Coastal-Burwood Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Tuesday 18 April 2017

Time:                                    4.30pm

Venue:                                 Boardroom, Corner Beresford and Union Streets,
New Brighton

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Kim Money

Tim Sintes

Tim Baker

David East

Glenn Livingstone

Linda Stewart

 

 

11 April 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Jo Wells

Manager Community Governance, Coastal-Burwood

941 6451

Jo.Wells@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/

 


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

 


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

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

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

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

B       5.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 4   

STAFF REPORTS

C       6.       Tree Removal Request 20 Lexington Place.................................................................. 15

C       7.       Tree Removal Report 1 Wild Dunes Place................................................................... 31

C       8.       Bowhill Road Proposed P10 Restriction...................................................................... 47

A       9.       Deed of Surrender and Deed of Lease to Family For Life Trust at Aranui Playground 53

C       10.     Coastal-Burwood Community Board ANZAC Day 2017 Wreath Laying................... 65

C       11.     Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Funding Scheme 2016-17 T Tauapai........................................................................................................................... 67

C       12.     Coastal-Burwood Community Board Area Report..................................................... 69

B       13.     Elected Member Information Exchange...................................................................... 78

B       14.     Question Under Standing Orders................................................................................. 78 

 

 


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

1.   Apologies

An apology was received from Tim Sintes.

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 Coastal-Burwood Community Board meeting held on Monday, 3 April 2017  be confirmed (refer page 5).

4.   Deputations by Appointment

4.1

Avonside Girls’ High School and Shirley Boys High School – Campus Design

The Principals of Avonside Girls’ High School and Shirley Boys High School – Sue Hume and John Laurenson -will speak to the Board and brief them on the design for the rebuild of Avonside Girls' High School and Shirley Boys' High School which will share a 11.5-hectare site at Queen Elizabeth II Park. Also in attendance will be Jo Scott of Great Scott! Communications

 

4.2

Family for Life Trust

Family For Life Trust members Kerry Rutherford and Corey Watkinson, will speak on the report at item nine about a new lease over the Aranui Playground.

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

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


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

 

Coastal-Burwood Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Monday 3 April 2017

Time:                                    9am

Venue:                                 Boardroom, Corner Beresford and Union Streets,
New Brighton

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Kim Money

Tim Sintes

Tim Baker

David East

Glenn Livingstone

Linda Stewart

 

 

3 April 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Jo Wells

Manager Community Governance, Coastal-Burwood

941 6451

Jo.Wells@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

There were no apologies.

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

Glenn Livingstone declared an interest in item 8 of the agenda and took no part in the discussion or decision on that item.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00064

Community Board Decision

That the minutes of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board meeting held on Monday, 20 March 2017 be confirmed.

Linda Stewart/Tim Sintes                                                                                                                                         Carried

 

4.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

4.1       Members of the Parklands @ Play Planning Team, Anita Darnell - Parklands Baptist Church and Queenspark Community Trust and Wayne Eden – Parklands Bowling Club assisted by Jacqui Miller – Community Recreation Advisor, presented feedback and an overview from the Parklands @ Play 2017 event held on Sunday 19th February.

             The Chairperson thanked the members of the planning team for their deputation and their work on the event.

 

4.2       Members of the I Love New Brighton Planning Team, Martha Baxendale – New Brighton Project, James Ridpath – Youth Alive Trust and Hannah Hill – Eastern Community Sport and Recreation assisted by Jacqui Miller – Community Recreation Advisor presented feedback and an overview of the I Love New Brighton 2017 held on Monday 6th February.

             The Chairperson thanked the members of the planning team for their deputation and their work on the event.

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.  

6.   Correspondence

The Board considered an item of correspondence from the Burwood East Residents Association regarding their concern at traffic congestion at peak hours on Travis Road between Parnwell Street and Travis County Drive.

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the correspondence report dated 03 April 2017

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00065

Community Board

Part B

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the correspondence report dated 03 April 2017

2.         Request that staff organise a site visit with the New Zealand Transport Agency, Christchurch City Council and members of the Burwood East Residents Association and Coastal-Burwood Community Board to discuss the concerns that the Burwood East Residents Association have about traffic congestion on Travis Road.

Kim Money/Linda Stewart                                                                                                                                      Carried

 

7.   Proposed No Stopping Restrictions Burwood Road

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00066 Staff Recommendation accepted without change

Community Board

Part C

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Revoke all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the east side of Burwood Road commencing at its intersection with Mairehau Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 607 metres to its intersection with Rothesay Street.

2.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the east side of Burwood Road commencing at its intersection with Mairehau Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 607 metres to its intersection with Rothesay Street.

Tim Baker/Tim Sintes                                                                                                                                                 Carried

 

 

8.   Coastal Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund 2016-2017 -  Maia Te Hae, Neveah Pirikahu and Finn Barber

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00067 Staff Recommendation accepted without change

Community Board

Part C

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $250.00 from its 2016/17 Youth Development Fund to Nevaeh Pirikahu-Waata towards attendance at the National Maori Netball Tournament in Auckland from 14-16 April 2017.

2.         Approves a grant of $250.00 from its 2016/17 Youth Development Fund to Maia Te Hae towards attendance at the National Maori Netball Tournament in Auckland from 14-16 April 2017.

3.         Approves a grant of $200.00 from its 2016/17 Youth Development Fund to Finn Barber towards his attendance at an Outward Bound Course from the 23-30 April 2017.

Tim Baker/David East                                                                                                                                                 Carried

 

9.   Establishment of a Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee

The Board considered a report recommending the establishment of a Youth Development Fund Committee.

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Consider the establishment of a Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee comprising the six Board members with its Terms of Reference being “to make decisions on behalf of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board on Youth Development Fund applications received during the Board’s 2016/19 term for those applications which fall outside of the regular board meeting cycle or there is a urgent need for approval”.

2.         Appoint a Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee.

3.         Approve that the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee be granted delegated authority to make decisions on Youth Development Fund applications on behalf of the Board.

4.         Approve that all decisions by the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee be reported on to the Board for record purposes.

5.         Approve the quorum of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee.

6.         Review and amend as necessary, wording of the Youth Development Fund application form and eligibility criteria.

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00068

Community Board

Part C

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Establish the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee comprising the six Board members with its Terms of Reference being “to make decisions on behalf of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board on Youth Development Fund applications received during the Board’s 2016/19 term for those applications which fall outside of the regular board meeting cycle or there is a urgent need for approval”.

2.         Appoint Kim Money as Chairperson and Tim Sintes as Deputy Chairperson of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee.

3.         Approve that the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee be granted delegated authority to make decisions on Youth Development Fund applications on behalf of the Board.

4.         Approve that all decisions by the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee be reported on to the Board for record purposes.

5.         Approve the quorum of the Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Fund Committee as two members.

6.         Amend as necessary, wording of the Youth Development Fund application form and eligibility criteria to reflect that the age range is general and, the list of activities is to have “but not limited to” preceding the list.

David East/Tim Sintes                                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

10. New Zealand Community Boards Conference 2017 - Board Members' Attendance

The Board considered a report to confirm members attendance at the New Zealand Community Board’s Conference 2017.

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the report.

2.         Approve the attendance of nominated Board Members at the New Zealand Community Boards Conference 2017 at the Heritage Centre, Methven from 11-13 May 2017.

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00069

Community Board

Part C

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the report.

2.         Approve the attendance of Tim Baker and Kim Money at the New Zealand Community Boards Conference 2017 at the Heritage Centre, Methven from 11-13 May 2017.

Linda Stewart/David East                                                                                                                                         Carried

 

 

11. Coastal-Burwood Community Board Area Report

11.1    Community Board Planning Workshop – Staff confirmed that a workshop will be held to develop the Community Board Plan and to seek direction from the Board on other matters.

 

11.2    Estuary Road Sealing – At the Board’s request information was given that the smoothing of a portion of Estuary Road on the trafficable central portion only was based on the criteria of greatest need and financial prudence.

 

             The Board expressed their frustration that that entire road width in that portion of Estuary Road was not sealed.

 

11.3    Rawhiti Domain – The Board requested staff to investigate the possibility of a review of the Rawhiti Domain and Thomson Park management plan.

 

11.4    Community Resilience Fund  - The Board expressed their frustration at the delay in the development of a process for applications to be made to the Community Resilience Fund.

 

11.5    Christchurch School of Gymnastics – The Board was concerned about a perceived delay in finalising the leasing agreement between Council and the Christchurch School of Gymnastics.

 

11.6    Pages Road Bridge Roundabout – The Board requested staff to investigate if the Pages Road Bridge Roundabout landscaping could be attended to in terms of levelling of tiling and ensuring that only matching tiles are used.

 

11.7    Maintenance Contracts – The Board requested staff to establish when the Parks Maintenance contacts are due for renewal and the possibility of rationalising contracts to have one covering all maintenance activities in an area, rather than having multiple contractors doing different activities in close proximity. 

 

 

Staff Recommendations

Part B

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Receive the Area Update.

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00070

Community Board

Part B

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Receive the Area Update.

David East/Glenn Livingstone                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00071

Community Board

Part B

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

2.         Requests that as the Pages Road Bridge replacement is possibly several years away, the bridge replacement and footpath repairs be disconnected as a project. There is urgency on health and safety grounds in carrying out footpath repairs for the area from the Bridge to Anzac Drive.

David East/Glenn Livingstone                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00072

Community Board

Part B

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

3.      Requests a review of the Tern Street western barrier to enable better access for people to the Estuary, and that minimum roading and footpath repairs be carried out to enable safe access to the Estuary. The Board requests that staff refer to the attached photos and note that Tern Street is one of the main access points to the Estuary and it is a very well used route.

David East/Glenn Livingstone                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

 

Community Board Resolved CBCB/2017/00073

Community Board

Part B

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

4.      Requests that with respect to the Christchurch School of Gymnastics:

a)     Urgency be given to finalising  the leasing agreement for the Christchurch School of Gymnastics to remain on the QEII Park site.

b)     Consideration be given to utilising the existing Christchurch School of Gymnastics building as opposed to demolition.

c)      That the proceeds of the partial QEII Park land sale to the Ministry of Education, or existing budgets, be considered in part to be used to assist the land remediation required for the new Christchurch School of Gymnastics site on QEII Park.

David  East/Glenn Livingstone                                                                                                                               Carried

 

12. Elected Member Information Exchange

Part B

12.1       Youth Forum – The Board requested staff to investigate the establishment of a youth committee, or similar, to enable the Board to better engage with youth.

12.2       Urban Development Authority – those Board members who had attended the recent seminar delivered to all Community Board representatives, on the proposal to establish an Urban Development Authority, reported back. 

12.3       Members agreed that the recent mini bus tour of Dallington and Avondale had been worthwhile in highlighting the lack of community facilities in those areas.

12.4       Members who had attended the Coastal Restoration Trust of New Zealand conference in late March on diverse coastal environments appreciated access to scientific information being delivered at a practical level.

 

13. Questions Under Standing Orders

Part B

There were no questions under Standing Orders at this meeting.

 

 

   

Meeting concluded at 11.16 am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 18 DAY OF April 2016

 

Kim Money

Chairperson

   


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

6.        Tree Removal Request 20 Lexington Place

Reference:

17/321747

Contact:

Dieter Steinegg

Dieter.steinegg@ccc.govt.nz

941 8683

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Coastal-Burwood Community Board to either approve or decline the removal of two council owned London Plane trees which are located on the berm outside the property of number 20 Lexington Place, Shirley.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to a request from the property owner of number 20 Lexington Place, Shirley. 

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by a score of 14

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Approve the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place and replace the trees with another species in a more suitable location

 

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Roads and Footpaths

·     Level of Service: 16.0.12 Maintain street landscapes 08 Maintain the Condition of Footpaths

·     Level of Service: 16.0.11 Maintain Street Trees

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1- Approve the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place and replace the trees with another species in a more suitable location. (preferred option)

·     Option 2 - Option 2 - Decline the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place, continue to repair the footpath every 2-3years and potentially the kerb and channel.

 

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Reduced cost to CCC/ratepayers for future potential damage to the private and/or council infrastructure.

·     Resident satisfaction with outcome.

·     The surrounding community is supportive of the trees being removed and replaced (four respondents were in support of removing the trees).

·     Replanting in a more suitable location will enhance the local area.

 

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The two London Plane trees are healthy and structurally sound and are not currently a threat to public safety.

·     The trees add some amenity value to the local area/community.

·     One respondent was in favour of tree retention.

·     The removal of healthy trees could set a precedent for all future requests for the removal of healthy trees.

 

 

5.   Context/Background

 

5.1       The former Burwood/Pegasus Community Board received a deputation from Russell Hamilton, resident of number 20 Lexington Place, requesting that the two Council owned London Plane trees outside this address be removed.

5.2       The two London Plane trees were planted in 1998 as part of the original subdivision planting. Both trees are considered to be in a fair overall condition, they are a typical example of semi-mature London Plane trees in Christchurch, (see attached tree assessment for full details).

5.3       The reasons the residents at number 20 Lexington Place would like the trees removed include:

·   The trees have caused and will continue to cause on-going damage to infrastructure (footpath, kerb and channel etc.).

·   The trees have been planted in a narrow berm with insufficient area for the future growth of the trees.

·   The trees have the potential to cause damage to private infrastructure (e.g. driveway and wall).

 

Consultation

5.4       A letter was delivered to all 25 residents in the street (refer attachment 1). Five responses including the applicant were received, with four people in support of the trees’ removal and one person opposed to the removal of the trees.

5.5       A summary of the comments from the four people in support of the removal of the trees include; they are way too big for our little cul de sac, leaves constantly fall all year, the debris is affecting private property and is blocking the storm water drain, removal of the trees in question is long overdue, the tree roots are shattering the foot path.

5.6       A summary of the comments from the person who opposed the removal of the tree include; the trees are very attractive to our street, they provide shade on hot days.

6.   Option 1- Approve the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Approve the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place.

Significance

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

6.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to engage locally, with affected residents and ratepayers.

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       Residents and rate payers are specifically affected by this option due to amenity value of the two trees and the on-going damage the trees are causing to the footpath. A letter was delivered to the affected properties, five responses were received with four people in support of the tree removal and one person opposed to the removal of the trees.

6.6       Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.8       Cost of Implementation - Tree removal and stump grinding only

Tree removal and stump grinding

$703.06

Total costs

$703.06 + GST

Tree, tree planting and 3 years maintenance

$1200.00

Total costs

$1200.00 + GST

 

 

 

 

6.9       Tree planting and maintenance costs –  

 

 

6.10    Funding source - Street Tree Maintenance (CAPEX) budget for tree removal and stump grinding. Street Tree Maintenance (CAPEX) budget for replanting. Street Tree Maintenance (OPEX) for 3 years maintenance.

Tree removal and stump grinding

$703.06

Tree, tree planting and 3 years maintenance

$1200.00

Total cost to CCC

$1903.06 +GST

 

 

 

 

Legal Implications

6.11    The tree is not a protected tree and the arboriculture assessment concludes that it is not a threat to public safety currently. However, an application to prune or remove the tree may be made to the District Court under The Property Law Act 2007 and the said Court can order the pruning or removal of a tree under the said Act.

Risks and Mitigations    

6.12    The tree removal, stump grinding and replanting with an appropriate species of tree would need to be undertaken by a qualified and experienced arboricultural contractor. The public would need to be notified of the works prior to commencement of works.

Implementation

6.13    Implementation dependencies - The removal of the trees may cause some minor disruption to residents and road users.

6.14    Implementation timeframe for tree removals and stump grinding - This could be undertaken at any time, subject to weather, traffic management and public notification.

6.15    Implementation timeframe for replacement planting - The replacement planting is preferable during the autumn/winter planting season May to August 2017.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·     Reduced cost to CCC/ratepayers for future potential damage to the private and/or council infrastructure.

·     Resident satisfaction with outcome.

·     The surrounding community is supportive of the trees being removed and replaced (the majority of respondents were in support of removing the trees).

·     Replanting in a more suitable location will enhance the local area.

 

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The two London Plane trees are healthy and structurally sound and are not currently a threat to public safety.

·     The trees add some amenity value to the local area/community.

·     One respondent was in favour of retaining the trees.

·   The removal of healthy trees could set a precedent for all future requests for the removal of healthy trees.

 

7.   Option 2 - Decline the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place

Option Description

7.1       Decline the request to remove the two London Plane trees outside number 20 Lexington Place.

Significance

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

7.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to engage locally, with affected residents and ratepayers.

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       Residents and rate payers are specifically affected by this option due to amenity value of the two trees and the on-going damage the trees are causing to the footpath. A letter was delivered to the affected properties, five responses were received with four people in support of the tree removal and one person opposed to the removal of the trees.

7.6       Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.8       Cost of Implementation - Not applicable

7.9       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - The trees are pruned approx. every five years.

7.10    Funding source - Street Tree Maintenance (OPEX) budget for continued maintenance and ongoing costs.

Legal Implications

7.11    There may be some future maintenance issues and resident concerns with the trees.

Risks and Mitigations   

7.12    If the request to remove the two London Plane trees is declined the trees are highly likely to cause further damage to the footpath and surrounding infrastructure. The trees may also cause future damage to private infrastructure (e.g. driveway and wall).

Implementation

7.13    Implementation dependencies - not applicable.

7.14    Implementation timeframe - not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.15    The advantages of this option include:

·     The two London Plane trees are healthy and structurally sound and are not currently a threat to public safety.

·     One respondent was in favour of retention of the trees.

·     The trees add some amenity value to the local area/community.

 

7.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Damage will occur due to the trees location and proximity to council infrastructure such as footpath and kerb and channel.

·     Damage is likely to occur due to the trees location and proximity to private infrastructure such as the driveway and brick wall.

·     Increased costs to the ratepayers and CCC as damage occurs.

·     The majority of respondents were in support of removing the trees.

·     Council may receive continuing requests and complaints regarding the trees.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20 Lexington Place-Tree Assessment

21

b

Attachment 2 Letter to residents re Proposed tree removal - 20 Lexington Plc

29

 

 

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

Dieter Steinegg - Arborist, Citywide

Approved By

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Customer and Community

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

7.        Tree Removal Report 1 Wild Dunes Place

Reference:

17/324385

Contact:

Dieter Steinegg

Dieter.steinegg@ccc.govt.nz

941 8683

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Coastal-Burwood Community Board to either approve or decline the removal of two council owned Oriental Plane trees which are located on the berm outside the property of number 1 Wild Dunes Place, Shirley.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to a request from the property owner of number 1 Wild Dune Place, Shirley. 

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by a score of 14

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.            Approve the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild                    Dunes Place and replace the trees with another species in a more suitable location.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Roads and Footpaths

·     Level of Service: 16.0.11 Maintain Street Trees

4.1.2   Activity: Roads and Footpaths

·     Level of Service: 16.0.08 Maintain the Condition of Footpaths

·     Level of Service: 16.0.11 Maintain Street Trees

 

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Approve the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild Dunes Place and replace the trees with another species in a more suitable location. (preferred option)

·     Option 2 - Decline the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild Dunes Place, continue to repair the footpath every 2-3years and potentially the kerb and channel.

 

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Reduced cost to CCC/ratepayers for future potential damage to the private and/or council infrastructure.

·     Resident satisfaction with outcome.

·     The surrounding community is supportive of the trees being removed and replaced (one respondent was in support of removing the trees).

·     No respondents were in favour of tree retention.

·     Replanting in a more suitable location will enhance the local area.

 

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The two Oriental Plane trees are healthy and structurally sound and are not currently a threat to public safety.

·     The trees add some amenity value to the local area/community.

The removal of healthy trees could set a precedent for all future requests for the removal of healthy trees.

5.   Context/Background

 

5.1       The former Burwood/Pegasus Community Board received a deputation from Mrs Crow, resident of number 1 Wild Dunes Place, requesting that the two Council owned Oriental Plane trees outside this address be removed.

5.2       CCC have received numerous customer service requests from both Mr and Mrs Crow, residents of number 1 Wild Dunes Place, requesting that the two Council owned Oriental Plane trees outside this address be removed, dating back to April 2015.

5.3       The two Oriental Plane trees were planted in 2000 as part of the original subdivision planting. Both trees are considered to be in a fair overall condition, they are a typical example of semi-mature Oriental Plane trees in Christchurch, (see attached tree assessment for full details).

5.4       The reasons the residents at number 1 Wild Dunes Place would like the trees removed include:

·   The trees have caused and will continue to cause on-going damage to infrastructure (footpath, kerb and channel etc.).

·   The tree closest to the driveway of number 1 Wild Dunes Place has caused cracking of the private driveway and has the potential to cause damage to the water toby located in close proximity to the tree.

·   The trees have been planted in a narrow berm with insufficient area for the future growth of the trees.

 

 

Consultation

 

5.5       A letter was delivered to all 10 neighbouring residents (refer attachment 1). One response, other than the applicant, was received in support of the trees removal, and nobody responded that was opposed to the removal of the trees.

5.6       A summary of the comment received from the resident who support the removal of the 2 trees include; the trees are causing damage to the kerbing and foot path in the street.

 

 

 

 


 

6.   Option 1 - Approve the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild Dunes Place (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Approve the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild Dunes Place.

Significance

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

6.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to engage locally, with affected residents and ratepayers.

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       Residents and rate payers are specifically affected by this option due to amenity value of the two trees and the on-going damage the trees are causing to infrastructure. A letter was delivered to the affected properties, one response was received with two people in support of the trees’ removal and nobody responded that was opposed to the removal of the trees’.

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 - Tree removal and stump grinding only

Tree removal and stump grinding

$703.06

Total costs

$703.06 + GST

 

 

 

6.8       Tree planting and maintenance costs  

Tree, tree planting and 3 years maintenance

$1200.00

Total costs

$1200.00 + GST

 

 

 

6.9       Funding source - Street Tree Maintenance (CAPEX) budget for tree removal and stump grinding. Street Tree Maintenance (CAPEX) budget for replanting. Street Tree Maintenance (OPEX) for 3 years maintenance.

Tree removal and stump grinding

$703.06

Tree, tree planting and 3 years maintenance

$1200.00

Total cost to CCC

$1903.06 +GST

 

 

 

 

Legal Implications

6.10    The tree is not a protected tree and the arboriculture assessment concludes that it is not a threat to public safety currently. However, an application to prune or remove the tree may be made to the District Court under The Property Law Act 2007 and the said Court can order the pruning or removal of a tree under the said Act.

Risks and Mitigations   

6.11    The tree removal, stump grinding and replanting with an appropriate species of tree would need to be undertaken by a qualified and experienced arboricultural contractor. The public would need to be notified of the works prior to commencement of works.

Implementation

6.12    Implementation dependencies - The removal of the trees may cause some minor disruption to residents and road users.

6.13    Implementation timeframe for tree removals and stump grinding - This could be undertaken at any time, subject to weather, traffic management and public notification.

6.14    Implementation timeframe for replacement planting - The replacement planting is preferable during the autumn/winter planting season May to August 2017.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.15    The advantages of this option include:

·     Reduced cost to CCC/ratepayers for future potential damage to the private and council infrastructure (cost details provided below 4.3.2).

·     Resident satisfaction with outcome.

·     The surrounding community is supportive of the trees being removed and replaced (one respondent was in support of removing the trees).

·     No respondents were in favour of tree retention.

·     Replanting in a more suitable location will enhance the local area.

 

6.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The two Oriental Plane trees are healthy and structurally sound and are not currently a threat to public safety.

·     The trees add some amenity value to the local area/community.

·     The removal of healthy trees could set a precedent for all future requests for the removal of healthy trees.

 

7.   Option 2 - Decline the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild Dunes Place

Option Description

7.1       Decline the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees outside number 1 Wild Dunes Place.

Significance

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

7.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to engage locally, with affected residents and ratepayers.

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       Residents and rate payers are specifically affected by this option due to amenity value of the two trees and the on-going damage the trees are causing to the footpath. A letter was delivered to the affected properties, one response was received with two people in support of the trees’ removal and nobody responded that was opposed to the removal of the trees’.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.7       Cost of Implementation - Not applicable

7.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - The trees are pruned approx. every five years.

7.9       Funding source - Street Tree Maintenance (OPEX) budget for continued maintenance and ongoing costs.

Legal Implications

7.10    There may be some future maintenance issues and resident concerns with the trees.

Risks and Mitigations    

7.11    If the request to remove the two Oriental Plane trees is declined the trees are highly likely to cause further damage to the footpath and surrounding infrastructure. The trees are also likely cause further damage to private infrastructure (e.g. driveway).

Implementation

7.12    Implementation dependencies - not applicable.

7.13    Implementation timeframe - not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.14    The advantages of this option include:

·     The two Oriental Plane trees are healthy and structurally sound and are not currently a threat to public safety.

·     The trees add some amenity value to the local area/community.

 

7.15    The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Damage will occur due to the trees location and proximity to council infrastructure such as footpath and kerb and channel.

·     Damage is likely to occur due to the trees location and proximity to private infrastructure such as the driveway and brick wall.

·     Increased costs to the ratepayers and CCC as damage occurs.

·     All respondents were in support of removing the trees.

·     No respondents were in favour of tree retention.

·     Council may receive continuing requests and complaints regarding the trees.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Tree Assessment Wild Dunes Place

38

b

Letter to residents Wild Dune Place

46

 

 

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

Dieter Steinegg - Arborist, Citywide

Approved By

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Customer and Community

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

8.        Bowhill Road Proposed P10 Restriction

Reference:

17/269898

Contact:

Wayne Anisy

Wayne.anisy@ccc.govt.nz

941-8999

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Coastal-Burwood Community Board to approve the installation of a P10 parking area on Bowhill Road as shown on Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to requests from the business owner at this location.

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 assessment of the magnitude of the problem and the number of properties affected by the preferred option.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Approve that a P10 parking area be installed on the south side of Bowhill Road commencing at a point 13 metres west of its intersection with Keyes Road and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 18 metres, this restriction is to apply at any time.

 

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 a P10 parking area (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 a turnover area for dairy customers to park.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     No long term parking is permitted at this location.

4.4       <enter text>

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       There have been recent requests from the dairy owner on the corner of the Keyes/Bowhill intersection to look into the parking issues being experienced at this location. The current issues are that vehicles can park with no restriction in the area on Bowhill Road between Keyes Road and Baker Street. There was some available parking on the west side of Keyes Road south of the roundabout, however this has since been removed due to optimisation requirements with the introduction of two approach lanes at the roundabout.

5.2       After site investigations it was agreed there were issues with long term parking and the installation of a time limited parking area would be the best solution. On 13/1/17 a letter with the attached plan was dropped into the Diary and number 5 Baker Street highlighting the proposal. There were no objections to this and one letter of support was received back from the Diary owner.

5.3       As the proposed option does not affect any other property owners or residents there was no further consultation carried out.


 

6.   Option 1 – Install P10 Parking Restrictions (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Install a P10 parking area on Bowhill Road as shown on Attachment A.

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       All immediately affected residents were notified by way of letter drop on 13 January 2017. To date there have no objections to the proposal. One submission in support was received back, this was from the Dairy owner who initially requested that we look into the parking issues.

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 - $400

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

6.8       Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

Legal Implications

6.9       Part 1, Clause 5 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 provides Council with the authority to install parking restrictions by resolution.

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 resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.11    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    

6.12    Not applicable.

Implementation

6.13    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

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

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.15    The advantages of this option include:

·   It will provide turnover for the businesses customers.

6.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It will remove the option for all day parking.

7.   Option 2 – Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing parking and 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 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       This option is inconsistent with the business owner request for an improved turnover parking area for their customers.

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       Not applicable

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:

·   Unrestricted parking will remain.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not address the issue of turnover for the business owner.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Bowhill Road P10 Diagram for Board Report

52

 

 

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

Wayne Anisy - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Aaron Haymes - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

9.        Deed of Surrender and Deed of Lease to Family For Life Trust at Aranui Playground

Reference:

17/269259

Contact:

Kathy Jarden

Kathy.jarden@ccc.govt.nz

941-8203

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Coastal-Burwood Community Board to recommend to Council that:

1.1.1   The lease over Aranui Playground with Pacific Trust Canterbury be surrendered; and

1.1.2   A new lease be granted to Family for Life Trust.

Origin of Report

1.2       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 staff evaluation.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Recommend that Council agree to surrender the existing lease with Pacific Trust Canterbury over the land at 13 Merrington Crescent, also known as Aranui Playground, 307 Breezes Road; and

2.         Recommend that Council agree to grant a new lease to Family For Life Trust over an area of land approximately 1324m2 located at 13 Merrington Crescent, also known as Aranui Playground at 307 Breezes Road contained in Certificate of Title CB516/289 for a term of 20 years less 1 day for the purpose providing early learning childcare services.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Community Facilities

·     Level of Service: 2.0.8 Identify and promote community facilities provided by third parties

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – Grant Surrender of Current Lease and Enter into New Lease (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – Decline Surrender

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·   Supports Council’s Early Childhood Education Policy “promoting equitable access for all children and their families/whanau to quality early childhood education in Christchurch.  Priority will be given to the least advantaged and those with special needs or abilities.”

·   Supports Council’s Strengthening Communities Strategy – “strong communities give people a sense of belonging and encourage them to take part in social, cultural, economic and political life.  This participation and the support that such communities can offer in times of stress, promote the well-being of individuals and families/whanau.”

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·   An open park space continues to be occupied by buildings and improvements.

 

5.   Context/Background

The Land and Buildings

5.1       The land subject to this report is known as the Aranui Playground with access off Pages Road/Breezes Road and Merrington Crescent.  A site plan is shown in Attachment A.

5.2       The land being Part Lot 4 and Part Lot 11 DP 3564 Certificate of Title CB516/289 being 3690 square metres more or less and held as fee simple.

5.3       Leases over this parcel of land are treated as park in accordance with section 138(2) of the Local Government Act 2002.

5.4       In 2014 Canterbury Play Centre Association held the lease with Council over this land and approached Council to assign their lease to Pacific Trust Canterbury.  This was approved by the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board on 17 February 2014.

5.5       The building is in good condition with Canterbury Play Centre Association carrying out earthquake works including replacing the piles and foundation prior to transferring ownership to Pacific Trust Canterbury.

5.6       The current lease expires 31 March 2022.

5.7       The building improvements are currently owned by Pacific Trust Canterbury who are in liquidation.

5.8       The liquidator has placed the building and improvements up for sale in the open market with any new ground lease subject to Council approval.

5.9       The liquidator has entered into a sale and purchase agreement for the buildings and the purchaser is now seeking approval to enter into a new lease.

5.10    The liquidator has agreed to surrender the current lease subject to the purchaser being granted a new lease on the land.

Request for Lease to Family For Life Trust

5.11    Family for Life Trust (the “Trust”) operates Just Kids Preschool which is a community based preschool.  The Trust employs up to 30 staff.  A copy of the Trust’s written application and philosophies may be found in Attachment B.  Ministry of Education reviews and audited financial accounts have also been provided for staff review.

5.12    The Trust has operated a preschool at 81 Bickerton Street for the last 15 years licenced for 144 children.  The Trust has also purchased a second preschool two years ago at 129 Pages Road licenced for 14 children.

5.13    The Trust would like to purchase the buildings at Merrington Crescent (Aranui Playground site) to complement their services as a community preschool giving consideration to a strong Pacifica theme to encourage participation from that community.  This intention has been supported by Ministry of Education personnel familiar with the Wainoni and Aranui communities.

5.14    Council officers propose a lease term of five (5) years with three (3) rights of renewal of 5 years each for a total term of 20 years less one day.

5.15    The proposed rental is based on current rents to similar organisations occupying parks and reserves.  The annual rent would be reviewed three-yearly subject to council rental policies.  For the purposes of calculating the annual rental, the leased area comprises 1120m2 land, and 204m2 main building and shed.  As of 1 April 2017, the current annual rent would be $294.75 plus GST.

Delegations

5.16    The Community Board does not hold the necessary delegations to give effect to the preferred option of surrendering the current lease and granting a new lease.

5.17    Community Boards may grant leases or licences on non-reserve land “for a maximum term of 20 years (less 1 day) to voluntary organisations over parks for the erection of pavilions and other buildings and structures associated with and necessary for the use of the land for outdoor sports games and other recreational activities” (Delegation 5.11).

5.18    The term “recreational” activity in this instance does not include early education services such as would be permitted if the park was classified under the Reserves Act for “local purpose community buildings”.  As such, a recommendation from the Community Board to the Council is sought.

6.   Option 1 – Grant Surrender of Current Lease and Enter into New Lease (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Surrender the current lease to Pacific Trust Canterbury (in Liquidation) and enter into a new lease with Family for Life Trust.

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 however public notification advising of Council’s intention to enter into a lease in accordance with Section 138(2) of the Local Government Act will be carried out.

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       Families in the Aranui/Wainoni area are specifically affected by this option due to cessation of services from this location.  Their views are supportive of this proposal. Their views have not been solicited on this issue however staff visits to the site and impromptu discussions with neighbours indicate that they would like these buildings to be utilised.  The Trust has prepared a business case supporting the need for further services in this neighbourhood.

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 – legal fees to prepare the necessary Deed documents.

6.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – no cost to Council

6.9       Funding source – not applicable

Legal Implications

6.10    Documents recording the Deed of Surrender and a new Deed of Lease will be prepared by Council’s Legal Services Unit.

Risks and Mitigations 

6.11    There is a risk that Family for Life Trust ceases to operate and the building is abandoned.

6.12    Risk  - empty building left on park due to Tenant ceasing to operate. 

6.12.1 Treatment: provision in the lease to ensure that the current building owner removes the improvements from the land.

6.12.2 Residual risk rating: the rating of the risk is low.

Implementation

6.13    Implementation dependencies - Recommendation by Community Board and approval by Council to surrender current lease and enter into new lease.

6.14    Implementation timeframe – 4 to 6 weeks.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.15    The advantages of this option include:

·   Supports Council’s Early Childhood Education Policy “promoting equitable access for all children and their families/whanau to quality early childhood education in Christchurch.  Priority will be given to the least advantaged and those with special needs or abilities.”

·   Supports Council’s Strengthening Communities Strategy – “strong communities give people a sense of belonging and encourage them to take part in social, cultural, economic and political life.  This participation and the support that such communities can offer in times of stress, promote the well-being of individuals and families/whanau.”

6.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   An open park space continues to be occupied by buildings and improvements.

7.   Option 2 – Decline Surrender

Option Description

7.1       Decline request to surrender current lease.

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       Residents and ratepayers are specifically affected by this option due to the need for early childhood education services in their area.  Their views have not been solicited on this issue however staff visits to the site and impromptu discussions with neighbours indicate that they would like these buildings to be utilised.  The Trust has prepared a business case supporting the need for further services in this neighbourhood.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.6       This option is inconsistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

7.6.1   Inconsistency – does not meet Council Level of Service: 2.0.8 Identify and promote community facilities provided by third parties

7.6.2   Reason for inconsistency – does not support Council policies and strategies

7.6.3   Amendment necessary – amendment to Council policies and strategies

Financial Implications

7.7       Cost of Implementation – Enforcement through the lease to ensure buildings and improvements are removed.

7.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – ongoing park maintenance of a larger open park space

7.9       Funding source – not budgeted; would need to be provided under Parks maintenance contracts.

Legal Implications

7.10    The current lease includes provisions for that the current tenant remove all buildings and improvements from the site. 

Risks and Mitigations   

7.11    Pacific Trust Canterbury (in Liquidation) abandons the building leaving it for the Council to remove and reinstate the site.

7.12    Risk  - financial ability of the liquidator to remove the improvements.  This will result in unbudgeted costs to the Council in pursuing removal of the buildings and improvements.

7.12.1 Treatment: approve the surrender of the lease, allowing for the sale of the building to Family for Life Trust and granting of a new lease.

7.12.2 Residual risk rating: the rating of the risk is low.

Implementation

7.13    Implementation dependencies  - Council Resolution

7.14    Implementation timeframe – Notification to Pacific Trust Canterbury liquidators and sufficient time to remove improvements – 3-6 months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.15    The advantages of this option include:

·   Area of open park becomes available to all residents to enjoy.

7.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Community desire to have provisions for early childhood education facilities in their neighbourhood.

·   Liquidator does not remove improvements leaving cost to Christchurch ratepayers

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Lease Plan - 13 Merrington Crescent

59

b

Family For Life Application

60

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

 

Signatories

Author

Kathy Jarden - Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Bruce Rendall - Head of Facilities, Property and Planning

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Customer and Community

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

10.    Coastal-Burwood Community Board ANZAC Day 2017 Wreath Laying

Reference:

17/325317

Contact:

Peter Croucher

peter.croucher@ccc.govt.nz

941 5305

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Coastal-Burwood Community Board to consider approving funding for its ANZAC Day 2017 Commemoration wreath laying.

 

2.      Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated to assist the Board to consider wreath laying events to commemorate ANZAC Day 2017.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Resolves to make a grant of $500 towards the cost of ANZAC Day 2017 wreaths

2.         Determines the locations for laying of wreaths and who will represent the Board at those locations.

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       The former Burwood/Pegasus Community Board had traditionally commemorated ANZAC Day with the laying of a commemorative wreaths funded by the Board.

3.2       In the past, wreaths have been laid at the New Brighton, Aranui and Burwood ANZAC ceremonies. In 2016 wreaths were laid at New Brighton and Aranui only. Advice has been received from Waitakiri School that in conjunction with All Saints Church, Burwood, an ANZAC ceremony will be held at the Burwood Monument on the corner of Lake Terrace and New Brighton Roads.

3.3       Funding for the wreaths will come from the Board’s 2016/17 Discretionary Response Fund which has an available balance of $42,255.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Decision Matrix ANZAC Wreaths 2017

66

 

 

Signatories

Author

Peter Croucher - Community Board Advisor

Approved By

Jo Wells - Manager Community Governance, Coastal-Burwood

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

11.    Coastal-Burwood Community Board Youth Development Funding Scheme 2016-17 T Tauapai

Reference:

17/331202

Contact:

Jacqui Miller

Jacqui.miller@ccc.govt.nz

941 5333

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Coastal-Burwood Community Board to consider one application received for the Board's 2016/17 Youth Development Fund.

1.2       There is currently $1,050.00 remaining in this fund.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report is to assist the Community Board to consider an application for funding from Tanaisjah Tauapai.

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 Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $300.00 from its 2016/17 Youth Development Fund to Tanaisjah Tauapai towards the New Zealand Hip Hop National Championships from the 26-29 April in Auckland.

 

 

4.   Applicant 1 – Tanaisjah Tauapai

4.1       Tanaisjah Tauapai is a 14 year old living in Rookwood Street, New Brighton.  She is a year nine student at Burnside High School.

4.2       Tanaisjah is a member of the 8 person Reality dance crew who dance at the Swarm Dance Studio in Moorhouse Avenue.  The Reality crew won the South Island regional competition on the 11th March which qualified them to compete at the National Championships in Auckland from the 26-29 April.  The event is also a qualifying event for the World Hip Hop Championships to be held in the United States in August 2017.

4.3       Tenaisjah began dancing three years ago at the Swarm Dance Studio and quickly developed into a very talented dancer making it into the best dance crew at Swarm.  The Reality crew perform regularly at community events including I Love New Brighton 2017 and also the Linwood Youth Festival Experience (LYFE). 

4.4       The crew rehearse three times a week throughout the year, which will increase to daily rehearsals before the NZ championships.  The crew have undertaken some fundraising activities including sausage sizzles, entertainment books sales and are looking at other options.  They estimate they will raise up to $150 per crew member

4.5       Tanaisjah also attends Majestic Church youth group and volunteers as a youth leader during their weekly programme.

4.6       The following table provides a breakdown of the costs for Tanaisjah Tauapai:

EXPENSES

Cost ($)

Registration Fee

35.00

Flights

290.00

Accommodation

120.00

Transport – Van Hire/Petrol

80.00

 

 

                                                                                                 Total

$525.00

 

1.1.  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

Author

Jacqui Miller - Community Recreation Advisor

Approved By

Jo Wells - Manager Community Governance, Coastal-Burwood

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

12.    Coastal-Burwood Community Board Area Report

Reference:

17/345304

Contact:

Jo Wells

jo.wells@ccc.govt.nz

941 6451

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

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

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board:

1.             Receive the Area Update.

2.             Request the Submissions Committee to prepare a draft submission on the Christchurch City Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2017/18 and requests that the draft submission be circulated to the Board for comment prior to submission; noting that the Submissions Committee has the delegated authority to submit on the Board’s behalf.

 

3.   Community Board Activities and Forward Planning

3.1       Community Board Plan update against outcomes

It is anticipated that the Community Board Plan will be reviewed and updated and come into effect from 1 July 2017.  A workshop is planned for April.

3.2       Memos/Information reporting back on Community Board matters

3.2.1   The Review of the Tsunami Evacuation in Christchurch City on 14 November 2016 has been provided by email. 

3.2.2   Outwards Correspondence

Nil to report at this time.

3.2.3   Estuary Road Resealing

On 3 April 2017 information was given that the smoothing of a portion of Estuary Road on the trafficable central portion only was based on the criteria of greatest need and financial prudence. The Board expressed their frustration that that entire road width in that portion of Estuary Road was not sealed.  This matter has been further discussed with staff.

 

In terms of similar roading treatment in other areas of the city there is an example in Riverlaw Terrace. Not smoothing the parked areas in Estuary Road meant that a much greater section of road could be sealed.

 

Not "smoothing" the parked areas - where most don't drive over - is common practice on the New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) State Highway network.

 

 

 

 

 

3.2.4   2017 LGNZ Conference

Local Government New Zealand is holding their 2017 Conference on 23–25 July 2017 in Auckland with the theme of  “Creating pathways to 2050: liveable spaces and loveable places”.

 

The conference is aimed at mayors, chairs, chief executives, councillors and senior management, the programme is attached (attachment A) for information.

 

More information is available at http://www.lgnz.co.nz/about-lgnz/lgnz-conference-2/

 

Board members are invited to signal their interest in attending.  If there is interest, staff will prepare a report seeking approval to allocate operational funding for attendance, flights and accommodation.

 

3.2.5   QEII Park – Memorial Trees and Fitness Track

During the Board Seminar held on 3 April 2017 with staff and representatives of the Ministry of Education, it was agreed to obtain the tree plan as it related to the proposed school’s site. Also, confirmation was sought that a publicly accessible fitness/walking track would still be available on the periphery of the park.

The agenda for the Council meeting on 13 April 2017 is now available on-line and contains this information (item 19 in that agenda).

In summary, the report is to ask Council to amend a resolution made on 23 June 2016 in relation to retaining trees on QEII Park. The fitness/walking trail is to be retained and upgraded.

 

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

3.3.1   Nil to report at this time.

3.4       Board area Consultations/Engagement

3.4.1   Draft Annual Plan 2017/18.  Copies of the consultation booklet are available at www.ccc.govt.nz/haveyoursay, at Civic Offices at 53 Hereford Street, Christchurch and all Council libraries and customer service desks.  

3.4.2   A leaflet containing general information about the Community Board, the Council and the Community Governance Team has been developed for Residents Associations. This has been done following requests from and consultation with Residents Associations.  It is a local resource for Residents’ Associations in the Coastal-Burwood ward. 

 

3.5       Submission Opportunities

3.5.1   Draft Annual Plan 2017/18

 

3.6       Annual Plan and Long Term Plan matters

3.6.1   The Submissions Committee is asked to prepare its submission to the Council on the Draft Annual Plan 2017/18.

3.7       Development of Civil Defence Emergency Plans

·    A workshop to be set up to discuss Board’s role in Community preparedness plans.

·    The review of the Tsunami Evacuation has now been made available.

3.8       Requests for information from Board meeting on Newsline

3.8.1   Members are invited to consider items for inclusion in Newsline.

3.9       Significant Board matters of interest to raise at Council

Board members are requested to highlight significant matters from the meeting to be raised by the Chair at the next Council Meeting (Community Board reports) on Thursday 11 May.

4.   Key Local Projects (KLPs) and Strengthening Communities Funded Projects

The three Community Board, ‘Key Local Projects’ are Aranui Community Trust Incorporated (ACTIS), People Empowerment Environmental Enhancement Project (PEEEP) previously known as Project Employment Environmental Enhancement Project and Rawhiti Community Sports Incorporated.  The three groups will be doing deputations to the Board on 1 May.

5.   Significant Community Issues

5.1       Repair of the South Brighton Boardwalk

A report is due to come to the Community Board on 1 May 2017.  The report will have some estimates and options presented.

6.   Major Community and/or Infrastructure Projects

6.1       Community Facilities

Staff are meeting with A-Town Boxing Gym Club regarding options for the facility they utilise to be repaired.  The Club have expressed interest to either lease or purchase the building from Council and to manage the repairs and improvements for the building.  A report will come to the Board once options are established.

6.2       Partnerships with the community and organisations

6.2.1   Consultation via a public information leaflet on the Burwood Park Fitness Trail has gone out to stakeholders and interested parties and is due to close 21 April 2017.

6.2.2   Development Christchurch Limited (DCL) has announced their ‘Land Development Strategy’ about the transfer of underutilised land from CCC to DCL.  This includes three development sites on Beresford St. The Council consultation is only about the issue of transferring land to DCL (owned by CCC) and not about the future use.  DCL will continue work to identify the highest and best uses for these sites and, taking into account community views through engagement, take steps towards the development of these sites as part of the New Brighton Regeneration Project.

The wider outcome to DCL holding a portfolio of Council land will assist us in delivering additional work in New Brighton as part of the regeneration project.

6.3       Infrastructure projects underway

Repair of the South Brighton Jetty is underway.

 

6.4       Events Report Back

Nil to report at this time.

7.   Parks, Sports and Recreation Update (bi-monthly)

7.1       Local Parks Update

Report bi-monthly.

8.   Community Board funding budget overview and clarification

8.1       The Board’s funding update is attached, please refer to (attachment B).

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

LGNZ Conference Programme 2017

73

b

2016-19 Coastal-Burwood Board Funding Update

77

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Katie MacDonald - Community Support Officer

Jo Wells - Manager Community Governance, Coastal-Burwood

Natalie Dally - Community Development Advisor

Heather Davies - Community Development Advisor

Jacqui Miller - Community Recreation Advisor

Peter Croucher - Community Board Advisor

Approved By

Jo Wells - Manager Community Governance, Coastal-Burwood

  


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

PDF Creator

 


Coastal-Burwood Community Board

18 April 2017

 

 

13.  Elected Member 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.

 

 

 

14.  Question Under Standing Orders

 

Any member of the local authority may at any meeting of the local authority at the appointed time, put a question to the Chairperson, or through the Chairperson of the local authority to the Chairperson of any standing or special committee, or to any officer of the local authority concerning any matter relevant to the role or functions of the local authority concerning any matter that does not appear on the agenda, nor arises from any committee report or recommendation submitted to that meeting.

 

Wherever applicable, such questions shall be in writing and handed to the Chairperson prior to the commencement of the meeting at which they are to be asked.