Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

A meeting of the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Friday 3 March 2017

Time:                                    9am

Venue:                                 Council Chamber, Environment Canterbury, 200 Tuam Street

 

 

 

24 February 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

                           
             


To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/meetings-agendas-and-minutes/

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

Committee Members

 

 

 

UDS Independent Chair

Bill Wasley

 

Christchurch City Council

Mayor Lianne Dalziel, Councillors Phil Clearwater and Sara Templeton

 

Environment Canterbury

Chairman David Bedford, Councillors Cynthia Roberts and Peter Skelton

 

Selwyn District Council

Mayor Sam Broughton, Councillors Malcolm Lyall and Mark Alexander

 

Waimakariri District Council

Mayor David Ayers, Councillors Kevin Felstead and Neville Atkinson

 

Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu

Lisa Tumahai

 

New Zealand Transport Agency (observer)

Jim Harland

 

Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (observer)

Kelvan Smith

 

Canterbury District Health Board (observer)

David Meates

 

 

UDS Implementation Manager

Keith Tallentire

ph 941 8590

 

Committee Adviser

Aidan Kimberley

ph 941 6566

 


 

UDS LogoUrban Development Strategy Implementation Committee (UDSIC) Terms of Reference (2015)

 

1.  Purpose

The UDSIC is a joint committee within the meaning of the Local Government Act 2002. In 2015 it absorbed additional functions from the former Recovery Strategy Advisory Committee established by the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority in 2012.

Local authority members are Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council, Selwyn District Council and Canterbury Regional Council. The joint committee has additional public body representation from tangata whenua and other agencies. It has been established to oversee implementation of the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy (UDS), provide advice to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and ensure integration between earthquake recovery activity and longer term urban development activity, including:

Providing clear and united leadership in delivering the UDS vision and principles;

Promoting integration with the Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch, associated recovery plans and programmes including the implementation of the Land Use Recovery Plan (LURP) and Natural Environment Recovery Programme (NERP); and,

Supporting the delivery of aligned tangata whenua objectives as outlined in Ngāi Tahu 2025 and the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan 2013.

The Committee is a formal joint committee pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002, (Schedule 7, Section 30). The Local Authorities have resolved that the Committee is not discharged at the point of the next election period (in line with clause 30 (7) of schedule 7).

2.  Membership

The local authorities and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu shall each appoint up to three representatives, including their respective Mayors, Chair and Kaiwhakahaere.

The Chief Executives of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) and Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB), and the Regional Director of the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) attend as observers and have speaking rights but in a non-voting capacity.

There shall be an Independent Chair (non-elected member), appointed by the Committee, who has speaking rights and voting capacity.

The standing voting membership is limited to 16 members (including the Independent Chair), but with the power to co-opt up to a maximum of two additional non-voting members where required to ensure effective implementation.

The Committee shall also appoint a Deputy Chair, who shall be elected at the commencement of each triennium, and who shall be a member of the Committee.

In accordance with Section 30A of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002, the quorum at a meeting of the Committee shall be eight voting members.

Other representatives of voting and non-voting organisations are permitted to attend meetings of the Committee; however attendance at any public excluded session shall only be permitted with the prior approval of the Chair. Likewise, speaking rights of other representatives at Committee meetings (whether in public session or not) shall only be granted with the prior approval of the Chair.

 

 

3.  Meeting Frequency

Monthly, or as necessary and determined by the Independent Chair.

Notification of meetings and the publication of agendas and reports shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Part 7 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

4.  Committee Delegations

The UDS Implementation Committee is delegated the following functions in support of its overall purpose:

General

Overseeing implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP, NERP and associated documents, such as the Greater Christchurch Transport Statement

Advising the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority on the development and implementation of the Recovery Strategy and any associated matters, including programmes, plans, projects, systems, processes and resources led by CERA or any other central government agency for the purposes of the recovery of greater Christchurch (as defined in the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011)

Ensuring the integration between the UDS and any of the foregoing matters

Ensuring organisational systems and resources support implementation

Monitoring and reporting progress against actions and milestones

Managing any risks identified in implementation

Identifying and resolving any implementation inconsistencies arising from partner consultation processes

Facilitating consultation and establishing forums as necessary to support implementation and review

Periodically reviewing and recommending any adjustments to the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP.

 

Specific

Selecting and appointing an Independent Chair and Deputy Chair

Taking responsibility for implementing any actions specifically allocated to the Committee

Implementing a Memorandum of Understanding, as adopted by the Committee for each triennial period, to provide and maintain partnership relationships and provide for the resolution of any conflict

Advocate for statements of intent of council owned companies to be aligned to implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP where appropriate.

Champion integration and implementation through partner strategies, programmes, plans and policy instruments (including the Regional Policy Statement, Regional and District Plans, Long Term Plans (LTPs), Annual Plans, transport programmes and triennial agreements) and through partnerships with other sectors such as health, education and business.

Establish protocols to ensure that implementation, where necessary, is consistent, collaborative and/or coordinated to achieve optimal outcomes.

Making submissions, as appropriate, on Government proposals and other initiatives relevant to the implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP.

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

AGENDA ITEMS

 

1.       Apologies................................................................................................................................... 7

2.       Declarations of Interest............................................................................................................ 7

3.       Deputations by Appointment.................................................................................................. 7

4.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes.......................................................................................... 7

STAFF REPORTS

5.       Strategic Approach to Regeneration Planning.................................................................... 15

6.       Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group to the Committee on a planned strategy review....................................................................................................................................... 17

7.       Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group on a revised Memorandum of Agreement for the Committee.................................................................................................................. 29

8.       Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document ..................................................... 55

9.       Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan Implementation Progress Report........................................ 61

10.     Urban Development and Regeneration update................................................................... 67   

 


 

Standing Items

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

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.   Deputations by Appointment

There were no deputations by appointment at the time the agenda was prepared. 

4.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee meeting held on Friday, 3 February 2017 be confirmed (refer page 8).


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

 

Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Friday 3 February 2017

Time:                                    9.03am

Venue:                                 Council Chamber, Environment Canterbury, 200 Tuam Street

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Members

Bill Wasley                                         

Chairman David Bedford , Environment Canterbury          

Councillor Cynthia Roberts , Environment Canterbury      

Councillor Peter Skelton , Environment Canterbury           

Mayor Sam Broughton , Selwyn District Council      

Deputy Mayor Malcolm Lyall , Selwyn District Council       

Mayor David Ayers , Waimakariri District Council    

Deputy Mayor Kevin Felstead , Waimakariri District Council        

Councillor Neville Atkinson , Waimakariri District Council 

Mayor Lianne Dalziel , Christchurch City Council      

Councillor Phil Clearwater , Christchurch City Council        

Councillor Sara Templeton , Christchurch City Council       

(Non-voting member) Kelvan Smith , Greater Christchurch Group (DPMC)  

(Observer) Jen Crawford , Regenerate Christchurch         

 

 

2 February 2017

 

 

 

Keith Tallentire

UDS Implementation Manager

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

 


  

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00001

That the apologies from David Meates, Jim Harland, Councillor Mark Alexander and Lisa Tumahai, and Mayors Lianne Dalziel and Sam Broughton for lateness, be accepted.

Michael Aitken was in attendance on behalf of the New Zealand Transport Agency.

Member Wasley/Mayor                                                                                                                                          Carried

2.   Declarations of Interest

Chairperson Bill Wasley declared an interest in Item 5, Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group to the Committee on the continued role of the Independent Chair

3.   Deputations by Appointment

There were no deputations by appointment.

4.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00002

Committee Decision

That the minutes of the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee meeting held on Friday, 9 December 2016 be confirmed.

Member Lyall/Member Skelton                                                                                                                           Carried

 

Mayor Lianne Dalziel joined the meeting at 09:04am

Mayor Sam Broughton joined the meeting at 09:27am

6.   Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group on a strategic approach to use of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016

 

Ivan Iafeta, Chief Executive of Regenerate Christchurch, and Jen Crawford, Regenerate Christchurch Board Member, joined the table to present on this item. The presentation updated the Committee on the work and focus for Regenerate Christchurch. It also outlined the process for submitting Regeneration Plans, and the importance and value of engaging people and communities.

A discussion was held on what can be learned from recent projects such as the Waimakariri Red Zone Recovery Plan. Comments were also made on the value of having an overall strategic view instead of viewing individual regeneration plans in isolation, the need for prompt responses from partners when developing plans and a desire to use the legislation wisely before it expires in 2021.


 

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00003

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Receive the presentation from Regenerate Christchurch

2.         Request further advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group relating to the strategic approach to the application of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016.

Member Skelton/Member Atkinson                                                                                                                  Carried

 

Chairperson Bill Wasley left the meeting at 09:34 am and Mayor David Ayers assumed the Chair.

5.   Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group to the Committee on the continued role of the Independent Chair

 

Jim Palmer, Chief Executive of Waimakariri District Council and representative from the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG), joined the table for this item.

 

The Committee was advised that the Chief Executives Advisory Group has confidence in the current Independent Chair. While there would be benefits in having a locally based Chairperson such as reduced travel costs, there would also be drawbacks such as the loss of experience and continuity ahead of the planned strategy review, and the potential difficulty for a locally based Chairperson to remain impartial. It was also noted that it is incumbent on the whole committee to provide local leadership, with the Independent Chair facilitating and working to support a unified Committee.

 

 

Motion

1.         That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee Request Christchurch City Holdings Limited to go to the local market to investigate the availability of other candidates for the role of Independent Chairperson.

Mayor Dalziel/Member Templeton                                                                                                                           Lost

 

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00004

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Confirms the continued appointment of the current Independent Chair until the planned strategy review has been completed.

2.         Delegate to the Chief Executives Advisory Group the authority to complete the contractual arrangements for this reappointment.

Member Skelton/Member Atkinson                                                                                                                  Carried

Chairperson Bill Wasley returned to the meeting at 10:07 am and resumed the Chair.


 

7.   Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group on enhancing linkages to other partnerships, agencies and organisations

 

Jim Palmer, Chief Executive of Waimakariri District Council and representative from the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG), remained at the table for this item.

 

The recommended approach recognised that many partner organisations, including members of this Committee, were already representatives on the governance of related partnerships, and that partner staff also had good links to such initiatives.

 

It was highlighted to the Committee that CEAG will reflect on whether there is going to be any duplication of efforts in establishing a stakeholder reference group (a separate recommendation from the UDSIC advice paper) as well as endorsing the informal networking approach.

Comments were made about the importance of including groups relating to ecology, transport, education and Police in any networking arrangements.

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00005

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Endorse an informal networking approach to strengthen and maintain links with related partnerships (including those relating to resilience, Safer Christchurch, and Healthy Christchurch initiatives).

2.         Request to receive periodical updates from related partnerships on their work at future meetings of this Committee or through the Committee being invited to the meetings of such bodies.  

3.         Undertake discussions with leaders from other organisations on an issues and as needed basis rather than through a standing forum arrangement.

4.         Delegate the planning arrangements for such networking and discussions to the Chief Executives Advisory Group, supported by the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Manager.

5.         Seek further advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group on how UDSIC recommendation (g) relating to a stakeholder reference group might be best progressed in light of any Committee resolution relating to recommendation (f) being the subject of this report.

Member Bedford/Member Lyall                                                                                                                          Carried

 

8.   Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group on renaming of the Partnership and Committee

 

Jim Palmer, Chief Executive of Waimakariri District Council and representative from the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG), remained at the table for this item.

The Committee discussed the value of retaining a reference to the Urban Development Strategy in the name against the need to reflect the wider leadership role the committee now fills. It was also noted that the name put forward by the Chief Executives Advisory Group, while a genuine option, was primarily intended to provoke discussion.

The Committee stressed the importance of putting more emphasis on enhancing the public’s understanding and appreciation of the role of the committee and the Urban Development Strategy, and suggested that thought needs to be put into how to do this in conjunction with the launch of the new name.

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00006

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Subject to confirmation, as outlined in recommendation 4, renames the Partnership the ‘Greater Christchurch Partnership.’

2.         Subject to confirmation, as outlined in recommendation 4, renames the Committee the ‘Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee’.

3.         Requests that these names listed above be included in the revised Memorandum of Agreement due for formal consideration at the Committee’s next meeting.

4.         Note that the new names will not become official until they have been ratified at governance meetings of partner organisations as part of their consideration of the revised Memorandum of Agreement.

5.         Work with Ngai Tahu to develop a Maori component as part of the new name.

Mayor Broughton/Mayor Dalziel                                                                                                                          Carried

 

The meeting adjourned at 10:38am and resumed at 10:56am

9.   Health Precinct Update

 

Dr Ian Town, accompanied by colleagues from the Health Precinct Advisory Council, addressed the committee regarding the Health Precinct which is currently under development. The Committee discussed the value the health sector brings to the city, and noted that the precinct will add to the city’s world class medical research facilities and enhance its ability to attract a high calibre of medical specialists. Comment was made that the Health Precinct is perhaps the most important development to emerge from the central city blueprint.

It was suggested that the Health Precinct Advisory Council make further presentations to the Christchurch City Council and the Canterbury Mayoral Forum to assist in further raising the profile of this initiative.

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00007

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Receive the presentation.

Member Templeton/Mayor Ayers                                                                                                                      Carried

 


 

 

10. Secretariat update

 

The Committee agreed to proceed with a bus tour on March 17, with further tours to follow in the hope that members who are unable to attend one tour will be available for others.

Councillor Peter Skelton asked that Paul Lonsdale and Tā Mark Solomon be invited to the next committee meeting to be presented with their commemorative plaques.

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00008

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Receive the report.

Member Lyall/Member Clearwater                                                                                                                    Carried

 

11. Urban Development and Regeneration update

 

Councillor Sara Templeton requested that some thought be put into how to deal with situations where no monthly update is received from some strategy partners and related organisations.

 

Committee Resolved GCUC/2017/00009

Joint Committee Decision

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Note the report and receive the attached Urban Development and Regeneration Update.

Member Felstead/Member Roberts                                                                                                                  Carried

 

 

   

Meeting concluded at 11:40am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 3rd DAY OF MARCH 2017

 

Bill Wasley

Chairperson

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

5.        Strategic Approach to Regeneration Planning

Reference:

17/185087

Contact:

Ivan Iafeta

ktallentire@greaterchristchurch.org.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to recommend to the Committee an approach to developing a regeneration planning framework (Regeneration Framework).

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       Regeneration is one of the seven underlying principles of the UDS.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Consider and provide feedback on the approach that Regenerate Christchurch and UDS partners intend to take to develop a regeneration planning framework as outlined in this report

2.         Agree that a proposed regeneration planning framework be provided to this Committee for discussion and adoption at its next meeting.

 

 

4.   Context/Background

4.1       At its meeting on 3 February 2017, UDSIC resolved to request advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG) on a strategic approach to using the powers under the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016 (GCR Act). 

4.2       As the entity responsible for leading the regeneration of Christchurch, Regenerate Christchurch strongly supports developing a Regeneration Framework to inform a strategic approach to regeneration planning.

4.3       Regenerate Christchurch attended the last CEAG meeting to discuss the work it is doing to develop a Regeneration Framework.  At that meeting CEAG agreed to Regenerate Christchurch submitting a paper for consideration at the next UDSIC meeting outlining its proposed approach together with the rationale for, and purpose of, the Regeneration Framework.

5.   Discussion

5.1       Achieving regeneration will require a collective effort between Regenerate Christchurch, UDS Partners, other regeneration partners and the wider community.  The planning powers under the GCR Act expire in 2021.  The full potential of the GCR Act will be maximised through the adoption of a planned and coordinated approach to regeneration.

5.2       The proposed Regeneration Framework is intended to be a key reference document and guide regeneration activities.  It will:

·        Describe what regeneration means for Greater Christchurch;

·        Support the strategic application of planning processes under the GCR Act;

·        Provide a basis for prioritisation and a way of assessing progress;

·        Provide confidence that the regeneration of Greater Christchurch is well planned, co-ordinated and progressing; and

·        Provide a clear view of what Christchurch wants to achieve by 2021 to ensure that regeneration activities are linked to desired outcomes.

5.3       Regenerate Christchurch has been working to develop a clear understanding of what regeneration means for greater Christchurch.  This work has considered the vision and value statements from Ngāi Tahu as the Crown’s Treaty Partner, together with the principles in the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Update, the Resilient Greater Christchurch Plan and other relevant strategic documents.

5.4       The term “regeneration” is broadly defined in the GCR Act and, based on engagement to date, there is an emerging picture of what regeneration means to people and how it is being interpreted.

5.5       Three key regeneration themes have emerged from this work:

People

The people of Christchurch are connected with their communities, engaged in achieving their vision and identity. Diversity is our key strength.

 

Place

Our places are distinctive. They are accessible to all, regardless of ability, age or choice of mobility options. Visitors want to come and see them. The city is our ecosystem – its transport links, support of and from our natural environment and its communities of individuals, families, hapū and iwi supports its adaptability for the future.

 

Prosperity

Entrepreneurship thrives in Christchurch – a smart city with a variety of educational and learning opportunities supports the growth of the community on all levels, which makes Christchurch attractive to visitors, potential new residents and investors alike.

 

5.6       The Regeneration Framework would expand on those themes to provide a basis for linking regeneration activities to desired outcomes.  This will support a proactive approach to planning ensuring that identified opportunities are assessed and prioritised against the contribution that they will make to the regeneration. It will also provide a basis for decisions on the use of powers under the GCR Act and measuring progress.

5.7       The framework would also seek to include a tool for assessing the range of options available to achieve the desired outcomes to confirm the most effective and efficient approach. In some cases a Regeneration Plan will be the most appropriate mechanism but not necessarily in all cases.

5.8       The proposed Regeneration Framework is intended to be a dynamic document that will be regularly reviewed and evaluated.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

6.        Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group to the Committee on a planned strategy review

Reference:

17/179081

Contact:

Keith Tallentire

ktallentire@greaterchristchurch.org.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG) to the Committee on a planned strategy review.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       This report responds to the resolution outlined in paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 and the associated Priority Action to undertake a strategy review as outlined in the 2016 Strategy Update.

 

3.   CEAG Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Endorse an approach to the first phase of a strategy review being a focus on the settlement planning aspects necessary to meet the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.

2.         Agree that such a settlement pattern review (which integrates the work necessary to meet the requirements of the National Policy Statement) is undertaken through a collaborative partnership arrangement overseen by this Committee.

3.         Note that a report be presented to the next meeting of the Committee outlining the project scope, timeframes and resource requirements to undertake a settlement pattern review.

 

 

4.   Context/Background

Background

4.1       At its meeting in September 2016 the Committee endorsed a paper including a series of recommendations for consideration by the reformed Committee following the local body elections.

4.2       Recommendation (i) was that “following a short period to enable the reconvened Committee to take stock of the work of the Committee in this last triennium and understand the current operating environment it focuses on agreeing the scope, timing and project plan for a comprehensive strategy review and associated engagement programme”.

4.3       Two presentations to be provided at this meeting will assist the Committee in relation to the first part of the recommendation (taking stock and current operating environment) and lead to the proposed approach to prioritise a settlement pattern review as the first phase of any strategy review:

i.      UDS Strategy Update 2016

ii.     National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

4.4       Other items on this agenda and previous meetings of the Committee have advanced the other recommendations in the UDSIC advice paper.

 

Strategy Update 2016

4.5       The 2016 Strategy Update was endorsed by the Committee in July 2016 and subsequently ratified at the individual governance meetings of partner councils.

4.6       The document updates the 2007 Strategy to respond to the significant events and changes that have occurred since its release. It does not replace the 2007 Strategy, but rather complements it.

4.7       The Strategy Update identifies priority actions for partnership collaboration which address today's major challenges and opportunities. Resilience has been one of the guiding principles of the Strategy that has become a critical consideration since its development. The Resilient Greater Christchurch Plan and the Strategy Update were developed concurrently, and their integration has been considered throughout the process. They support and reinforce each other.

4.8       Further information will be provided to the Committee through a staff presentation at the meeting.

 

National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

4.9       The National Policy Statement (NPS-UDC) was issued by notice in the New Zealand Gazette on 3 November and took effect from 1 December 2016. A UDS Partnership submission on the draft NPS-UDC was endorsed at the July 2016 meeting of this Committee.

4.10    The NPS-UDC directs local authorities to provide sufficient development capacity in their resource management plans for housing and business growth to meet demand for the next thirty years. It requires an evidence base and a level of analysis that is new to urban planning practice in New Zealand.

4.11    It adopts a tiered structure that establishes additional requirements for local authorities with high-growth and medium-growth urban areas within their district or region. The Christchurch urban area is identified as being in a group of high-growth urban areas along with Auckland, Tauranga, Hamilton, and Queenstown.

4.12    There is also a requirement that local authorities with common growth issues in adjacent areas will collaborate.

4.13    The Minister for the Environment has significant expectations of the whole process.

4.14    The Christchurch urban area, as identified by Statistics New Zealand includes the towns of Prebbleton (Selwyn district) and Kaiapoi (Waimakariri district) and is shown in Attachment A. Of particular relevance for the Committee is that the NPS-UDC specifies that the application of policies to ensure development capacity is not restricted to the boundaries of the identified urban area. Policy PD1 also states that local authorities that share jurisdiction over an urban area are strongly encouraged to work together to implement the NPS-UDC.

4.15    The requirements of NPS-UDC policies variously relate to both territorial authorities and regional councils. A summary, including the timeframes for meeting the NPS-UDC policy requirements, is included as Attachment B.

4.16    Further information will be provided to the Committee through a staff presentation at the meeting.

 

CEAG advice on a proposed approach to the first phase of a strategy review

4.17    The Chief Executives Advisory Group recommend that the first phase of a strategy review focus on the settlement planning aspects necessary to meet the requirements of the NPS-UDC.

4.18    The Strategy Update did not attempt to revise the land use framework set out in the Land Use Recovery Plan (LURP) and included in Chapter 6 of the Regional Policy Statement. Whilst the work undertaken to develop and implement the LURP will go some way to meeting the NPS-UDC requirements further work will be necessary during 2017 and 2018.

4.19    A settlement pattern review would therefore complement the work undertaken to prepare the Strategy Update and would provide for a meaningful discussion with other partnerships and organisations in implementing the resolutions in that regard from the last meeting of this Committee.

4.20    It could also integrate with District Plan Reviews (DPRs) commencing for Selwyn and Waimakariri Districts and be informed by the extensive work undertaken as part of the Christchurch Replacement District Plan process.

4.21    If such an approach is endorsed a comprehensive project plan would be prepared with oversight from CEAG and periodic update reporting scheduled for this Committee during 2017 and 2018.

4.22    Due to the interdependencies associated with land use and transport planning across the sub-region a settlement pattern review would need to be a collaborative endeavour of the Partnership. This continues the approach established in the development of the 2007 Strategy, the formulation of the LURP and meets the stated intent of the NPS-UDC.

4.23    A collaborative approach would:

a.    Establish a consistent evidence base for decision-making

b.    Enable expertise to be shared across Partners

c.     Be the most efficient way to undertake and/or commission new work

d.    Ensure individual council DPRs are developed with reference to a sub-regional context

e.    Align with and assist the implementation of UDS Priority Actions, notably:

i.      Priority Action A – Understanding current and future land use and housing needs

ii.     Priority Action B – Develop a robust monitoring and reporting framework

iii.    Priority Action C – Reviewing the Strategy

4.24    A settlement pattern review would not alter individual council responsibilities or agreed timeframes for their DPRs and so would need to be appropriately scoped and undertaken with reference to these initiatives.

4.25    Similar collaborative approaches have been adopted for the SmartGrowth (Western Bay of Plenty) and FutureProof (Waikato) initiatives and these partnerships have also endorsed a collaborative approach to delivering the NPS-UDC requirements. It is our intention to maintain regular contact with these partnerships so we can share collaborative learnings.

Wider strategy review issues

4.26    Whilst the proposed focus for the first phase of a strategy review is on settlement planning undertaking this work, and the associated engagement requirements, will help highlight any broader matters requiring attention.

4.27    Any such matters can then be reported to the Committee for consideration and would benefit from a more informed position.

4.28    A diagram outlining the high level end-to-end process for undertaking a settlement pattern review and its linkage with wider strategy review issues is included as Attachment C to this report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Statistics NZ : Christchurch Main Urban Area

21

b

NPS Urban Development Capacity summary A3

22

c

Indicative end to end process and related engagement processes

25

 

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

PDF Creator


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

7.        Advice from the Chief Executives Advisory Group on a revised Memorandum of Agreement for the Committee

Reference:

17/178848

Contact:

Keith Tallentire

ktallentire@greaterchristchurch.org.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG) to recommend a revised Memorandum of Agreement for the Committee for subsequent ratification at individual partner governance meetings.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       This report responds to the resolution outlined in paragraph 4.1 and supports the visible and collaborative leadership objective of the Committee and Partnership.

 

 

3.   CEAG Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Endorse the revised Memorandum of Agreement as outlined in Attachment B to this report.

2.         Recommend that the Canterbury Regional Council (ECan), Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council, Selwyn District Council, and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu resolve to:

a.         Approve the revised Memorandum of Agreement as set out in Attachment B

b.         Delegate responsibility to the Chief Executives Advisory Group to make any minor non-material amendments to the agreement, and to execute the Agreement.

c.         Note that from the date the agreement is executed the committee's name will change from the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee, and that the committee is working with Ngāi Tahu to develop a Māori component as part of its new name.

d.         Delegate to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee the authority to adopt a Māori component of its name.   

e.         Note that the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee has delegated authority to confirm the final Communications Protocol referenced in the Memorandum of Agreement and incorporate it into the Agreement.

f.          Note that paragraph 4.4 of the Agreement continues the arrangement that the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee is not discharged following triennial general elections.

 

 

4.   Context/Background

Background

4.1       At its meeting in September 2016 this Committee endorsed a paper including a series of recommendations for consideration by the reformed Committee following the local body elections.

4.2       Recommendation (i) was that “the Committee’s Memorandum of Agreement is reviewed early in the new triennium and adjusted as appropriate to reflect new circumstances”.

4.3       A Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) is a requirement for joint committees following enactment of the LGA2002 Amendment Act 2014.

4.4       The existing MoA for the Committee was endorsed by this Committee in July 2015 and remains in place as part of the enduring provisions of the Committee such that it is not disestablished at the point of local body elections.

4.5       The 2015 MoA is included as Attachment A to this report for reference.

CEAG advice

4.6       Despite the fact that the existing MoA remains in place, CEAG recommend that it be revised.

4.7       The reasons for this include:

i.      A revised MoA would better convey the renewed approach discussed by the Committee and reflect the new name of the Committee and Partnership.

ii.     It would ensure strong ownership by the Committee’s new membership and reflect organisational changes since 2015.

a.    the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority was disestablished and the Greater Christchurch Group of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has assumed responsibility for supporting greater Christchurch regeneration

b.    around half of the voting members of the Committee will have changed following recent elections

c.     Regenerate Christchurch is finalising a positon in relation to confirming its membership and/or relationship with the Committee

iii.    It would help outline the new operating environment and integrate the emerging themes of regeneration and resilience.

iv.   It would clarify minor technical and terminology points raised in relation to the current MoA.

4.8       The proposed revised MoA is included as Attachment B to this report.

4.9       This revised MoA addresses the changes and matters highlighted above and, for consistency and where appropriate, it adopts a similar structure and approach to the recent Agreement prepared for the Greater Christchurch Public Transport Joint Committee.

4.10    At its meeting on 3 February 2017 the Committee requested that its name be changed to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee, and this has been incorporated into the MoA. Work is underway with Ngāi Tahu to develop a Māori component as part of the Committee’s new name.

4.11    If endorsed by the Committee the revised MoA would be circulated to the voting member Partners (as identified in Clause 4.1 of the Agreement) to seek ratification at their individual partner governance meetings.

4.12    Non-voting member Partners would be asked to provide feedback on any suggested amendments and consider their respective authority and delegations to enable them to ratify the document.

4.13    While it is not anticipated any final decision-making on the content of the MoA rests with the regional council and territorial authorities, this being a joint committee established by the Partner councils under the LGA 2002.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

UDSIC Memorandum of Agreement 2015

32

b

Draft revised Memorandum of Agreement

41

 

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

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


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

8.        Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document

Reference:

17/179101

Contact:

Milly Woods

mwoods@greatchristchurch.org.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide the Committee with a summary of the Urban Development Authority discussion document, which was released by Building and Construction Minister Hon Dr Nick Smith on 14 February 2017.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       Regeneration is one of the seven principles of the UDS and supports the urban consolidation and redevelopment objectives of the Strategy, including UDS Priority Action G to promote intensification opportunities.

 

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Agree that a submission on behalf of the UDS Partnership is prepared on the Urban Development Authority discussion document in liaison with partner staff and officers supporting the Canterbury Mayoral Forum.

 

 

4.   Context/Background

Background

4.1       The Urban Development Authority discussion document was released on 14 February 2017, and is open for submissions until Friday 19 May 2017. The Government has identified a number of issues relating to the urban environment:

·    Low housing supply

·    Rising house costs

·    Difficulties in meeting expected population growth

·    The impacts of housing market imbalances on national economic performance

·    Challenges of increasing productivity in cities

·     Declining urban areas

4.2       The key challenges when addressing these issues identified by the Government include:

·    the lack of statutory authority for Crown involvement in regional or local urban planning

·    territorial authorities are not requires to take into account the national interest when making decisions about urban development

·    limited coordination of planning at national through to local scales for large scale urban development

·    the difficulties of assembling fragmented land

 

4.3       The proposed response to these issues and challenges is the enactment of legislation which would allow for the establishment of Urban Development Authorities, responsible for delivering large scale urban development projects. 

4.4       The Urban Development Authorities discussion document can be found at http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/housing-property/consultation/urban-development-authorities/discussion-document.pdf

Proposed Legislation

4.5       The Government is proposing legislation which will allow central government and territorial authorities to allocate more enabling development powers to identified urban development projects. These projects will have been identified as being highly complex, or strategically important at national or local levels.

4.6       A two stage process is proposed, commencing with the establishment of an urban development project, and then the preparation of a development plan. The proposed processes are summarised in Attachment A.

4.7       Once potential areas for development are identified by central and/or territorial authorities, the Urban Development Authority (UDA) and the lead development entity are selected. UDA’s may be either existing or newly formed public entities, and may be appointed to undertake the functions of both the UDA and the lead development entity. The proposed functions of each of these entities are shown in the table below.

 

Urban Development Authority Functions

Lead Development Entity Functions

·      Identify potential development projects

·      Coordination of UDA activity

·      Authorising the use of development powers

·      Planning within the development project

·      Controlling investment decisions relating to land in the development project

·      Procuring development of land in the development project

·      Design, marketing and financing of development project

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1. UDA and Lead Development Entity Functions

4.8       If a UDA is appointed to undertake all functions, it may choose to delegate some of these. The UDA cannot delegate authority for the exercise of development powers, and the UDA will remain responsible for any delegated functions.

4.9       Development plans will then be prepared collaboratively by the UDA, community, local government, iwi, local business owners and infrastructure providers. Development powers are available to the UDA until strategic objectives are met and the project is complete.

Relationship to other initiatives

4.10    There are a number of initiatives currently underway relating to urban development, including:

·    Resource Legislation Amendment Bill

·    Productivity Commission’s Better Urban Planning Inquiry

·    The National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

·    Housing Infrastructure Fund

 

4.11    The legislation proposed in the discussion document is intended to complement the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity and the Housing Infrastructure Fund. The proposed legislation may assist local authorities to:

·    provide residential and business land capacity

·    enable development of housing and buildings

 

Previous consultation

4.12    The proposal has been informed by previous consultation on the Building Sustainable Urban Communities discussion document (2008), and the Productivity Commission’ report Using Land for Housing (2015).

4.13    A submission was prepared on behalf of the UDS Partnership on the Using Land for Housing report. The UDS view on the establishment of any UDA was as follows:

The UDS Partnership does not support the recommendation for the establishment of a single Urban Development Authority for New Zealand. Nor does it support the transfer of any regulatory functions to a UDA/UDC. The UDS Partnership would support the establishment of a UDA at a 'city scale' if a demonstrable need is identified and it assisted in the implementation of strategic objectives agreed through voluntary collaborations between local authorities. (UDS, 2015)

 

4.14    The UDS Partnership submission envisaged a role for an Urban Development Authority which played a ‘catalyst’ role in development, and expressed support for mechanisms which enable aggregation of fragmented land.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Urban Development Authorities - Proposed Processes

58

 

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

9.        Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan Implementation Progress Report

Reference:

17/186740

Contact:

Chrissie Williams

chrissie.williams@ecan.govt.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide an update to the Committee on the implementation progress of the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan (LPRP). This is the second report to the Committee since the gazettal of the LPRP.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       A strategic goal of the Urban Development Strategy is that “strategic regional and sub-regional infrastructure, including Lyttelton Port and Christchurch International Airport, service and utility hubs, and existing and future corridors, is protected”.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Receive the report

 

 

4.   Context/Background

Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan

4.1       The LPRP was gazetted in November 2015.[1] The LPRP enables Lyttelton Port to recover from the extensive damage it received during the Canterbury earthquakes, and continue to contribute to the wellbeing of Greater Christchurch in the future.  

Recovery Framework and Supporting Commitments

4.2       The LPRP includes statutory directions to amend Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) documents to facilitate port recovery and rebuild activities (Actions 1 – 5). RMA documents were amended in relation to:

·   reclamation of up to 24 hectares in Te Awaparahi Bay for a new container terminal;

·   repair, rebuild and demolition of wharf structures;

·   development of commercial activities in Dampier Bay;

·   dredging for berth pockets and deepening and widening the main navigation channel; and

·   movement of the ferry terminal if required, and development of a cruise ship berth.

 

4.3       The LPRP also sets out supporting commitments made by parties involved in its development which support wider recovery aspirations and manage effects of port recovery activities. The supporting commitments made by parties relate to:

·   Development and implementation of a Catchment Management Plan for Whakaraupō/Lyttelton Harbour;

·   Transport Network Memorandum of Understanding;

·   Pedestrian Access across Norwich Quay;

·   Dampier Bay Public Access;

·   Dampier Bay Urban Design Guide;

·   Naval Point development plan;

·   Cruise Ship Berth; and

·   Bulk Liquids Storage Facilities.

 

Implementation Progress Reporting

4.4       Section six of the LPRP states that:

Canterbury Regional Council will also liaise with the agencies with responsibilities for actions under the Recovery Plan. It will report every six months to the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee on progress with the implementation of the Recovery Plan.

 

4.5       This report responds to that requirement. It is the second report to be produced since the LPRP was gazetted, the first report was presented to the meeting of the Committee in July 2016.

 

5.   Implementation Progress

5.1       Statutory Directions

Completed.

The LPRP Actions 1 – 5 were statutory directions which required amendments to objectives, policies and methods in planning documents.

All amendments to the documents were made within the required timeframes.

 

5.2       Supporting Commitments by Parties

Development and Implementation of a Catchment Management Plan for Whakaraupō/Lyttelton Harbour

5.2.1   Canterbury Regional Council (Environment Canterbury), Lyttelton Port Company Limited (LPC), Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke, Christchurch City Council (CCC) and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu with Tāngata Tiaki agreed to develop and implement a catchment management plan for Whakaraupō/Lyttelton Harbour. Key objectives included restoration of ecological and cultural health of the harbour as mahinga kai, and addressing other environmental, cultural and social concerns, recreational user needs, and port needs.

5.2.2   As set out in the LPRP, the process was to include:

·     agreement on the organisational and governance structure and development process by December 2015;

·     stocktake of existing traditional and scientific knowledge to be completed by June 2016; and

·     the Whakaraupō/Lyttelton Harbour catchment management plan to be developed by December 2016.

 

Progress:

The Whakaraupō / Lyttelton Harbour Catchment Management Plan project was launched August and the Memorandum of Understanding was signed by the partners. The Governance Group was established and the project plan approved.

 

Three well-attended community workshops were held in September 2016 providing positive and useful input.

 

The Science Advisory Group (SAG) and the Partners Working Group (PWG) have held field trips and workshops to share knowledge on the key issues and drivers of decline in the health of the harbour.

 

The SAG is drafting an issues and options paper to inform the development of the action plan, and guide the development of monitoring indicators.

 

Drafting of the final Catchment Management Plan has begun with guidance from Te Rūnunga o Ngāi Tahu and Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke. The December 2016 date for completion in the Recovery Plan was an error that was not corrected. Partners are working towards a June 2016 completion.

 

Transport Network – Memorandum of Understanding

Completed.

5.2.3   CCC, Environment Canterbury, LPC, the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), and KiwiRail have completed and signed a Memorandum of Understanding which sets out the principles of how they will work together to ensure the provision of a transport network that supports recovery while maintaining safe and efficient transport solutions for users.

 

Transport Network – pedestrian access across Norwich Quay

5.2.4   The NZTA, in consultation with CCC and LPC, intends to upgrade pedestrian access across Norwich Quay. This was recognised as involving short-term works, with a longer-term programme to address access as the Dampier Bay developed progresses and effects become more certain. The LPRP noted the intention of NZTA to complete the pedestrian facility by December 2018.

 

Progress:

NZTA have investigated a pedestrian crossing of Norwich quay in consultation with a community group facilitated by the Lyttelton Mt Herbert Community Board. A "smart" signalised crossing has been agreed between Sutton Quay and Canterbury Street, with associated relocation of the western bus stop on Norwich Quay. Detailed design is being finalised and delivery is expected by March 2017.

 

Dampier Bay Public Access

5.2.5   The LPRP included providing for the commercial development of Dampier Bay. This recognised the desire of the community for greater access to the waterfront. To support this, LPC, CCC and Environment Canterbury agreed to enter into a legally binding agreement for public access along the waterfront, with connection of the waterfront to Godley Quay and Norwich Quay.  The agreement was also intended to cover the design process, including community input, for the promenade. The access agreement was intended to be signed within three months of Gazettal of the LPRP. The legally binding instrument is to be implemented by July 2021, unless the parties agree on a variation.

 

Progress:

Staff from Environment Canterbury, LPC and CCC have been working to reach agreement on the access agreement.  A revised draft agreement has been prepared, but outstanding issues remain. Work is continuing to reach agreement between the parties.

 

The access agreement will take the form of an Implementation Agreement, to be signed by the three parties, with an attached easement instrument to be signed by the CCC and LPC. The key aspects of the agreement are:

·    recognising LPC’s role to develop and maintain temporary and permanent access ways in Dampier Bay;

·    defining the location and minimum width requirements for both the temporary and permanent access ways;

·    outlining how the permanent access way will be staged;

·    a two-yearly review clause; and

·    the requirement for LPC to report on progress every six months.

 

 

 

Dampier Bay Urban Design Guide

5.2.6   LPC agreed through the LPRP to prepare, through a collaborative process, design guidance for Dampier Bay to complement the rules introduced into the planning framework. This will set out how the new buildings and public spaces will maintain and enhance the character of Lyttelton Port and consider Ngāi Tahu cultural landscape values. The design guide was proposed to be completed within six months of Gazettal.

 

Progress:

LPC worked with Boffa Miskell to produce a Dampier Bay Design Guide. The Design Guide was informed by a cultural landscape assessment undertaken with Ngāti Wheke.

 

The community’s thoughts and ideas were discussed at a public 'Port Talk' event and feedback was received from a range of individuals and organisations.

 

Naval Point

5.2.7   CCC is preparing a development plan for the Naval Point recreational area, recognising its importance for ocean based recreation in Greater Christchurch. The CCC will provide for community participation in the development plan process.

 

Progress:

The quantitative risk assessment has now been finalised and peer reviewed. Council (and other parties are continuing to work on risk mitigation measures.

 

Cruise Ship Berth

5.2.8   CCC and LPC agreed to investigate short-term and long-term options and funding for a dedicated cruise berth facility at Lyttelton Port. The two parties were to agree on a collaborative approach, and may involve other interested parties.

 

Progress:

The Lyttelton Port Company has prepared an options paper but funding is yet to be confirmed.

 

Bulk Liquids Storage Facilities (Quantitative risk assessment)

Completed.

5.2.9   CCC, with support from LPC and the bulk liquid storage lessees, committed to developing a quantitative risk assessment (QRA) of the bulk storage facilitates at Naval Point within nine months of gazettal of the LRPP.

 

Progress:

Completed. Christchurch City Council, with support from Lyttelton Port Company and the oil companies, released the quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for the Naval Point ‘tank farm’ in November 2016. The risk analysis quantifies risk in terms of ‘annual individual fatality’, similar to risk measurements for natural hazards in the Port Hills following the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011.

 

5.3       Lyttelton Port Company Limited Recovery Projects

5.3.1   A LPC have made progress on a number of the recovery related projects at the Port. These include:

·     The reclamation in Te Awaparahi Bay is currently at 9.9 hectares.[2]

·     Commenced repairs on Jetty No.2 and No.3 in late 2015, completion early 2017.

·     Construction of replacement LPC Operation/Administration building commencing July 2016.

·     Channel deepening consents have been lodged and a hearing is likely around April 2017.

·     The additional reclamation consents are likely to be lodged late March 2017.

·     Dampier Bay landside and marina design process commenced early 2016 and is to be known as Te Ana Marina. Construction is scheduled to start in mid-2017 with Stage 1 scheduled to be completed in early-2018.

6.   Next Steps

6.1       This report will be followed by updated reports every six months to the UDSIC as required under section six of the LPRP.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

 

10.    Urban Development and Regeneration update

Reference:

17/183478

Contact:

Keith Tallentire

ktallentire@greaterchriscthurch.org.nz

03 941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide the Committee with brief updates on the broad range of urban development and regeneration activities underway across the Greater Christchurch area.

1.2       The Update collates contributions from partners and a range of other agencies and government departments.

 

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee:

1.         Note the report and receive the attached Urban Development and Regeneration Update. 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Urban Development and Regeneration Update - February 2017

68

 

 


Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee

03 March 2017

UDS Logo

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 

  



[1] The Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016 identifies the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan as a Recovery Plan under that Act. Under section 60, any person exercising powers or performing functions under the RMA must not make a decision or recommendation relating to all or part of greater Christchurch that is inconsistent with the Plan, on specific matters in sub-sections (2)(a)-(f).

[2] The current reclamation activity was provided for under the Canterbury Earthquake (Resource Management Act Port of Lyttelton Recovery) Order 2011, up to a maximum of 10 hectares.