Hearings Panel

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

A Hearings Panel meeting will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 12 December 2018

Time:                                    8.30am

Venue:                                 Committee Room 2, Level 2, Civic Offices, 53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Panel

Members

Councillor Glenn Livingstone

Community Board Member Tim Lindley

Community Board Member Tori Peden

 

 

 

7 December 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Sarah Drummond

Hearings and Committee Advisor

941 6262

Sarah.drummond@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/

 


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

 


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

2.       Election of a Chairperson......................................................................................................... 4

3.       Declarations of Interest............................................................................................................ 4  

Staff Reports

4.       Proposed Earthquake-prone Buildings - Identification of Priority Routes.......................... 5

5.       Volume of Submissions - Proposed Earthquake-prone Buildings - Identification of Priority Routes...................................................................................................................................... 29   

6.       Hearing of Submissions........................................................................................................... 72

7.       Hearing Panel Consideration and Deliberation.................................................................... 72 

 

 

 


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

 

1.   Apologies

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

2.   Election of Chairperson

         At the start of the meeting a Chairperson will be elected.

3.   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.

  


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

 

4.        Proposed Earthquake-prone Buildings - Identification of Priority Routes

Reference:

18/1259752

Presenter(s):

Robert Wright and Richard Gant

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Hearings Panel to consider the submissions received by the Christchurch City Council in response to the public notification of the Council’s proposed Earthquake-prone Buildings – Priority Routes Policy.

1.2       The Hearings Panel has no decision-making powers but, in accordance with its delegation, must consider the written and oral submissions received on the proposal and make recommendations to the Council. The Panel’s consideration of submissions and the recommendations it makes to the Council must be consistent with Section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 which requires that “the views presented to the local authority should be received by the local authority with an open mind and should be given by the local authority, in making a decision, due consideration.”

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hearings Panel:

1.         Hears oral submissions and considers all submissions received during the public consultation process, on the draft Earthquake-prone Buildings – Priority Routes Map;

2.         Receives and considers the information and recommendations contained in the Hearings Panel Report and the proposed Earthquake-prone Buildings – Priority Routes Map (Attachment A);

3.         Recommends to the Council that the Earthquake-prone Buildings – Priority Routes Map incorporates any changes to the draft Map the Panel considers appropriate as a result of its consideration of submissions received and staff recommendations.

 

3.   Background

Legislative context

3.1       The Building Act 2004 (the Act) includes requirements relating to the establishment and maintenance of a national system for identifying, assessing and managing earthquake-prone buildings. The requirements came into effect on 1 July 2017.

3.2       The system categorises New Zealand into three seismic risk areas: high, medium and low. The seismic risk areas are used to set time frames for identifying and remediating earthquake-prone buildings. The vast majority of Christchurch district is within a high risk zone.

3.3       The Act requires territorial authorities to identify earthquake-prone buildings and to further identify a subset of priority earthquake-prone buildings. Priority buildings are those that are considered to present a higher risk because of their construction, type, use or location. They must be identified and remediated in half the time allowed for other earthquake-prone buildings in the same seismic risk area.

3.4       Section 133AE (clause 1) of the Act provides the meaning of “priority building”. The following subsections of that clause provide the meaning of priority building that relates to the identification of priority routes:

(e) any part of an unreinforced masonry building that could—

(i) fall from the building in an earthquake (for example, a parapet, an external wall, or a veranda); and

(ii) fall onto any part of a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare that a territorial authority has identified under section 133AF(2)(a):

(f) a building that a territorial authority has identified under section 133AF(2)(b) as having the potential to impede a transport route of strategic importance (in terms of an emergency response) if the building were to collapse in an earthquake.

3.5       Section 133AF of the Act details the role a territorial authority, whose district includes any area of medium or high seismic risk, has to identify certain priority buildings. This section says:

(2) The territorial authority,—

(a) for the purpose of section 133AE(1)(e) (prioritising parts of unreinforced masonry buildings), must use the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify any part of a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare in an area of medium or high seismic risk—

(i) onto which parts of an unreinforced masonry building could fall in an earthquake; and

(ii) that has sufficient vehicle or pedestrian traffic to warrant prioritising the identification and remediation of those parts of unreinforced masonry buildings; and

(b) for the purpose of section 133AE(1)(f) (prioritising buildings that could impede a strategic transport route),—

(i) may, in its discretion, initiate the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify buildings for that purpose; but

(ii) must not identify buildings for that purpose other than in accordance with the special consultative procedure.

Priority buildings identified with community input

3.6       The Council’s Building Consents team worked with relevant Council service teams and with emergency service providers to identify draft Priority Routes. Those routes were consulted on to ensure the views of informal emergency service providers, such as freight transport operators and demolition or construction service providers, as well as the wider community could be considered.

3.7       The Proposed Priority Routes Map (Attachment B) identifies the routes considered to have sufficient vehicle or pedestrian traffic or that are of strategic importance in terms of an emergency response such that the priority building provisions of the Act should apply. 

3.8       Certain hospital, emergency and education buildings are automatically prioritised in the Act because their function is critical in an earthquake event. As these are identified by legislation the routes they are located on may not be identified in the proposed Priority Routes Map.

3.9       The final Priority Routes Map will be used by the Council’s Building Consents team to identify and manage high priority earthquake-prone buildings and for building owners to initiate and undertake the necessary seismic remediation works within the required timeframe.

3.15   Once agreed by the Council, the Priority Routes Map will be publically available on the Council website and affected building owners contacted to ensure a very high level of awareness and transparency.

4.   Significance

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

4.2       Engagement requirements for this level of significance included, a special consultative procedure (required by the Act) which included a public notice, three public presentations, a consultation document which was posted to known earthquake-prone building owners (from the MBIE register); emailed to key stakeholders and social media to advertise the consultation.

5.   Impact on Mana Whenua

5.1       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.

6.   Community Views and Preferences

6.1       Consultation was undertaken that complies with the requirements for a special consultative procedure as detailed in section 83 of the Local Government Act (2002). The consultation period ran from Monday 15 October 2018 to Thursday 15 November 2018.

6.2       Details of the consultation undertaken are in Attachment B of this report.

Consultation feedback

6.3       Submissions were received from 17 submitters, including:

·    Three Community Boards: Spreydon Cashmere Community Board, Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board and Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board and

·    Seven key stakeholder organisations - Property Council New Zealand, Christchurch Civic Trust, Insurance Council of New Zealand, Earthquake Disability Leadership Group (EDLG), Historic Places Canterbury, Summit Road Society and Central City Business Association.

6.4       There were two questions posed, firstly relating to high pedestrian and vehicular thoroughfares and secondly, strategic routes.

High pedestrian and vehicular thoroughfares

6.5       12 submitters were in support of the proposed high pedestrian and vehicular thoroughfares, three did not support and two did not indicate a preference.

Strategic routes

6.6       11 submitters were in support of the proposed high pedestrian and vehicular thoroughfares, four did not support and two did not indicate a preference.

6.7       The written submissions received are in Attachment C of this report.

7.   Analysis of Submissions - Key Points

Feedback themes

Thoroughfares and strategic routes

7.1       Three submitters commented in support of the identified thoroughfares and strategic routes.

7.2       One submitter supported the proposed thoroughfares but was against the strategic routes, requesting the inclusion of Sherborne Street/Cranford Street to the list of strategic routes.

7.3       One submitter in support of both the proposed thoroughfares and strategic routes commented in support of particular strategic routes in the Port Hills but noted the risk of rock fall.

Two submitters commented that the proposed high traffic or pedestrian thoroughfare areas in the central city are too broad and should be refined.

7.4       One submitter questioned the inclusion of Hagley Park as a high pedestrian thoroughfare.

7.5       The owner of a small section commercial zoned land in Belfast verbally requested its removal from the high traffic vehicle and pedestrian thoroughfare areas as there are no buildings within the vicinity of that area. The land concerned is from Tyrone Street to Main North Road and to the side of the Railway.

7.6       Project team response

·    Recommend Sherborne Street/Cranford Street is added to the list of strategic routes.

·    Recommend the Panel notes the comments on the rock fall risk on Port Hills routes.

·    Recommend the high traffic or pedestrian thoroughfare areas in the central city are retained as proposed. This enables the Council to take a precautionary approach to managing risk posed by earthquake-prone buildings.

·    Recommend that Hagley Park is retained as a high pedestrian thoroughfare due to the high numbers of pedestrians that use that use the park and because there are earthquake-prone buildings within the park area.

·    Recommend the removal from the priority routes of a section of Wairakei Road where it intersects with the Belfast Bypass due to the road being permanently closed.

·    Recommend the land in Belfast from Tyrone Street to Main North Road and to the side of the Railway referred to in 7.5 above is removed from the map.

 

Heritage buildings

7.7       Two submitters commented on the impact the priority earthquake-prone buildings classification could have on heritage buildings.

7.8       One submitter questioned the balance between safety measures and the threat to heritage buildings and requested that Council incentivise the repair of heritage buildings.

7.9       One submitter commented that Council should put in place a requirement for building owners that receive a heritage grant to undertake the work in a timely manner.

7.10    Project team response

·    The Council has a heritage grants scheme that building owners can apply to. The Council can also allow more time for building repairs when there are valid reasons to do this – which could include retention of a heritage building.

·    The Council’s heritage grants require building owners to undertake the agreed work within 18 months and to the satisfaction of the Council’s Heritage team. 

·    Recommend these submission points are noted.

 

Identification of earthquake-prone buildings

7.11    Three submitters commented that earthquake-prone buildings should be identified.

7.12    One submitter commented that the public needs a visual aid to tell them the building is earthquake-prone.

7.13    Project team response

·    Known earthquake-prone buildings are listed on the MBIE national register. Go to: https://epbr.building.govt.nz/

·    Building owners are required to display earthquake-prone building notices.

·    Recommend these submission points are noted.

 

Partial repair

7.14    Two submitters commented on the process to repair earthquake-prone buildings. Both requested that building owners be able to partially repair earthquake-prone elements of their building.

7.15    Project team response

·    This is already in place, with building owners required to repair or demolish the elements of the buildings that result in them being defined as earthquake-prone (below 34 per cent compliance with the New Building Standards: NBS).

·    Recommend the submission point is noted.

8.   Proposed Priority Routes

8.1       The recommended Earthquake-prone Buildings Priority Routes are shown on the map

www.ccc.govt.nz/thoroughfaresandstrategicroutes

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A Earthquake-prone Buildings - Priority Routes Map Consultation

10

b

Attachment B Earthquake-prone Buildings Priority Routes Submissions Received

15

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Gavin Thomas - Principal Advisor Economic Policy

Lori Rankin - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Robert Wright - Head of Building Consenting

Leonie Rae - General Manager Consenting and Compliance

  


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

 

5.        Volume of Submissions - Proposed Earthquake-prone Buildings - Identification of Priority Routes

Reference:

18/1264322

Presenter(s):

Sarah Drummond, Hearings and Committee Advisor

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to collate, for the consideration of the Hearings Panel, the submissions received in response to the consultation on the.

1.2       A volume of submissions received from submitters who have subsequently asked to be heard in person by the Hearings Panel and are scheduled to be heard at the meeting is appended as Attachment A.

1.3       A volume of submissions received from submitters who have not asked to be heard in person is appended as Attachment C

1.4       At the close of the Agenda the following submitters advised that they were not available to speak to their submission, or, that they no longer wished to be heard and are attached as Attachment B:

1.4.1   The Property Council of New Zealand

1.4.2   Spreydon Cashmere Community Board

1.5       Note, that the Local Government Act 2002 requires, as one of the principles of consultation, that “the views presented to the local authority should be received by the local authority with an open mind and should be given by the local authority, in making a decision, due consideration” (section 82(1)(e)).

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Hearings Panel:

1.         Accept the written submissions (including any late submissions) received on the review of the earthquake prone buildings consultation.

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Volume 1 - Heard Submissions

31

b

Volume 2 - No Longer Heard Submissions

43

c

Volume 3 - Not Heard Submissions

48

 

 

Signatories

Author

Sarah Drummond - Committee and Hearings Advisor

Approved By

Sarah Drummond - Committee and Hearings Advisor

  


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Hearings Panel

12 December 2018

 

 

6.    Hearing of Submissions

 

Submitters who indicated that they wished to be heard in person will present to the Hearings Panel.  A schedule of presenters can be found at the beginning of the volume of “Heard Submissions”.

 

 

 

7.    Hearings Panel Consideration and Deliberation