult for residents to leave their properties.

·    Concerns that the removal of the free turn lane on Brougham Street will increase congestion.

·    Suggestions for the traffic light sequence be changed to increase through traffic on Ensors Road.

·    Suggestion for an alternative rail crossing or changing the train timetable to avoid peak times.

·    Suggestion for Ensors Road, north of the Heathcote River bridge be two laned northbound and a reduction in the size of the roundabout to accommodate the two lanes.

·    Safety concerns for pedestrians crossing at the roundabout.

Cycle lanes

·    Requests for a separated cycle lane.

·    Request for a cycle lane on Opawa Road/Shakespeare Road.

·    Safety concerns for cyclists using the southbound cycle lane on Ensors Road.

·    Request for the cycle lanes to be at least two metres wide.

·    Suggestion for hash lines to be added on the cycle lane on western Brougham Street to remind queuing motorists not to wait on the cycle lane. 

·    Request for cycle separators and an advanced stop box be installed on the northbound left hand lane on Ensors Road.

·    Request for the green cycle lane paint to be extended through the roundabout.

Additional requests

·    Request for bollards on the corner of Ensors Road and Opawa Road to stop vehicles driving across the grass and cutting the corner.

·    Request for the bus stop outside 25 Ensors Road be moved outside 29 Ensors Road to allow for two lanes and the cycle lane to be extended south of the roundabout.

·    Request for a green turning arrow from Brougham Street into Ensors Road south.

·    Request for zebra crossings on raised platforms in the slips lanes.

·    Request for a signalised pedestrian crossing on the north side of the intersection.

·    Requests to replace the roundabout with traffic lights.

6.16    The following summarises feedback received from submitters who did not state their preference:

Congestion

·    Concern about the roundabout. As it is physically build up, it is difficult to see the indicators on other vehicles.

Cycle lanes

·    Request to extend the green cycle lane painted area through the roundabout

·    Request for the cycle lane to be two metres wide and to reduce the median strip to allow for this.

·    Request for delineators between the cycle lane and vehicle lanes and an advanced stop box at the traffic lights.

·    Request for hash lines to reduce vehicle queueing on the cycle lanes.

·    A suggestion that the Cycle Advisory Panel should be reinstated.

Additional requests

Request for there to be a right turning arrow from Brougham Street into Ensors Road (south).

6.17    As a result of consultation, the following changes were made to the final scheme plan for approval:

·    Confirmation that the cycle lane leading into the Opawa Road roundabout stops 15 metres prior to the roundabout.  NZTA requires that cyclists are expected to enter the lane to go through or around the roundabout.  Cycle lanes are not recommended through a roundabout.

·    Installation of flexi-posts between the traffic and cycle lane on Ensors Road heading towards Brougham Street.

·    Installation of bollards along the grass area near the entrance to 38 Ensors Road to prevent vehicles from parking in this area, or driving across the grassed area, and to avoid damage to the notable tree in this area.  The location of the bollards minimises any effects on the notable tree.

·    Narrowing of the median on Ensors Road to the minimum needed to allow for more width for the cycle and traffic lanes.

·    Adjustment of the alignment of the median at the Ensors Road / Brougham Street end of Ensors Road to provide a consistent width along Ensors Road for the cycle lane and traffic lanes (i.e. no pinch point).

·    Shifting the signals pole, as needed, with realignment of the median.

·    Removal of landscaping at the Brougham Street / Ensors Road end of the median to minimise ongoing asset maintenance, and continue with the patterned surface.  Landscaping is to be maintained at the roundabout end of the median for consistency at this intersection.

·    Relocation of the signals box from the island by the slip lane on Brougham Street to the berm.

·    No change is proposed to the Opawa Road roundabout.  It is noted that signals at the roundabout were investigated as part of the scheme design options, and this was discounted because of the dis-benefits to public transport, and I’s close proximity to the Brougham Street signalised intersection would exacerbate issues with queuing.

·    No change is proposed to the signals in terms of additional arrows.  The only changes to the signals will be phasing changes.

 

6.18    A letter has been sent to all submitters advising the outcome of the consultation, including details of the Board meeting and how they can request speaking rights. Also included in this letter was a link to the feedback summary with project team responses.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.19    This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, and in particular, the Council’s Long Term Plan, to support Public Transport Infrastructure, and a level of service that provides journey reliability on high frequency core services.

Financial Implications

6.20    Cost of Implementation

6.20.1 The estimated cost of the implementation of this project is $551,298, which includes 15% contingency and fees.

6.20.2 The budget for this project is $271,849 for FY18.  There is a budget shortfall of approximately $280,000, due to the high costs incurred in investigating and modelling the various options to realise real benefits in improved reliability and reduced delays to the Orbiter bus service at this intersection.

6.20.3 Additional funding has been approved by the change request process to enable this project to proceed to detailed design and implementation in FY18.

6.21    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs

6.21.1 There are anticipated increased maintenance costs due to the proposed green cycle lane markings and an additional sump.  The maintenance of the additional grassed area will be offset by the reduction in the landscaped areas.

Legal Implications

6.22    There are no legal implications beyond the Christchurch City Council’s rights as the road controlling authority for Ensors Road, and NZTA’s rights as the road controlling authority for Brougham Street.

Risks and Mitigations    

6.23    There are no identified risks.

Implementation

6.24    Implementation dependencies – n/a

6.25    Implementation timeframe – To be constructed during school holiday period, if possible, to minimise disruption to vehicle movements at the Ensors Road / Brougham Street intersection during construction.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.26    The advantages of this option include:

·   Greatest level of bus journey time improvement of all 12 options considered

·   Delivery of project for significantly less cost than next-best option (Option 4)

·   Meets key objectives of maintaining vehicle travel times and reliability on Brougham Street, and maintaining walking and cycling safety and access.

·   Increased cycling infrastructure will also help to increase safety for cyclists within the project area.

6.27    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   As with all options there will be a requirement for temporary traffic management and some limited disruption to traffic flows through the Ensors Road / Brougham Street intersection during construction.

7.   Option 2 – Option 5B – Northbound Two Laning and Revised Cycling Improvements

Option Description

7.1       This option is an amendment to Option 5A (the preferred option), and was designed to reduce construction costs  associated with narrowing the median on Ensors Road, south of Brougham Street by introducing a shared pedestrian and (northbound) cycle facility on the footpath.

7.2       This option would require property purchase to allow the relocation of an existing fenceline and timber pole to provide the minimum width required for a shared facility, and the supports for an existing road sign would need to be widened and raised.

7.3       The shared path joins the road again at Brougham Street / Ensors Road intersection and the joining location is protected by installation of flexible bollards.  The configuration of the cycle facilities can vary without affecting the performance of the option in terms of bus delays and journey time variability.

Significance

7.4       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.

7.5       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are low.

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.6       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

7.7       Community views were not obtained on this option.  They were only obtained for the preferred option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.8       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, and in particular, the Council’s Long Term Plan, to support Public Transport Infrastructure, and a level of service that provides journey reliability on high frequency core services.

Financial Implications

7.9       Cost of Implementation – the rough order cost for this option is $440,000, which includes a 57% contingency allowance.

Legal Implications

7.10    There are no legal implications beyond the Christchurch City Council’s rights as the road controlling authority for Ensors Road, and NZTA’s rights as the road controlling authority for Brougham Street.

Risks and Mitigations    

7.11    There are no identified risks.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.12    The advantages of this option include:

·   The same safety benefits and dis-benefits as the preferred option.

7.13    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Provision for cyclists is less attractive than the preferred option, as some cyclists may choose not to use the shared facility, marginally reducing the benefits of this option in comparison to the preferred option.

·   Property purchase is required to allow the existing fence to be relocated and to provide adequate width for the shared path, which may jeopardise the feasibility of the cycling facility along the northbound Ensors Road.

8.   Option 3 – Do Nothing

Option Description

8.1       The Do Nothing option reflects the existing geometry and road marking of the project area.  This option is included to provide a baseline for comparison and measuring the improvements of the other options investigated.

Significance

8.2       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.

8.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not necessary.

Impact on Mana Whenua

8.4       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

8.5       Community views were not obtained on this option.  They were only obtained for the preferred option, for which there was 32 submissions in support, or in support with a comment.  There were no submissions received in opposition to the project.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

8.6       This option is inconsistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, because it does not align with the Council’s Long Term Plan, to support Public Transport Infrastructure, and a level of service that provides journey reliability on high frequency core services.

Financial Implications

8.7       Cost of Implementation – Nil.

8.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Nil

8.9       Funding source – No funding is required.

Legal Implications

8.10    There are no known legal implications for this option.

Risks and Mitigations    

8.11    There is a risk of adverse public reaction, and damage to the Council’s reputation, if the project did not proceed after consulting with the public on the preferred scheme plan for the intersection.

Implementation

8.12    Implementation dependencies – Not applicable.

8.13    Implementation timeframe – Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.14    The advantages of this option include:

·   Initial capital cost savings

8.15    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Continued delays to, and unreliability of, the Orbiter bus service at this intersection.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Consultation Plan FINAL - Ensors Orbiter

27

 

 

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

Kirsty Mahoney - Project Manager

Lori Rankin - Engagement Advisor

Sharon O'Neill - Team Leader Project Management Transport

Lynette Ellis - Manager Planning and Delivery Transport

Approved By

Chris Gregory - Head of Transport

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

9.        Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report

Reference:

17/684176

Contact:

Shupayi Mpunga

shupayi.mpunga@ccc.govt.nz

03 941 6605

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to resource the Community Board to promote a pro-active partnership approach to decision-making between the Council and Community Boards working together to achieve the best outcomes for the city with decisions being made with a good understanding of community views.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the Area Update.

2.         Decide if the Board wishes to make a submission on the Marine and River Facilities Bylaw.

3.         Advise of items the Board would like considered for inclusion in Newsline.

 

3.   Community Board Activities and Forward Planning

3.1       Community Board Plan update against outcomes

The Board continues to meet to discuss its 2017-2019 Community Board Plan.  The Board is currently working on its priorities.

3.2       Memos/Information reporting back on Community Board matters

3.2.1   Graffiti Statistics – Attached is the bi-monthly report on the suburban statistics of the graffiti in the Christchurch City area.

3.2.2   Mobility Parking Spaces – At the Board’s 17 May 2017 meeting the Board discussed painting the mobility parking spaces in the Nayland Street carpark blue to decrease the general public parking in mobility parking spaces.  Staff have advised:

The Council’s policy on Equity and Access for People with Disabilities states:

4.3   Design, provide and monitor the use of mobility parking which is physically accessible, affordable, safe to use and appropriately located.

4.5.  Enforce regulations relating to footpaths and streets to allow people with disabilities to move about unobstructed (this includes, for example, cars parked across entrance ways and sandwich boards on footpaths).

Traffic Control Devices (TCD) Rule states:

Coloured road surfaces can also be provided to reinforce the use of reserved parking spaces by disabled users. It is recommended blue be used to help better identify parking spaces reserved for disabled road users.

Staff are opposed to marking one or two spaces ad hoc.  It simply isn’t anticipated by Council’s road budgets or maintenance provisions.  Council’s budget for new road markings is modest and is consistently spent each year (this year’s is fully committed).  It has never stretched to and does not anticipate coloured surfacing – as far as staff are aware all green cycle surfacing has been implemented through other budgets.  Therefore, staff disagree that there is an operational allowance for blue coloured surfacing within the operational budget for new road markings.  The main issue is that to start using the budget for coloured surfacing would likely deplete the budget well before the end of the financial year.  Then, Council is forced to unreasonably defer low cost items such as no stopping, parking ticks (for which the budget is intended) until next financial year funding becomes available. 

 Given the TCD Rule recommends green surfacing, staff are of the view the correct approach would be to seek a Council view on the marking of all mobility spaces, with a specific funding allowance through the next Long Term Plan (LTP). 

3.2.3   Christchurch City Libraries Mobile Van Changes – Since 2012 the Libraries mobile van has served its original purpose of serving communities who lost their library services and became  isolated and vulnerable as a result of the devastating 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes.  

·   The return of library services to Sumner with the opening of Matuku Takotako: Sumner Centre along with the recent reopening of voluntary libraries in Redcliffs and Heathcote, will mean a withdrawal of the mobile van from these areas.

·   The mobile van will continue to be responsive to community needs and reach out to vulnerable and socially isolated citizens across Christchurch.

3.3       The provision of strategic, technical and procedural advice to the Community Board

3.3.1   The Board adopted new Standing Orders and Code of Conduct at its 19 May 2017 Board meeting.  There are now some changes that will impact on the Board.  One being:

Standing Order 4.2:  Meeting duration

•     A meeting must not continue for more than eight hours from when it starts (including any adjournments) unless the meeting resolves to continue. 

•     No meeting can sit for more than three hours continuously without a break of at least ten minutes unless the meeting resolves to extend the time before a break.

3.4       Board area Consultations/Engagement

3.4.1   Below is the proposed timeline for Council Bylaw Reviews currently underway:

 

Marine and River Facilities Bylaw

Traffic and Parking Bylaw (proposes to incorporate Speed Limits Bylaw)

Freedom Camping Bylaw

Stock Control Bylaw

General Bylaw

Regulatory and Performance Committee

Complete

26 July 2017

26 July 2017

26 July 2017

26 July 2017

(recommendation for a few minor changes)

Council to approve draft for public consultation

Complete

10 August 2017

10 August 2017*

 

10 August 2017

10 August 2017

Public consultation

3 July  - 6 August 2017

Late August – late September

N/A

Late August – late September

Late August – late September

Public Hearings

Mid-October 2017

Mid-October 2017

N/A

Mid-October 2017

Mid-October 2017

Council to approve final bylaw

November 2017

November 2017

N/A

November 2017

November 2017

New Bylaw in force

December 2017

December 2017

Current bylaw to remain in force.

December 2017

December 2017

*    (recommendation that no change is made to the Freedom Camping Bylaw, therefore no public consultation required)

Proposed repairs to Penfold’s historic cottage

12 July – 14 August 2017

Summit Road Proposed times on road restrictions

10 July – 4 August 2017

 

3.5       Requests for information from Board meeting on Newsline

3.5.1   The Board is asked to put forward items they would like considered for inclusion in Newsline.

3.6       Significant Board matters of interest to raise at Council

3.6.1   Ferry Road Masterplan - Project FR4 Woolston Park Transportation Improvements.- The Board forwarded a report to the Council’s 6 July 2017 meeting asking the Council to bring forward funding and delivery of Ferry Road Master Plan FR4 to increase safety for students of Te Waka Unua School crossing Ferry Road.  The Council resolved:

That the Council:

1.    Note that staff have advised that planning and engagement will continue, however, delivery of outcomes will not occur until the 2018/19 financial year. 

2.    In the event that planning is able to be expedited such that the project is able to commenced in this financial year, if necessary, request staff bring a proposal back to Council for funding to be brought forward.

3.6.2   Community Board Delegations- At the Council’s 6 July 2017 Council Meeting the Council received the Strategic Capability Committee Report and part of the Council’s resolution stated:

That the Council:

2.      Note that a report on Community Board delegations will be provided to the Council within one month.

4.   Significant Community Issues

People without Homes and Related Issues

4.1       Status

4.1.1   This item is provided to give feedback to the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Board on its report to Council on public safety issues in Doris Lusk Reserve, homelessness and related issues and the subsequent Council resolution CNCL/2017/0097 that the Council:

Request officers to report back to the Council and Community Board on a joined up approach to addressing the issues raised in the report regarding the Doris Lusk Park and the need for drop-in facilities

4.1.2   At its meeting of 5 July 2017, the Social and Community Development Committee (SCD) considered a staff report on homelessness and possible approaches by the Christchurch City Council to address these.  The report outlined the Council and Community Board resolutions in this area, what is known about the size of the problem and suggested possible ways forward.  Traditionally public policy approaches to people without homes is to develop pathways to stable housing dependant on the dominant cause of the homelessness e.g. domestic violence, chronic mental health issues, chronic alcohol or addiction issues etc. This has resulted in a myriad of housing policies, funding pathways and support mechanisms.

4.1.3   Since the mid 1990’s authorities in the United States, Canada, Australia and some Western European countries have tried a different approach called Housing First.  In this approach people who are homeless, for whatever reason, are provided with a house that is likely to be their permanent dwelling and wrap around services are provided to first ensure that stable housing is established and then that any underlying issues are addressed.  Evaluations of overseas projects have shown that this is an approach with considerable merit especially in establishing a stable home for those formerly without a home.

4.1.4   There are two Housing First-based projects in New Zealand one in Hamilton, begun in 2014, and one in Auckland, begun in March 2017.  Both are supported by central government funding.  In both cases the role of the local council has been to be the “backbone” organisation that coordinates and facilitates the work of community housing providers, social service NGO’s working in the area and the relevant government social services agencies.  In both cases the Councils have also provided some funding to support their role.

4.1.5   The Government, in its national budget of 2017, has made provision for $16.5 million to support the further development of Housing First-based projects.

4.1.6   The need or otherwise for a drop-in centre will be considered as part of the development of overall approach to issues for people without homes.

4.2       Action

4.2.1   The SCD Committee resolved to request that staff:

1.         Undertake research in Christchurch to establish the number of people without homes, main attendant issues and baseline information.

2.         Work with people without homes, and a range of Government and non-government agencies to develop and implement a Housing First proposal to take to the Ministry of Social Development.

3.         Meets with the Social and Community Development Committee in August 2017 to discuss progress and next steps.

4.3       Timeframe

Ongoing.

5.   Major Community and/or Infrastructure Projects

5.1       Community Facilities

5.1.1   Bays Area Skate Project Progress - Staff are starting the process with the community to look at a suitable location for a skate facility in the Bays area, covering from Sumner to Ferrymead. The first step in the process is to come up with a site selection criteria and staff will work with the community to help with this.

Staff are planning to have a workshop to collect ideas on what is important to include in this criteria. The workshop will be held on Monday 24 July, 6pm at the Redcliffs Mt Pleasant Bowling Club, 9 James Street, Redcliffs.

More information about this project and how the workshop will be run will be sent out via the Bays Area Skate e-newsletter, and staff will be sorting a newsline article next week to share this information and how to be added to the subscription list.

This criteria will then be used by an independent consultant to create a list of possible sites, the sites that meet the criteria will then be discussed with the elected members prior to going out for public consultation.

Staff are still working with the Sumner community in relation to the temporary skate ramp.


 

5.2       Events Report Back

5.2.1   Winter Blast! On the 5 July, 300 local seniors enjoyed an afternoon of entertainment, music, dancing, and refreshments with Te Waka Unua Kapa Haka, Graham Wardrop and Waltham Community Cottage ukulele group. Woolston Club provided the venue and afternoon tea with support from Friends of Edmonds Garden. It was also an opportunity to find out about local exercise groups and for participants to meet Community Board members.

5.2.2   The Big Chill - was held on Saturday 8 July at Linwood Park for children and families at the start of the school holidays on the first day of Kids Fest. The park was busy with League games and over 400 happy kids and parents enjoying what was on. Feedback was very positive with everyone attending appreciating it was on and free to attend.

           

 

6.   Community Board funding budget overview and clarification

6.1       The Board’s 2017/18 Strengthening Communities Fund information will be shared with the Board once a report has been presented to the Council on 27 July and decisions made.  Staff will organise a workshop with the Board shortly after this has happened before a decision meeting is held.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Graffiti Statistics - Suburb Street Report June 2017

35

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Liz Beaven - Community Board Advisor

Vimbayi Chitaka - Community Development Advisor

Bruce Coleman - Community Development Advisor

Meg Logan - Governance Support Officer

Carly Waddleton - Community Development Advisor

Louise McLean - Community Support Officer

Diana Saxton - Community Recreation Advisor

Approved By

Shupayi Mpunga - Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

  


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

PDF Creator

 


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

19 July 2017

 

 

10.  Elected Members’ Information Exchange

 

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