Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Tuesday 5 June 2018

Time:                                    4.30pm

Venue:                                 Boardroom, Fendalton Service Centre,
Corner Jeffreys and Clyde Roads, Fendalton

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sam MacDonald

Aaron Campbell

David Cartwright

Linda Chen

Jamie Gough

Aaron Keown

Raf Manji

Shirish Paranjape

Bridget Williams

 

 

30 May 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Matthew McLintock

Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

941 6231

matthew.mclintock@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/

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

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.       Correspondence............................................................................................................... 5  

STAFF REPORTS

A       8.       Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Proposed Speed Limit Changes................................ 9

C       9.       Level Crossing Approaches - Proposed Road Marking Changes................................ 21

C       10.     Wairakei Road - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions................................................. 33

A       11.     Property Review Process.............................................................................................. 39

C       12.     Applications to the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund - Fendalton Bowling Club, Burnside Park Tennis Club...................................... 59

C       13.     Applications to the Board's 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund - Te Ora Hou Otautahi Inc and Fendalton Friendship Club.............................................................. 63

C       14.     Application to the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 Youth Development Fund - James Paget, Katherine Ellis and Klara Richter........................................................... 67

C       15.     Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 Youth Development Fund - Application - Max Jordan Quinn Shanks, Ella Maree Hutchinson............................................................ 71

B       16.     Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board Area Report - May 2018.......... 75

B       17.     Elected Members’ Information Exchange.................................................................... 83

C       18.     Resolution to Exclude the Public................................................................................. 84  

 

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

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 Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board meeting held on Monday, 14 May 2018  be confirmed.

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 4.30pm.

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

Julie Greenwood – Proposed Speed Limits on Harewood Road

Ms Greenwood will speak on behalf of Harewood School regarding the proposed speed limits on Harewood Road.  Item 8 refers.

 

5.2

Wayne Colville – Proposed Speed Limits on Guys Road

Mr Colville, a resident of Guys Road will speak to the Board regarding the proposed speed limits on Guys Road.  Item 8 refers.

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

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

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

7.        Correspondence

Reference:

18/489455

Presenter(s):

Matt McLintock, Community Governance Manager

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Correspondence has been received from:

Name

Subject

Airport Business Park

Russley Car Parking

Rhonda Mitchell

Birch Trees outside 67 and 67A Rossall Street

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the correspondence report dated 05 June 2018.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Correspondence from the Airport Business Park

6

b

Correspoondence from R Mitchell

8

 

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

8.        Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Proposed Speed Limit Changes

Reference:

18/329949

Presenter(s):

Steve Dejong, Traffic Engineer 

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board’s recommendation to Council that it approve speed limit changes within the Board’s area.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated following requests from developers and residents within the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood area.

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 the recommended decisions and 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 Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board recommends that Council:

1.         Approve that pursuant to Part 4 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, speed limits be revoked and set as listed below in resolutions 3 to 12, including the resulting changes in the Christchurch City Council Register of Speed Limits and Speed Limit Maps.

2.         Approve that any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls  or setting permanent non-variable speed limits and made pursuant to any bylaw or other legislation, the land Transport Act 1978 and any of its revisions to the extent that they are in conflict with the speed limits described in this report, are revoked.

Harewood Area 1

3.         Approve that the speed limit of Harewood Road west of Johns Road be set to 50 kilometres per hour commencing at its intersection with Johns Road and Russley Road and extending in a westerly direction to its intersection with the Christchurch International Airport Authority ‘Orchard Road’.

4.         Approve that the speed limit of Waimakariri Road and Whitchurch Place be set at 60 kilometres per hour.

5.         Approve that the speed limit of Harewood Road east of Johns Road be set to 60 kilometres per hour commencing at its intersection with Johns Road and Russley Road and extending in an easterly direction to its intersection with Woolridge Road.

6.         Approve that the speed limit of Sawyers Arms Road east of Johns Road be set to 60 kilometres per hour commencing at its intersection with Johns Road and extending in a south easterly direction to a point 300 metres north west of its intersection with Crofton Road.

7.         Approve that the speed limit of Watsons Road be set to 60 kilometres per hour commencing at its intersection with Harewood Road and extending in a north easterly direction to a point 200 metres northeast of Harewood Road.

Harewood Area 2

8.         Approve that the speed limit of Styx Mill Road be set to 60 kilometres per hour commencing at its intersection with Gardiners Road and extending in an easterly direction to a point 400 metres west of its intersection with Main North Road.

9.         Approve that the speed limit of Gardiners Road be set to 60 kilometres per hour commencing at a point 160 metres north of its intersection with Sawyers Arms Road and extending in a northerly direction to a point 100 metres south of its intersection with Wilkinsons Road.

10.       Approve that the speed limit of Highsted Road and Claridges Road be set at 50 kilometres per hour.

Hussey Road

11.       Approve that the speed limit of Hussey Road be set at 50 kilometres per hour.

Yaldhurst Area

12.       Approve that the speed limit of Guys Road, Coringa Road, Savills Road, Conservators Road and Ryans Road be set to 80 kilometres.

Date Speed Limits Come Into Force

13.       Approve that the speed limit changes listed in resolutions 3 to 12 above come into force following the date of council approval and installation of the appropriate speed signage, approximately July 2018.

 

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Road Operations

·     Level of Service: 10.0.6 Improve Road Safety: Reduce the number of reported crashes on the network

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood speed limit changes (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – Do Nothing

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Aligns posted speed with changing residential nature of the area.

·     Aligns with the NZTA Speed Management Guide 2016 and requirements of Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017 for road controlling authorities (RCAs) to set safe and appropriate speeds.

·     Reduces road safety risk

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     There are no known disadvantages.

 

5.   Context/Background

Fendalton/Waimairi/ Harewood Speed Limit Changes

5.1       There have been recent national changes to how speed limits are assessed.  This has resulted in a review of the speed limits within four study areas which are identified on Attachments A to D.

5.2       The Land Transport Rule Setting of Speed Limits 2017 requires that consideration of the safe and appropriate speed is made when reviewing speed limits.  The NZ Transport Agency Speed Management Guide (the Guide) and supporting information determines what the safe and appropriate speed is for certain roads.

5.3       A review of speed limits of roads within the study areas outlined in this report identified some speed limits that are presently not the safe and appropriate speed.  Option 1 of this report would make changes to speed limits that are in accordance with the safe and appropriate speed for relevant roads. 

6.   Option 1 – Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood speed limit changes (preferred)

Option Description- Harewood Area 1

6.1       Harewood Area 1 comprises of Harewood Road, Sawyers Arms Road, Waimakariri Road,
Watsons Road and Whitchurch Place. The majority of these roads in Harewood Area 1 currently have a posted speed limit of 70 kilometres per hour (km/hr).  Under this preferred option, the speed limit of these roads would be reduced to 60 km/hr.  The existing 50 km/hr change points would be retained, and existing signage amended to reflect the new 60 km/hr speed limit.  The exception is Harewood Road west of Johns Road, which is currently subject to a speed limit of
80 km/hr that would be reduced to 50 km/hr under the preferred option.  New 50 km/hr speed limit signs would be installed on Harewood Road immediately west of Johns Road.

6.2       The 60 km/hr speed limit on Harewood Road also responds to requests from Harewood School over a number of years for a reduced speed limit on Harewood Road past the school.

6.3       Waimakariri Road is typically only around six metres wide, and is adjoined by semi residential lifestyle blocks. In accordance with the Guide, a 60 km/hr speed limit is appropriate for this environment.

Option Description- Harewood Area 2

6.4       Harewood Area 2 comprises of Gardiners Road, Styx Mill Road, Highsted Road and Claridges Road. Sections of roads are currently posted at 80 km/hr.

6.5       Reducing the speed limit of Gardiners Road, Highsted Road and Claridges Roads reflects new or planned residential development fronting these roads.

6.6       Styx Mill Road west of Regents Park is approximately two kilometres in length and is identified as having a medium high collective crash risk under its current posted 80 km/hr speed limit.  Although development is not yet progressing as rapidly here as it is in Gardiners Road, most of it is zoned Residential and a fire station is to be located on Styx Mill Road.   The proposed subdivisions in Gardiners Road are also expected to increase traffic volumes along Styx Mill Road.

6.7       The Manager of the Council Refuse Transfer Station located at the eastern end of Styx Mill Road has raised safety concerns regarding entry of their articulated trucks into the site, and the speed of vehicles on the bend.  Reducing the speed to 60km/hr will help to alleviate these concerns.

Option Description- Hussey Road Area

6.8       The Hussey Road Study area comprises of a one kilometre long length of 70 km/hr road with two sweeping bends.  The popular Willowbank Wildlife Reserve is located at the western end of the study area, and frequently generates high traffic volumes and turning movements at the site access as well as pedestrian and cycle activity in the vicinity of the site.  Towards the eastern end of the study area is the vehicle access to the Styx Mill Conservation Area and Dog Park.

6.9       Given the features described above, reducing the speed limit from 70 km/hr to 50 km/hr is appropriate and consistent with the Guide.

Option Description- Yaldhurst Area

6.10    The Yaldhurst Study Area comprises of Guys Road, Ryans Road, Savills Road, Conservators Road and Coringa Road.  This area is one of the last remaining 100 km/hr zones left in the Northwest of Christchurch.   These rural roads generally have narrow carriageways and are out of alignment with the safe and appropriate speed identified through application of the Guide.

6.11    A reduced speed limit of 80 km/hr not only reflects the safe and appropriate speed identified in the Guide, but also provides more consistency with other rural and semi-rural roads west of the airport.

Significance

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

6.13    Engagement included a letterbox drop to the local community and publication on the Have Your Say webpage.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.14    This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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

6.15    Pre-consultation engagement was undertaken with NZTA and the New Zealand Police. Both parties provided their initial support through this process.

6.16    Consultation with the requirements of the Rule was carried out from 26 March to 16 April 2018. A total of 750 leaflets were hand delivered to residents, 169 leaflets were posted to absentee owners, and 101 key stakeholders were emailed a link to the Have Your Say webpage.

6.17    During the submission period 144 submissions were received, with responses summarised as follows.

View on proposal

Harewood area 1

Harewood area 2

Hussey Road

Yaldhurst area

Support

111

107

94

85

Do not support

19

19

16

8

Did not indicate

14

18

34

51

 

144

144

144

144

 

6.18    Of those that did not support the plan the issues raised were

·    Retain the existing speed

·    The speed limit should be reduced to 50km/hr rather than 60km/h.

6.19    A letter has been sent to all submitters advising of the outcome of the consultation, including details of the Community Board meeting, and how they can request to speak to their submission if they wish. Also included in this letter was a link to the feedback received and the Community Board report.

6.20    Staff will continue to monitor traffic speeds in the area and will revisit as residential intensity increases.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.22    Cost of Implementation – Approximately $10,000.

6.23    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - covered under the area maintenance contract and effect will be minimal to the overall asset.

6.24    Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

Legal Implications

6.25    Speed limits must be set in accordance with Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017 and subsequent amendments.

6.26    Part 4 (Clause 27) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to set speed limits by resolution.  The Council has not delegated its authority to set speed limits.

6.27    The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.28    Not applicable.

Implementation

6.29    Implementation dependencies  - Council approval.

6.30    Implementation timeframe - anticipated to be early in the 2018-2019 financial year.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.31    The advantages of this option include:

·   Reduced road safety risk

·   Aligns with the NZTA Speed Management Guide 2016 and the requirements of Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017 for RCAs to set safe and appropriate speeds.

·   Reflects emerging residential development patterns.

6.32    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   No known disadvantages.

7.   Option 2 – Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing posted speed limits.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       Refer to 6.15 to 6.20 above.

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 - $0.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0.

7.8       Funding source - Not applicable.

Legal Implications

7.9       Speed limits must be set in accordance with Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017.  A road controlling authority must consider whether a speed limit for a road is safe and appropriate in accordance with the Rule.  Staff are of the opinion that existing speeds as they relate to this option are not the safe and appropriate speeds. 

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    Not applicable.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

7.12    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   There are no identified advantages to this option.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Is incompatible with committed residential development

·   Does not reduce road safety risk

·   In the opinion of staff, does not meet the regulatory requirements of the Setting of Speed Limits Rule 2017. 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Speed Limit Change Plan - Yauldhurst Area

16

b

Speed Limit Change Plan- Harewood Area 1

17

c

Speed Limit Change Plan - Harewood area 2

18

d

Speed Limit Change Plan - Hussy Road

19

 

 

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

Steve Dejong - Traffic Engineer

Dane Moir - Engagement Delivery Assistant

Wayne Gallot - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

9.        Level Crossing Approaches - Proposed Road Marking Changes

Reference:

18/382135

Presenter(s):

Peter Rodgers, Graduate Transport Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to approve ‘no overtaking’ road markings on the approaches to level crossings in its area, the Blighs Road level crossing and the Glandovey Road railway level crossing, in accordance with Attachments A, B and C.

1.2       The Blighs Road level crossing sits on the ward boundary between the Papanui ward and the Fendalton ward.  A separate report was presented to the Papanui-Innes Community Board on 27 April 2018 seeking its approval of the changes to the Blighs Road level crossing.  The Papanui-Innes Community Board resolved to approve the ‘no overtaking’ road markings on the approach to the Blights Road railway level crossing.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report is staff generated.

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 assessing the impact of the project against the criteria set out in the Significance and Engagement assessment.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Approve the installation of ‘no overtaking’ road markings, in accordance with the report Attachments A, B and C, on the road approaches to railway level crossings on the following roads:

·        Blighs Road (Attachment B) noting that the Papanui-Innes Community Board resolved its approval of the installation of ‘no overtaking’ road markings at this railway level crossing at its meeting on 27 April 2018.

·        Glandovey Road (Attachment C).

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Road Operations

·     Level of Service: 10.0.6 Improve Road Safety: Reduce the number of reported crashes on the network.

 

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – Approve road markings (preferred option).

·     Option 2 – Do nothing.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Provides supplementary advanced warning on level crossing approaches.

·     Ensures that level crossings meet the minimum requirements for level crossing approaches required by the Traffic Control Devices Manual (Part 9: Level Crossings).

·     Clarifies to road users that it is inappropriate and unsafe to overtake just before a level crossing.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Cost to implement (although this is required by law).

 

5.   Context/Background

Background

5.1       The Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004 (Traffic Control Devices Rule) covers requirements for the design, construction, installation, operation and maintenance of traffic control devices, and functions and responsibilities of road controlling authorities. The Traffic Control Devices Manual (TCD Manual) is incorporated in the Rule as a reference and provides guidance on best practice and practices that are mandated by law in relation to the use of Traffic Control Devices. Part 9 of this manual relates to railway level crossings.

5.2       Following an audit of level crossings in Christchurch, staff identified a number of level crossings which did not have the full extent of road markings which are required by legislation.

5.3       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to approve the road markings required by legislation at the approaches to level crossings within the Fendalton wards.

5.4       In all cases, the road markings required are ‘no overtaking’ or ‘no passing’ lines, which are designated by a solid yellow line to the left of the white centreline and indicate that motorists should not overtake at this location.

Legal Requirements

5.5       The Road User Rules state that a driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction at or within 60 metres of a level crossing. The TCD Manual requires ‘no overtaking’ lines for a minimum distance of 65 metres. Therefore, to comply with the TCD Manual requirement, road markings need to be a minimum distance of 65 metres from the level crossing limit line.

5.6       Permanent warning signs must be placed at the start of the ‘no overtaking’ lines, which then extend up to the limit line at the level crossing. These signs must be placed where they are visible to approaching traffic and provide a safe stopping distance.

5.7       The proposed changes show a driver that they are not permitted to overtake in these areas.

5.8       A number of other minor changes to the level crossings are also being implemented, including the installation and relocation of existing permanent warning signs to ensure the level crossing approaches are compliant.

5.9       There are no changes required to the Barnes Road, Sturrocks Road, Strowan Road, and Wroxton Terrance level crossing approaches as they are compliant.

5.10    The following level crossing approaches (shown in Attachment A) all require minor changes. This will ensure that the level crossing meets the requirements of the Traffic Control Devices Rule.

Blighs Road (Attachment B)

5.10.1 The Blighs Road level crossing sits on the ward boundary between the Papanui Ward and the Fendalton Ward. A separate report was presented to the Papanui-Innes Community Board on 27 April 2018 for approval of the changes to the Blighs Road level crossing which are presented in this report.

5.10.2 There are existing ‘no overtaking’ lines on the both approaches to the Tuckers Road level crossing. However, they are of insufficient length.

5.10.3 The existing ‘no overtaking’ lines are proposed to be extended by 20 metres on the western approach, up to a total of 75 metres from the level crossing in accordance with Attachment B.

5.10.4 The existing ‘no overtaking’ lines are proposed to be extended by 40 metres on the eastern approach, up to a total of 98 metres from the level crossing in accordance with Attachment B.

Glandovey Road (Attachment C)

5.10.5 There are no existing ‘no overtaking’ lines on the western approach to the Glandovey Road level crossing.

5.10.6 There are existing ‘no overtaking’ lines on the eastern approach to the Glandovey Road level crossing. However, they are of insufficient length.

5.10.7 The new ‘no overtaking’ lines are proposed to be extended from the level crossing a total of 160 metres to the west, up to the Glandovey Road / Idris Road intersection in accordance with Attachment C.

5.10.8 The existing ‘no overtaking’ lines are proposed to be extended by 60 metres on the eastern approach, up to a total of 90 metres from the level crossing in accordance with Attachment C.


 

6.   Option 1 - Approve No Overtaking Lines at level crossing approaches (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Approve the changes to the road markings on the level crossing approaches in accordance with Attachments B and C.

Significance

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

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       Community views have not been sought on this proposal as these are minor safety related changes with little to no impact on the community. These proposed changes ensure that the layout of the level crossings are consistent with the legal requirements.

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 – $500 for the road markings.

6.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Maintenance of road markings is covered by the existing maintenance budget and the impact will be minimal to the overall asset.

6.8       Funding source - Traffic Operations budgets.

Legal Implications

6.9       The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Traffic Control Devices Rule.  This options makes the level crossings compliant with the Traffic Control Devices Rule. 

6.10    The Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the Council’s powers under section 334 of the Local Government Act 1974.  This includes facilities for the control of traffic and traffic enforcement laws (for example regulatory road markings).

Risks and Mitigations

6.11    There are no known risks to this option.

Implementation

6.12    Implementation dependencies - Community Board Approval.

6.13    Implementation timeframe – Implementation is expected to be before the end of June 2018.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.14    The advantages of this option include:

·   Ensure that all level crossings in the Fendalton Ward are compliant with the legal requirements.

·   Improve safety at level crossings.

6.15    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Cost to implement (although this is required by law).

7.   Option 2 - Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Do not make changes to the level crossing approaches.

Significance

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

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       See section 6.4.

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 – Not applicable.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Not applicable.

7.8       Funding source – Not applicable.

Legal Implications

7.9       The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Traffic Control Devices Rule.  Existing level crossings provisions for no overtaking lines are deficient. 

7.10    The Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the Council’s powers under section 334 of the Local Government Act 1974.  This includes facilities for the control of traffic and traffic enforcement laws (for example regulatory road markings).

7.11    The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Traffic Control Devices Rule.

7.12    This option involves two level crossings remaining non-compliant with the Traffic Control Devices Rule.

Risks and Mitigations

7.13    Not Applicable.

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

7.15    Implementation timeframe – Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   No cost to implement.

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Level crossings continue to have noncompliant markings.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Fendalton - Waimairi - Harewood Level Crossing Proposed 'No Overtaking' Road Markings - Overview Plan

27

b

Blighs Road Level Crossing Proposed 'No Overtaking' Road Markings - Plan For Board Approval

28

c

Glandovey Road Level Crossing Proposed 'No Overtaking' Road Markings - Plan For Board Approval

30

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Rodgers - Graduate Transport Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

10.    Wairakei Road - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

Reference:

18/475820

Presenter(s):

Wayne Anisy, Area Traffic Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to approve the installation of 'No Stopping' restrictions on Wairakei Road in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to the recent road layout changes on Wairakei Road as part of the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) Western Corridor upgrade project.

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 Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Revoke all stopping and parking restrictions on the north side of Wairakei Road commencing at a point 176 metres east of its intersection with Orchard road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 40 metres.

2.         Revoke all stopping and parking restrictions on the south side of Wairakei Road commencing at a point 64 metres east of its intersection with Peter Leeming Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 35 metres.

3.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the north side of Wairakei Road commencing at a point 216 metres east of its intersection with Orchard Road, and extending firstly in a south easterly direction, then in a clockwise direction around the cul-de-sac turning head, and terminating on the south side of Wairakei road at a point 104 metres south east of its intersection with Peter Leeming Road.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Parking

·     Level of Service: 10.3.8 Optimise operational performance.

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Install No Stopping Restrictions (preferred option)

·     Option 2 - Do Nothing.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Reduces the risk of a crash by providing sufficient turning movements in the cul-de-sac turning head and addresses the requests from the businesses to reinstate the parking in the areas west of the cul-de-sac.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Removes car parking within the cul-de-sac turning head.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       Wairakei Road (west of Russley Road) was changed to a cul-de-sac as part of the recent NZTA Western Corridor upgrade project.  The western leg of Wairakei Road no longer intersects with Russley Road. 

5.2       Following these changes, No Stopping lines were installed around the cul-de-sac turning head as part of the project and these restrictions now need to be resolved to become legal. Consultation for these upgrades was undertaken as part of NZTA's Notice of Requirements Process (NRP).

5.3       Areas just west of the new cul-de-sac turning head had now redundant No Stopping and Loading Zones.  These are no longer necessary due to altered traffic patterns. 


 

6.   Option 1 - Install No Stopping Restriction (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Install 'No Stopping' restrictions on Wairakei Road in accordance with Attachment A.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is low and is consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance includes the consultation with the owner and occupier of any property likely to be injuriously affected by the option.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       Consultation for these upgrades was undertaken as part of NZTA's Notice of Requirements Process (NRP). The revoking of existing traffic controls as part of this option has not been consulted on.  However, these were originally imposed to support traffic conditions that no longer exist and there have been requests from the businesses to reinstate parking as proposed. 

6.5       The Council Parking Compliance team support this option.

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 – NZTA will be funding the installation, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report.

6.8       Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

6.9       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Covered under the area maintenance contract and effect will be minimal to the overall asset.

Legal Implications

6.10    Part 1, Clauses 7 and 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to install parking restrictions by resolution.

6.11    The Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.12    The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.13    Not Applicable.

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

6.15    Implementation timeframe - Approximately four weeks once the area contractor receives the request.


 

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Reduces the risk of a crash by providing sufficient turning movements in the cul-de-sac turning head and addresses the requests from the businesses to reinstate the parking in the areas west of the cul-de-sac.

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Removes car parking within the cul-de-sac turning head.

7.   Option 2 - Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing intersection markings.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       This option is inconsistent with community requests for improvement at this location.

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 - $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0.

7.8       Funding source – Existing staff budgets.

Legal Implications

7.9       There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this option.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    Not Applicable.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

7.12    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   There are no advantages for this option as the No Stopping restrictions have already been installed in the cul-de-sac as part of the project.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not address the requests form the businesses to reinstate the parking in the areas west of the cul-de-sac turning head.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Wairakei Road No Stopping Diagram for Board Report

38

 

 

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

Wayne Anisy - Traffic Engineer

Steve Dejong - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

11.    Property Review Process

Reference:

18/358208

Contact:

Angus Smith

Manager – Property Consultancy

 

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to confirm the outcomes of a workshop at the end of last year which considered a list of properties in its area that are no longer required, or being utilised, for the purpose that they were originally purchased. In doing so, this report seeks a recommendation from the Board to the Council on resolutions to formalise and initiate the next steps in the process.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated to follow up on a Council resolution of 12 May 2016 Council Resolved CNCL/2016/00242 and related workshops held with Community Boards.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision(s) 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 on the basis that this is largely a general report implementing a process that follows a number of workshops and engagement with the Community Boards.

2.1.2   Additionally, given the general nature of the assets, the number of people effected and/or extent of effect is generally nil to low. Any significance issues based on individual property specifics is likely to be attended to on an individual property at future stages and related decision points in the process.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations:

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board recommend to the Council that it:

1.         Declare the following properties surplus and suitable for disposal:

Harewood

a.         Gravel Pit (22 Waimakariri Road) 22 Waimakariri Road.

b.         Harewood Ward Land Less than 300 m2  47F Sapphire Street.

c.         Stopped Road (1F Jessons Road) 1F Jessons Road.

Waimari

d.         Fendalton/Waimairi Ward Land Less than 300 Square Metres 23A Cricklewood Place.

 

2.         Grant delegated authority to the Property Consultancy Manager to:

a.         Commence the sale process for the properties set out in resolution 1 above in accordance with Council’s normal practices and policies, including unilateral dealings where a tender is not practical.

b.         Conclude the sale of these properties on the best terms possible.

 

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Facilities, Property and Planning

·     Level of Service: 13.4.10 Consultancy projects managed: e.g. acquisition of property rights, e.g. easements, leases and land assets to meet LTP funded projects and activities

4.2       The Council has adopted a process for determining the future use of properties that are no longer being utilised for a public work i.e. delivering a service or activity.

4.3       That process has been socialised with Community Board’s on a couple of occasions, with a workshop at the end of last year to categorise the properties into specific actions. This report serves to formally adopt those actions.

4.4       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Endorse the Community Board’s Workshopped Recommendations (preferred)

·     Option 2 - Adopt different categorisations and outcomes.

4.5       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.6       Both options are relatively similar and almost have the same advantages. The difference is that under option 2 the Community Board and Council can review and change the categorisation from that discussed in the workshop and therefore future use of the properties.

4.6.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Supports Community Board process, thinking and desires to date.

·     Creates certainty.

·     Provides continued momentum to the process.

·     Provides good prudent management and custodianship of Councils property assets while balancing community outcomes,

4.6.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Nil

 

5.   Context/Background

Background

5.1       The Council owns properties for the delivery of a service / activity / public work.  When in use, properties are held and funded by the business unit delivering that service / activity or project.

5.2       When a property is no longer required for the purpose for which it was originally held it is prudent for Council to make a conscious decision to determine the future use of that property.  Holding land with an indeterminate purpose or reason is not prudent and may put the Council at operational risk e.g.

5.2.1   Reputational for not proactively and prudently managing and utilising property assets.

5.2.2   Being reactively driven by unilateral unsolicited proposals to outcomes.  

5.2.3   Legislative non-compliance e.g.  not dealing with offer back obligations (section 40 of the Public works Act) appropriately.

5.2.4   Not meeting the principles of the Local Government Act.

5.2.5   Inappropriate uses developing e.g. vandalism, unsanctioned occupations.

5.2.6   Poor maintenance and compliance.

5.3       Holding property without an agreed reason, purpose or use also comes at a cost in terms of operating / holding, foregone capital, potential social, poor community outcomes and therefore imprudent custodianship of public assets / money.

5.4       In general terms the Council only holds land that is:

5.4.1   Required for a public work, either; currently utilised to deliver an activity or service; or held for future delivery of the same; and

5.4.2   Held for strategic purposes e.g. project; and

5.4.3   Held pending a future use decision i.e. under review in terms of future use. 

5.5       The Council adopted a process in May 2016 that is designed to facilitate and make decisions that support the active and prudent management of the Council’s property.

Process

5.6       A flow chart of the process is attached, but in summary is as follows:

5.6.1   When a property ceases to be held for the purpose of delivering the activity or service for which it was originally purchased then information about it is circulated around business units, Community Boards and internal stakeholders to assess and identify community needs and develop options for alternative public uses.

5.6.2   This is generally done on a semi regular basis, dictated by the number of properties that are no longer required for their original purpose. 

5.6.3   A period of six months is provided to establish the alternative public uses and options.

5.6.4   The results are collated into an options report which would usually incorporate as one of the options sale.

5.6.5   The Council then resolve future use based on staff and Community Board recommendations.

5.7       Retaining the property for an alternative public use needs:

5.7.1   To be rationalised.

5.7.2   A clearly identified need.

5.7.3   To be supported by a sound and robust business case.

5.7.4   Supporting Council strategies.

5.7.5   Established funding in the Councils annual and long term plans.

5.7.6   To have an identified sponsor i.e. end asset owner / sponsor and budget provision within the Long Term Plan.

5.8       It is important to note that this is not a process to review or rationalise the Council’s property holdings that are currently held by asset owning units to deliver a service or activity. That would need to be a separate organisation wide exercise.

Current status

5.9       The community boards have considered a list of properties in the ward that are no longer being utilised for the original intended purpose for which they were purchased and in doing so have categorised them as follows:

5.9.1   Held - Recommending on whether any of the properties should be retained for a strategic purpose.

5.9.2   Sold - Recommending on whether any of the properties should be declared surplus for disposal.

5.9.3   Used - Deciding on which properties the Board and staff will work on over the coming months to identify as having alternative public uses for recommending to the Council for a decision.

5.10    A list of the properties that are within this community board’s area and how they were categorised at the work shop at the end of last year is attached – “Workshop Recommendations”. This report seeks endorsement of those categories and thereby implementation of either sale (5.9.2 above) or a process to determine an alternative use (5.9.3 above).

5.10.1 Sale of a property would be implemented immediately in accordance with the resolutions above and normal council practices and policies.

5.10.2 The intention to implement a process to support an alternative future use decision will see staff working with the community board to design a process for each property to help deliver an outcome e.g. tender/request for proposal, expression of interest, community engagement, consultation, unilateral dealing etc.


 

6.   Option 1 – Endorse the Community Boards Workshopped Recommendations (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       That the Community Board reviews the outcomes from the workshop as per attached. Endorses these and recommends to the Council that it pass the resolutions above in section 3. - Staff Recommendations. This would enable some positive initiatives to be undertaken to achieve sale or determining future use. As well as creating certainty for those properties to be retained for a strategic purpose.

Significance

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

6.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not required.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.4       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

6.5       The substantive decisions required from this report do not require any specific consultation to seek community views and preferences. Attending to the future use of some of the properties may require some form of consultation and / or community engagement and that will be built into the process developed by staff and the Community Board.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.6       This option is with Council’s Plans and Policies:

6.6.1   Inconsistency – Not applicable.

6.6.2   Reason for inconsistency – Not applicable.

6.6.3   Amendment necessary – Not applicable.

Financial Implications

6.7       Cost of Implementation – The specific resolutions of this report have no direct impact. Though future individual property decisions may have. These will need to be considered separately depending on the circumstances.

6.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Not applicable refer above.

6.9       Funding source – Not applicable refer above.

Legal Implications

6.10    There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

6.11    This report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

Risks and Mitigations  

6.12    The purpose of this process and decision making is to create certainty and reduce risk.

Implementation

6.13    Implementation dependencies - On going collaborative work and support between staff and the Community Board to determine future uses.

6.14    Implementation timeframe – April to Sept initiate sale process or community engagement / consultation process depending on the property and its categorisation.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.15    The advantages of this option include:

·   Supports Community Board process, thinking and desires to date.

·   Creates certainty.

·   Provides continued momentum to the process.

·   Provides good prudent management and custodianship of Councils property assets while balancing community outcomes.

6.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Nil.

7.   Option 2 – Adopt different categorisations and outcomes

Option Description

7.1       That the Community Board reviews the outcomes from the workshop as per attached. Adopts and recommends those with some changes for Council to consider. In doing so the Council could adopt those or re-categorise as it sees fit. Accordingly, appropriately amending and passing the resolutions above in section 3. - Staff Recommendations. This would enable some positive initiatives to be undertaken to achieve sale or determining future use. As well as creating certainty for those properties to be retained for a strategic purpose.

Significance

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

7.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not required.

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.4       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

7.5       The substantive decisions required from this report do not require any specific consultation to seek community views and preferences. Attending to the future use of some of the properties may require some form of consultation and / or community engagement and that will be built into the process developed by staff and the Community Board.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.6       This option is with Council’s Plans and Policies

7.6.1   Inconsistency – Not applicable.

7.6.2   Reason for inconsistency – Not applicable.

7.6.3   Amendment necessary – Not applicable.

Financial Implications

7.7       Cost of Implementation – The specific resolutions of this report have no direct impact. Though future individual property decisions may have. These will need to be considered separately depending on the circumstances.

7.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Not applicable refer above.

7.9       Funding source – Not applicable refer above.

Legal Implications

7.10    There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

7.11    This report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

Risks and Mitigations  

7.11.1 The purpose of this process and decision making is to create certainty and reduce risk.

Implementation

7.12    Implementation dependencies - On going collaborative work and support between staff and the Community Board to determine future uses.

7.13    Implementation timeframe – April to Sept initiate sale process or community engagement / consultation process depending on the property and its categorisation.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.14    The advantages of this option include:

·   Creates certainty.

·   Provides continued momentum to the process.

·   Provides good prudent management and custodianship of Councils property assets while balancing community outcomes,

7.15    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Council’s decisions may not align with the Community Boards desired outcomes.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Process Flow Chart

47

b

Harewood Property list

48

c

Waimari Property list

54

d

Workshop Outcomes

58

 

 

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

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Approved By

Bruce Rendall - Head of Facilities, Property & Planning

Anne Columbus - General Manager Corporate Services

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

12.    Applications to the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund - Fendalton Bowling Club, Burnside Park Tennis Club

Reference:

18/494154

Presenter(s):

Lisa Gregory, Community Recreation Adviser

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to consider two applications for funding from its 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund from the organisations listed below.

Funding Request Number

Organisation

Project Name

Amount Requested

00058029

00057992

Fendalton Bowling Club

Burnside Park Tennis Club

Upgrade of Audiovisual Equipment

Bulb Replacement for Exterior Flood Lighting

$4,130

$4,000

 

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated as a result of an application being received.

2.   Significance

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

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

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

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Approve the making of a grant of $4,000 from its 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund to the Fendalton Bowling Club towards upgrading their Audiovisual Equipment.

2.         Approve the making of a grant of $4,000 from its 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund to the Burnside Park Tennis Club towards Blub Replacement for Exterior Flood Lighting.

4.   Key Points

4.1       At the time of writing, the balance of the Discretionary Response Fund is as detailed below.

Total Budget 2017/18

Granted To Date

Available for allocation

Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted

$136,995

$83,174

$53,821

$45,821

 

4.2       Based on the current Discretionary Response Fund criteria, the application listed above is eligible for funding.

4.3       The attached Decision Matrix provides detailed information for the application.  This includes organisational details, project details, financial information and a staff assessment.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 DRF - Fendalton Bowling Club Audiovisual Equipment Decision Matrix

61

b

Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 DRF - Burnside Park Tennis Club Flood Light Bulb Replacement Matrix

62

 

 

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

Lisa Gregory - Community Recreation Advisor

Approved By

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

 

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

13.    Applications to the Board's 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund - Te Ora Hou Otautahi Inc and Fendalton Friendship Club

Reference:

18/479941

Presenter(s):

Maryanne Lomax, Community Development Adviser

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to consider two applications for funding from its 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund from the organisation(s) listed below.

Funding Request Number

Organisation

Project Name

Amount Requested

00058206

Te Ora Hou Otautahi Incorporated

Whanau Resiliency Project

$28,400

00058183

Fendalton Friendship Club

Revitalisation and Club Promotion

$1,790

 

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated as a result of applications being received.

2.   Significance

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

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

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

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Approve the making of a grant of $20,000 from its 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund to Te Ora Hou Otautahi Incorporated towards wages for the Whanau Resiliency Project.

2.         Approve the making of a grant of $1,200 from its 2017-18 Discretionary Response Fund to the Fendalton Friendship Club towards promotional material and computer software.

4.   Key Points

4.1       At the time of writing, the balance of the Discretionary Response Fund is as detailed below.

Total Budget 2017/18

Granted To Date

Available for allocation

Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted

$136,995

$83,174

$53,821

$32,621

 

4.2       Based on the current Discretionary Response Fund criteria, the applications listed above are eligible for funding.

4.3       The attached Decision Matrix provides detailed information for the application.  This includes organisational details, project details, financial information and a staff assessment.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Te Ora Hou Otautahi Inc - Decision Matrix

65

b

Fendalton Friendship Club - Decision Matrix

66

 

 

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

Maryanne Lomax - Community Development Advisor

Approved By

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

14.    Application to the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 Youth Development Fund - James Paget, Katherine Ellis and Klara Richter

Reference:

18/415775

Presenter(s):

Maryanne Lomax, Community Development Adviser

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to consider three applications received for the Board's 2017-18 Youth Development Fund.

1.2       There is currently $4,150 remaining in this fund.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report is staff generated as a result of an application being received.

2.   Significance

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

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

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

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Approve the making of a grant of $75 from its 2017-18 Youth Development Fund to James Paget towards participating in the Southern Jam Youth Jazz Festival in Blenheim from 8 to 11 August 2018.

2.         Approve the making of a grant of $450 from its 2017-18 Youth Development Fund to Katherine Ellis towards competing in the World Archery Youth Oceania Championships in New Caledonia from 9 to 13 July 2018.

3.         Approve the making of a grant of $500 from its 2017-18 Youth Development Fund to Klara Richter towards competing in the U21 Canoe Polo World Championships in Canada from 31 July to 5 August 2018.

 

4.   Applicant 1 - James Paget

4.1       James is a 15 year old student from Strowan.

4.2       He has been selected to participate in the Southern Jam Youth Jazz Festival in Blenheim from 8 to 11 August 2018.

4.3       Southern Jam is a five day festival of gigs, competitions and master classes for high school bands from all over the South Island.  It is the only event of its kind in the South Island and provides a fantastic opportunity for young musicians to learn from those who are top class in their field.  The performances include easy listening blues, swinging rhythms and big brass show stoppers.

4.4       James is currently in Year 11 at Christchurch Boys' High School and is a member of the school's Jazz band, Concert band and Dixie band as a trumpeter. 

4.5       He is also a member of the Norwest Brass band which puts on regular concerts and performs at local community events including Celebrate Bishopdale.  They also entertain at local residential nursing homes several times a year.

4.6       Music takes up a large amount of his free-time outside of school but this year he was also involved in helping at a second-hand charity bookshop over summer.  He has also been coaching a local junior touch team this season.

4.7       The following table provides a breakdown of the costs involved in the event:

EXPENSES

Cost ($)

Transport, accommodation, food

$450

 

 

                                                                                                 Total

$450

 

4.8       This is the first time the applicant has applied for funding.

5.   Applicant 2 – Katherine Ellis

5.1       Katherine is a 17 year old student who lives in Casebrook and has been selected to represent New Zealand at the World Archery Youth Oceania Championships to be held in New Caledonia from
9 to 13 July 2018.

5.2       Katherine started archery in 2014 and since then has medalled at various South Island, National and Australian competitions.   The Oceania championships includes both target and match play competition and is a positive step towards higher level representation at events such as the Hyundai World Cup series in 2019.

5.3       Katherine manages her training around her NCEA study commitments, her girl guiding and involvement as an ambassador for the Forward Foundation, a charity encouraging greater women's participation in sports.

5.4       Katherine works two caregiving jobs to help fund her sporting trips.

5.5       The following table provides a breakdown of the costs for the trip:

EXPENSES

Cost ($)

Entry Fee

$106

Uniform

$190

Flights

$1,110

Accommodation

$1,200

Transport

$500

Food

$500

                                                                                                 Total

$3,606

 

5.6       The applicant applied for funding from Shirley-Papanui Community Board in 2014-15 and 2015‑16.

6.   Applicant 3 – Klara Richter

6.1       Klara is a 20 year old Avonhead resident and has been selected to represent New Zealand at the U21 Canoe Polo World Championships in Canada from 31 July to 5 August 2018.

6.2       Klara started playing canoe polo in 2013 and from there quickly became involved in other aspects of the sport such as coaching and leadership development.  Klara was recognised for her efforts with a runner up placing in the Southland Secondary Future Champions category at the Secondary School Sports Awards in both 2014 and 2015.

6.3       Klara was also selected to captain the U21 A Women's New Zealand Canoe Polo team in 2017.  From here the U21 team won the U21 grade at the 2017 International Oceania Championships and also came second in the Women's Open Competition.

6.4       Klara has now fulfilled her dream of representing New Zealand and playing against the best teams in the world and tries hard to give back to her sport, by volunteering to referee and coach in the sport that she loves.

6.5       Klara has been busy fundraising through sausage sizzles, raffles and various other activities.

6.6       The following table provides a breakdown of the costs for the trip:

EXPENSES

Cost ($)

International Airfares

$3,311

Domestic Airfares

$200

Travel Insurance

$259

Boat Insurance

$90

Accommodation

$1,200

Uniform

$200

Misc

$100

                                                                                                 Total

$5,360

 

6.7       This is the first time the applicant has applied for funding.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this 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

Maryanne Lomax - Community Development Advisor

Lisa Gregory - Community Recreation Advisor

Approved By

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

15.    Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood 2017-18 Youth Development Fund - Application - Max Jordan Quinn Shanks, Ella Maree Hutchinson

Reference:

18/511376

Presenter(s):

Lisa Gregory, Community Recreation Adviser

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board to consider two applications received for the Board's 2017-18 Youth Development Fund.

1.2       There is currently $4,150 remaining in this fund.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report is staff generated as a result of applications being received.

2.   Significance

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

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

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

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Resolve to approve the making of a grant of $500 from its 2017-18 Youth Development Fund to Max Jordan Quinn Shanks towards competing at the International Mounted Games Nations Teams Championships in Kentucky, USA from 2 to 15 July 2018.

2.         Resolve to approve the making of a grant of $500 from its 2017-18 Youth Development Fund to Ella Maree Hutchinson towards competing at the Youth World Touch Cup in Kuala Lumpur, from 4 to 12 August 2018.

1.      Applicant 1 – Max Jordan Quinn Shanks

1.1          Max is a 16 year old Burnside High School student who lives in Ilam and has been selected to                    represent New Zealand at the International Mounted Games Nations Teams Championships in                           Kentucky, USA from 2 to 15 July 2018.

1.2          Max has been riding horses since the age of 11 and currently trains three times a week and                      competes in riding events on the weekends.  Max also volunteers to coach younger riders in                   mounted games to help them improve their skills and achieve as high as possible in their sport.

1.3          Max has represented Canterbury at events throughout New Zealand and feels this International           competition will benefit him by gaining the experience and skills to improve personally and as                 part of a team.  Max is also eager to pass on what he learns to the mounted games community                           in Canterbury and New Zealand.

1.4          Max has been actively fundraising through sausage sizzles, raffles, silent auctions and an                           equestrian fashion show.  He also works two part time jobs and raises other funds through                      babysitting, wood chopping and farm chores.

1.5          The following table provides a breakdown of the costs for Max's trip:

EXPENSES

Cost ($)

Airfares

$3,100

Accommodation

$1,500

Insurance

$200

Uniform

$350

Registration Fee

$1,320

                                                                                                               Total

$6,470

 

1.6          This is the first time the applicant has applied for funding.

 

2.         Applicant 2 – Ella Maree Hutchinson

2.1          Ella is a 20 year old Casebrook resident who has been selected to represent New Zealand as part        of the U20 Women's Touch Team at the Youth World Touch Cup in Kuala Lumpur, from 4 to 12      August 2018.

2.2          Ella has played touch rugby since the age of seven, has been a representative for the last 11                    years and it has been her long term goal to represent her country in the sport that she loves.

2.3          Ella works as a youth worker and sports mentor full time and has a real passion for working with             young people, running active programmes, leadership programmes, coaching and after school                            programmes.

2.4          Ella also coaches in her sport and is excited to learn new skills on her trip away to help improve               her own game and utilise in her training programmes.

2.5          Ella will fund any shortfall for her trip away through her full time job and extra money she earns             cleaning at a local gym.

2.6          The following table provides a breakdown of the costs for Ella's trip:

EXPENSES

Cost ($)

Airfares to and from training camp

$180

Domestic flights to Auckland

$130

World Cup Costs – Flights, accommodation, uniform, van hire, registration

$4,380

                                                                                                               Total

$4,690

 

             2.7       The applicant applied for funding from the Papanui-Innes Community Board in 2013/14.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this 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

Author

Lisa Gregory - Community Recreation Advisor

Approved By

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

16.    Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board Area Report - May 2018

Reference:

18/404584

Presenter(s):

Matt McLintock, Community Governance Manager

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

This report provides information on initiatives and issues current within the Community Board area, to provide the Board with a strategic overview and inform sound decision making.

2.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board:

1.         Receive the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board Area Report for April 2018.

2.         Receive for information the staff memorandum regarding the Colina Street culvert.

3.         Receive for record purposes, the Board’s submission on Proposed Changes to Cranford Street and the Surrounding Area.

 

3.   Community Board Activities and Forward Planning

3.1       Memos/Information/Advice to the Board

3.1.1   Colina Street Culvert

The Board requested that staff investigate a reported hole in the river bed at Colina Street culvert.  The attached Information Memorandum provides Board members with a response to that request. (Refer Attachment 1.)

3.2       Board area Consultations/Engagement/Submission opportunities

3.2.1   Liquor License

·     Brigittes Espresso Bar, 209 Papanui Road Merivale – On-licence renewal

·     Frank’s, 251 Clyde Road, Fendalton – Off-licence renewal

·     Kinji Japanese Restaurant, 279B Greers Road, Bryndwr – On-licence renewal

·     Merivale Fresh Choice, 135 Office Road, Merivale – Off-licence renewal

·     Traiteur of Merivale, 209 Papanui Road, Merivale – Off-licence renewal

·     Tutto Bene Restaurant & Pizzeria, 192 Papanui Road, St Albans – On-licence renewal

·     Pavilions Restaurant & Bar, 42 Papanui Road, St Albans – On-licence renewal

·     Belfast Tavern, 899 Main North Road, Belfast – On-licence new

·     The Elmwood, 1 Normans Road, Papanui – On-licence renewal.

·     Samirai Bowl Japanese Restaurant, 501 Wairakei Road, Burnside – On-licence new

 

 

 

3.2.2   Consultations in the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood area

Jeffreys Reserve Water Tank Replacement

Feedback on an alternative option for the Jeffreys Reserve replacement water tank was open for comment from 23 April 2018 closing 14 May 2018. Council Staff also held a drop in session for residents on 1 May 2018.

 

Proposed Changes to Cranford Street and the Surrounding Area

A significant increase in people travelling on Cranford is expected when the Northern Corridor opens in 2020.  The Council is proposing changes to Cranford Street and the surrounding roads to coincide with the completion of the Christchurch Northern Corridor, to improve the travel times for people travelling through and minimise people taking short cuts through side streets affecting local residents.

 

The Consultation period was open from Friday 27 April 2018 until Monday 4 June 2018 and four drop-in sessions were scheduled during May 2018 for residents to talk to Council staff about the proposal.

 

3.2.3   Community Events Implementation Plan

Community Events implementation plan is currently in the initial stages of development and seek feedback on how the board would like to see this plan developed and implemented

 

The Community Events Implementation Plan will describe the goals and actions needed to steer Council’s role in the development and production of community events in Christchurch.

 

Council’s Community Events Team have reviewed current Council practice relating to the development and production of community events and considered what areas should be emphasised in the review process. Three areas have emerged:

 

·    Events produced by Council’s Events Production and Community Recreation Teams.

·    Sponsorship and support provided to third party events that support a well-rounded events calendar.

·    Creating a more events-friendly city, focusing on enabling events and streamlining the permitting process for event organisers.

 

3.3       Annual Plan and Long Term Plan matters

3.3.1   The Board Chairman and Deputy Chairman presented the Board’s submission on the Council’s Draft Long Term Plan to the Council Hearing on Monday 30 April 2018.

3.4       Board Reporting

3.4.1   Board members are invited through the issued weekly meetings schedule, to forward any items they would like highlighted for inclusion in the Board’s monthly Newsletter, Newsline releases and the monthly report to the Council.

4.   Community Board Plan – Update against Outcomes

4.1       The next progress report against the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board Plan will be presented to the Board in July 2018.

5.   Significant Council Projects in the Board Area

5.1       Strengthening Community Fund Projects

5.1.1   2018-19 Strengthening Communities Fund

Applications from the community to the 2018-19 Strengthening Communities Fund closed on 8 May 2018.

A decision report will be presented to the Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board at its meeting on 20 August 2018.

5.2       Other partnerships with the community and organisations

5.2.1   Community Liaison Meeting

The next Community Liaison Meeting will be held on Wednesday, 13 June 2018.

5.2.2   Tree Planting at Styx Mill

On Saturday, 6 May 2018 Trees for Canterbury, with co-ordination with Christchurch City Council Rangers, hosted a planting event at Styx Mill.  120 people planted over 1,800 native trees in just over an hour.

5.3       Community Facilities (updates and future plans)

5.3.1   Jellie Park Recreation Centre

The upgrade and earthquake repair programme at Jellie Park Recreation Centre is continuing with work on the spa and sauna having now been completed.  Work on the indoor Hydroslide is expected to be completed in September 2018.

Work has also begun on the outdoor pool and the outdoor area with the expected completion date for these to be November 2018. 

 

A small swim shop has also been installed near the entrance to the pool.IMG_2497

5.4       Infrastructure Projects Underway

5.4.1   Jeffreys Reserve Replacement Water Tank

As mentioned earlier in this report, feedback has been sought in relation to an alternative option for the placement of the Jeffreys Reserve replacement water tank.  A drop-in session was also held with affected residents.

A decision report will be presented to the Board for its consideration late June or early July 2018.

5.4.2   Proposed Changes to Cranford Street and the Surrounding Area

At its meeting of 30 April 2018, the Board decided to convene its Submission Committee to develop feedback to the above project.

The Committee met on Monday 21 May 2018 and compiled the feedback and submitted it on behalf of the Board on Friday 25 May 2018.  The submitted feedback is attached for information. (Refer Attachment B.)

6.   Community Board Funding Update

6.1       The Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board’s 2017/18 Discretionary Response and Youth Development Funds balance sheet is attached. (Refer Attachment C.)

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Memo to Fendalton-Waimari-Harewood Community Board - Ilam Stream, Colina St culvert 2018.05.10

80

b

Fendalton Waimairi Harewood Community Board - Submission on Proposed Changes to Cranford Street and the Surrounding Area May 2018

81

c

Board Funding Spreadsheet

82

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Kay Rabe - Governance Support Officer

Bronwyn Frost - Community Support Officer

Lisa Gregory - Community Recreation Advisor

Margaret Henderson - Community Board Advisor

Maryanne Lomax - Community Development Advisor

Trevor Cattermole - Community Development Advisor

Approved By

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

  


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

PDF Creator 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

17.  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.

 

 

 


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

18.  Resolution to Exclude the Public

Section 48, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

 

I move that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely items listed overleaf.

 

Reason for passing this resolution: good reason to withhold exists under section 7.

Specific grounds under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution: Section 48(1)(a)

 

Note

 

Section 48(4) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 provides as follows:

 

“(4)     Every resolution to exclude the public shall be put at a time when the meeting is open to the public, and the text of that resolution (or copies thereof):

 

             (a)       Shall be available to any member of the public who is present; and

             (b)       Shall form part of the minutes of the local authority.”

 

This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as follows:


Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board

05 June 2018

 

 

 

ITEM NO.

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED

SECTION

SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT

PLAIN ENGLISH REASON

WHEN REPORTS CAN BE RELEASED

19

Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board - Community Service  Awards 2018 Nominations

s7(2)(a)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons

Names of award recipients are kept confidential until they agree to accept the  award and subsequently have their name released as a recipient.  Names of unsuccessful nominees are kept confidential.

Names of successful nominees will be released once they have been notified of the Board's decision.