Christchurch City Council

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Christchurch City Council will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Thursday 5 October 2017

Time:                                    9.30am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner

Councillor Vicki Buck

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Phil Clearwater

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor David East

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Aaron Keown

Councillor Glenn Livingstone

Councillor Raf Manji

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Deon Swiggs

Councillor Sara Templeton

 

 

29 September 2017

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Dr Karleen Edwards

Chief Executive

Tel: 941 8554

 

Jo Daly

Council Secretary

941 8581

jo.daly@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.
Watch Council meetings live on the web:
http://councillive.ccc.govt.nz/live-stream

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

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

3.       Public Participation.................................................................................................................. 4

3.1       Public Forum....................................................................................................................... 4

3.2       Deputations by Appointment............................................................................................... 4

4.       Presentation of Petitions......................................................................................................... 4

Civic Awards Committee

5.       Civic Awards Committee Minutes - 20 September 2017....................................................... 5

Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee

6.       Short-stay parking private sector opportunities .................................................................. 9

7.       Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee Minutes - 15 September 2017.... 19

Health and Safety Committee

8.       Health and Safety Committee Minutes - 15 September 2017............................................. 25

Strategic Capability Committee

9.       Strategic Capability Committee Minutes - 14 September 2017.......................................... 29

STAFF REPORTS

10.     Revocation of Delegation....................................................................................................... 33

11.     Resolution to Exclude the Public........................................................................................... 35  

 

 

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

1.   Apologies

An apology was received from Councillor Johanson.

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.   Public Participation

3.1  Public Forum

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

3.2  Deputations by Appointment

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

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

4.   Presentation of Petitions

There were no Presentation of Petitions at the time the agenda was prepared.  

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

5.        Civic Awards Committee Minutes - 20 September 2017

Reference:

17/1037321

Contact:

Milinda Peris

milinda.peris@ccc.govt.nz

941 8251

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Civic Awards Committee held a meeting on 20 September 2017 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for its confirmation.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives and confirms the Minutes from the Civic Awards Committee meeting held 20 September 2017.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Civic Awards Committee - 20 September 2017

6

 

 

Signatories

Author

Milinda Peris - Civic and International Relations Coordinator

  


Council

05 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

05 October 2017

 

Report from Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee  – 15 September 2017

 

6.        Short-stay parking private sector opportunities

Reference:

17/1020887

Contact:

Aaron Haymes

aaron.haymes@ccc.govt.nz

941 8999

 

 

 

1.   Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee Recommendation to Council

 

That the Council:

1.         Accept the recommendation under option 1 for implementation of a Partnered Assistance process.

2.         Request Council staff to discuss with owners and operators of temporary off-street car parking sites:

a.         Methods for providing a better standard of amenity

b.         Opportunities for making long-stay parking available for short-term stays after hours/on weekends.

2.         Fund all Council staff costs associated with providing stage one and two of the partnered service.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Report Title

Page

1

Short-stay parking private sector opportunities

 

 

 

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

Short-stay parking private sector opportunities

Reference:

17/847149

Contact:

Aaron Haymes

Aaron.haymes@ccc.govt.nz

9418075

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Development Forum to consider options for the Christchurch City Council to partner with the private sector to facilitate development of short stay parking facilities. 

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is being provided to fulfil Development Forum DLPF/2017/00011.

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by assessing impacts against significance and engagement assessment criteria. 

 

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Development Forum recommends that the Council:

1.         Accept the recommendation under option 1 for implementation of a partnered assistance process.

2.         Consider funding all Council staff costs associated with providing stage one and two of the partnered service.

 

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – Partnered Assistance (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – Working Group and Request for Proposal

·     Option 3 – Do nothing

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·   Suits any type of project from a small number of car parks at ground level up to a large scale multi-level parking facility.

·   Is flexible and provides options for the developer, including early decision making on commercial viability without substantial cost commitment.

·   Will ensure that costs for the developer are controlled and money is only spent on elements that are absolutely necessary.

·   Provides a complete service from initial ideas through to and including operational support.

·   Is relatively low cost to the Council for the likelihood that provision of short-stay parking provision in the city is well supplied.

·   Fast to implement and likely to result in quick-win solutions.

·   Leaves open the ability to implement option 2 at a later stage to address overall strategic parking needs.

 

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The possibility that multiple developers approach the Council with an intention to provide parking facilities in the same demand location and a potential oversupply.

·     Not highly strategic however the initial consultation stage, working with city Transport Planners could be used to manage this aspect. 

 

 

5.   Context/Background

Current needs

5.1       Central Christchurch is in a transitional phase for parking demand where the demand profile is changing at a rate that is unprecedented in the history of the city.

5.2       The Christchurch Central Recovery Plan includes longer term goals for a liveable city that will require changes in the way we use transport in Christchurch. The change is occurring already but the time needed for larger numbers of our citizens to adapt to this change requires transitional thinking so we can accommodate our current culture, which relies heavily on an ability to travel to the central city by car.

5.3       Factors that influence needs and the short-stay parking demand profile include: 

5.3.1   New development scale, use, associated occupancy and potential to generate visitor trips is only moderately predictable.

5.3.2   The demand on public parking generated by developments that do not provide on-site parking to match the demand caused by the activity.

5.3.3   Delivery of central city projects in locations that seek to enhance public realm and include some short stay parking removal.

5.3.4   The high numbers of existing car parks that are providing long-stay parking in favour of commuter demand over short-stay casual and retail parking.

5.3.5   Commuter rate of uptake of transport choices, such as public transport, cycling, walking.

5.3.6   The rate that occupants of the central city are returning to work, live and do business.

5.3.7   Demand locations. 

5.3.8   The location of current parking facilities.

5.3.9   The rate that existing vacant sites providing temporary short-stay parking are used for construction.

5.3.10 Parking occupied by construction workers (estimated at about 800) and where temporary traffic management is in place during construction. 

 

Parking demand

 

5.4       Evidence that informs parking demand is obtained from the following resources: 

5.4.1   The Christchurch Central Parking Plan includes information that helps predict future demand in the city. The plan was produced in 2015 so requires that consideration is given to changes in the demand profile since its release, such as recent parking assets coming online on the city. The plan includes suggestions for specific locations where short stay parking facilities may be required. 

5.4.2   The Council manages a parking dashboard that ensures that the changing profile of parking in the city is well understood. The dashboard enables activity monitoring that can inform planning decisions.

5.4.3   Quarterly parking surveys are conducted by Council staff to monitor car park numbers and occupancy. The data collected during these surveys also contributes to the parking dashboard’s reliability.

5.5       Current short-stay demand varies across the central city. Occupancy surveys indicate that areas of the city that experienced high demand and shortfalls earlier this year around the Retail Precinct are now well served. With the addition of 805 spaces at Lichfield Street in October, short stay capacity is expected to remain above demand in the Retail Precinct for the foreseeable future. Some hot-spots remain where demand is still high but the additional numbers of car parks required to meet that demand in the short term is not significant, with the exception of the public hospital area. 

5.6       Future demand is likely to be reasonably high to the north of the central city with demand generators in the Performing Arts Precinct, The Convention Centre and the Central Library.

5.7       It is true that some areas of the central city are experiencing short-stay demand that exceeds supply but in some locations members of the public are unaware that new parking facilities exist. In locations where this is occurring it is important that this is understood by those who intend to provide parking facilities.

The diagram above is from the Christchurch Central Parking Plan, produced in 2015.

 

City street projects

 

5.8       The Christchurch Central Recovery Plan intends that a number of on-street car parks are removed within the central city to achieve an enhanced public realm, through wider footpaths, tree plantings and cycle facilities. The intention is that where on-street parking is removed it is replaced with off-street parking within a convenient distance, resulting in no net loss of parking to achieve an objective of keeping supply at or above demand.  The intention is that provision of off-street parking is a shared responsibility between the private sector and public organisations such as the Council.

5.9       The transition described above requires careful management and to date we have experienced the results when alternatives were not in place ahead of the removal of on-street parking as a result of the delivery of public projects. These lessons learned provide opportunities for the private sector to work with the Council to identify situations where on-street parking will be removed for public projects and ensure that sensible and convenient alternatives are in place prior to commencement of a project. Possibilities include short term temporary facilities that could be in place until such time that a development and demand profile stabilises, transport culture adapts and alternative permanent public or private facilities are in place.

 

 

 

 

Regulatory and city impacts 

 

5.10    In addition to commercial viability and the need to provide facilities in locations where they are most needed the following considerations apply to the establishment of new parking facilities within the central city:

5.10.1    Transport network impacts in any particular location are a key consideration. Generation of additional vehicle movements in certain locations can seriously impact traffic flows. In most cases this can be managed and to avoid critical impacts a Traffic Engineer would need to assess the effects of the proposal.

5.10.2    Success of the new city network relies upon encouraging vehicle movements within road corridors that have been assigned to each transport mode through a transport network hierarchy. The city will soon include wayfinding devices that encourage movement of cars in corridors prioritised for car travel. The features in a car priority corridor, including signal control ensure that people travelling by car have the best experience possible.

5.10.3    A number of temporary use approvals were issued under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act. Existing approvals were extended but no new approvals can be issued under this legislation. That means that resource consent is required for all new sites or anyone wishing to extend their temporary use approval in the future. At the time that temporary use approvals were allowed there was significant relaxation of the rules for establishing temporary parking on empty allotments. Now that we are transitioning back to a fully functioning central city the impacts on growing numbers of occupants and the environment need to be considered.

5.10.4    An Environment Canterbury discharge consent for stormwater disposal will be required for most sites and may require pre-treatment prior to discharge.

5.10.5    A building consent or exemption from consent will be required for drainage work.

5.10.6    A vehicle entrance approval is required for new vehicle entrances.

5.10.7    Consideration should also be given to security and public safety, by taking into account pedestrian access to vehicles, lighting, location and visibility from adjoining occupied spaces and buildings.

6.   Option 1 – Partnered Assistance (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       A three stage service provided by the Council where a developer approaches the Council initially to make their interests known and Council staff engage and assist with each aspect required to establish a parking facility.

6.2       The first stage delivers a consultation service where Council Transport Planning staff will work closely with the developer to provide information that helps inform the viability of a particular proposal. In this stage Council staff will discuss parking dashboard information, current and expected future demand in any location and likely network implications. Staff will ensure that a developer is well informed before progressing to the next stage. At this time the developer need not have incurred costs preparing detailed information or producing any plans but needs to have some ideas to start a conversation.

6.3       The second stage delivers a case managed service to the developer and their professional team through the Councils established Partnership Approvals programme. The programme assists with identifying all required approvals, providing advice and working through regulatory requirements. The service includes advice to the developers’ team regarding the level and contents of documentation required to achieve approval quickly and efficiently. The level of cost investment in planning for a developer starts off as minimal (some basic plans to start off with) and increases throughout this stage. This process ideally starts with a site that has already been identified and concludes when a site is operational.

6.4       The majority of privately owned parking is now managed by private service providers in Christchurch. The third stage of this process deals with operational support where Council staff can provide advice that will assist with managing a parking operation. In addition to the option of private service providers the Council Parking Operations team can provide a price or negotiate an arrangement for managing parking sites if owners so desire. Developers can choose to continue into this stage with Council staff support or manage operations independently.

Significance

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

6.6       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to inform.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.7       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.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.8       This option is consistent with the Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

6.9       Cost of implementation of the service – Costs for initial implementation are minimal and fit within existing budgets. A minimal level of internal collaboration between teams to agree process would be required and also to document the process at a very basic level to share with potential developers.

6.10    Ongoing Costs – Stage one work, consultation would mostly fit within existing budgets under the provision of public advice. Stage two, case managed service is currently a service that is paid for by external customers. The likely cost per project has not been calculated but could be between $1k to 5k, depending upon the complexity and scale of the project. An option exists to consider the Council covering staff costs to deliver the Partnership Approvals service. This could apply once a developer is committed to going ahead with their project, where parking is only available to the general public for short-stay use and will not be leased as reserved or long-stay parking.

6.11    Ongoing costs - Stage three costs would need to be determined on a case by case basis and have ongoing implications for the Council. Any service provided during stage three would be on a cost recoverable basis.

6.12    Funding source – Costs for supporting establishment of the service and supporting developers in any partnership agreement have not currently been allowed for specifically in any budgets.

Legal Implications

6.13    It is recommended that the Councils legal team provide advice following any decision to advance this option. In particular any contractual arrangements that may need to be put in place to facilitate the service.

Risks and Mitigations   

6.14    A full risk assessment has not been carried out at this stage but there are currently no obvious risks or potential impacts that could not be managed. 

Implementation

6.15    Implementation dependencies - Wider Council teams’ and managers’ participation, and active participation by the development community. 

6.16    Implementation timeframe – Implementation would be managed by the Council’s Christchurch Central Transport Programme Office staff and registrations of interest could be received immediately. Two weeks required for internal collaboration to agree / learn process and arrange for relevant staff availability, ready to hold first stage meetings with the development community. 

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.17    The advantages of this option include:

·   Suits any type of project from a small number of car parks at ground level up to a large scale multi-level parking facility.

·   Is flexible and provides options for the developer, including early decision making on commercial viability without substantial cost commitment.

·   Will support cost control for developers.

·   High quality staff advice will reduce unnecessary expenditure.

·   Provides a complete service from initial ideas through to and including operational support.

·   Is relatively low cost to the Council for the likelihood that provision of short-stay parking provision in the city is well supplied.

·   Fast to implement and likely to result in quick-win solutions.

6.18    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   The possibility that multiple developers approach the Council with an intention to provide parking facilities in the same demand location and a potential oversupply.

·   Not highly strategic however the initial consultation stage, working with city Transport Planners could be used to manage this aspect. 

7.   Option 2 – Working Group and Request for Proposal (RFP)

Option Description

7.1       This option includes the establishment of an internal Council working group to study the current short term demand and produce a report with detailed information about the parking demand profile and future needs of the city. The group could also investigate possibilities for public / private cost sharing arrangements for permanent key strategic facilities.

7.2       The report could include a range of options that meet the strategic objectives of the central city long term and identify key locations and estimated numbers of car parks required in each location.

7.3       The Council would use the report to produce a RFP document with a scope and release it to the private sector inviting proposals for parking facilities. Proposals would be submitted to the Council by the private sector.

7.4       Using a selection process the Council would review each RFP and consider progressing those that most adequately meet the needs of the city.

Significance

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

7.6       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are inform.

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.7       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.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.8       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

7.9       Cost of Implementation – Would require additional budget allocation. 

7.10    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Staff costs progressing proposals but no ongoing costs once parking facilities are established. 

7.11    Funding source – Additional budget required. Cost not likely to be significant. Additional information to ascertain costs can be provided following a decision to progress this option.

Legal Implications

7.12    It is recommended that the Council’s legal team provide advice following any decision to advance this option.

Risks and Mitigations    

7.13    A full risk assessment has not been carried out at this stage but there are currently no obvious risks or potential impacts that could not be managed. 

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies - Internal collaboration amongst multiple staff and teams. Sufficient interest in the development community.

7.15    Implementation timeframe – Estimated at three months to investigate and produce a report and RFP released at around four months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Reduce the likelihood of an oversupply short stay parking.

·   Greater accuracy meeting strategic needs and possibly resulting in the best proposals going ahead rather than anything and everything.

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   More suitable for achieving the objectives of an overall parking strategy catering for more than short-stay parking.

·   Slow to implement and less likely to result in quick-wins.

·   To some extent replicates detail in the Christchurch Central Parking plan but does bring a higher degree of accuracy and current day relevance.

8.   Option 3 – Do Nothing

Option Description

8.1       That the current short stay parking situation is allowed to evolve without intervention.

Significance

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

8.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are nil.

Impact on Mana Whenua

8.4       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

8.6       Cost of Implementation – Nil.

8.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Likely to result in longer term costs to the Council for establishing short stay parking facilities in some locations.

Legal Implications

8.8       Legal implications remain current state.

Risks and Mitigations   

8.9       Risk implication remain current state.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.10    The advantages of this option include:

·   No short term costs

8.11    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Short-stay parking demand management impacted by doing nothing.

·   Lost opportunity to leverage current interest in private sector.

 

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

Aaron Haymes - Manager Operations (Transport)

Approved By

Chris Gregory - Head of Transport

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

7.        Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee Minutes - 15 September 2017

Reference:

17/1020930

Contact:

Chris Turner-Bullock

christopher.turner@ccc.govt.nz

941 8233

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee held a meeting on 15 September 2017 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for its information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee meeting held 15 September 2017.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Innovation and Sustainable Development Committee - 15 September 2017

20

 

 

Signatories

Author

Christopher Turner-Bullock - Committee Advisor

  


Council

05 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

8.        Health and Safety Committee Minutes - 15 September 2017

Reference:

17/1016488

Contact:

Mark Saunders

Mark.Saunders@ccc.givt.nz

941 6436

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Health and Safety Committee held a meeting on 15 September 2017 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for its information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Health and Safety Committee meeting held 15 September 2017.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Health and Safety Committee - 15 September 2017

26

 

 

Signatories

Author

Mark Saunders - Committee and Hearings Advisor

  


Council

05 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

9.        Strategic Capability Committee Minutes - 14 September 2017

Reference:

17/1020941

Contact:

Chris Turner-Bullock

christopher.turner@ccc.govt.nz

941 8233

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Strategic Capability Committee held a meeting on 14 September 2017 and is circulating the Minutes recorded to the Council for its information.

 

2.   Recommendation to Council

That the Council receives the Minutes from the Strategic Capability Committee meeting held 14 September 2017.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

A

Minutes Strategic Capability Committee - 14 September 2017

30

 

 

Signatories

Author

Christopher Turner-Bullock - Committee Advisor

  


Council

05 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

10.    Revocation of Delegation

Reference:

17/1026279

Contact:

Carol Bellette

Carol.Bellette@ccc.govt.nz

941 8999

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Council to revoke a delegation it made at its meeting on 25 May 2017 and make a minor amendment to the Finance and Performance Committee Terms of Reference. This is to allow the Council to appoint an independent member to the Finance and Performance Committee.

1.2       This report has been generated at the request of the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Council:

1.         Revokes clause 2(b) of Council Resolution CNCL/2017/00163 passed on 25 May 2017, which was as follows:

2(b): Delegates to the Appointments Panel the authority to appoint an independent member to the Finance and Performance Committee.

2.         Amends the membership section of the Finance and Performance Committee Terms of Reference by replacing the words “an independent member appointed by an Appointments Panel established by the Council” with “a non-voting independent member appointed by the Council”.

 

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       When the Council established the Finance and Performance Committee, provision was made for an independent member to be appointed to the Committee.

3.2       On 25 May 2017 the Council considered a report outlining a proposed process for appointing the independent member and passed the following Council resolution (resolution number CNCL/2017/00163):

3.3       In practice it has been difficult to assemble a quorum of Appointments Panel members to complete the appointment process. While it would be feasible to wait until a panel meeting can be scheduled, or for the Council to amend the quorum requirement, it would be faster and more efficient for the Council to make the appointment directly. To ensure it has the correct authority to do this, the Council needs to rescind the delegation it made to the Appointments Panel on 25 May 2017.

3.4       The recommendation to only revoke clause 2(b) of the original resolution returns the power to make the appointment to the Council, but retains the appointment process and Panel should the need arise to appoint a replacement member in the future.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Signatories

Author

Aidan Kimberley - Committee and Hearings Advisor

Approved By

Carol Bellette - General Manager Finance and Commercial (CFO)

   

 


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

11.  Resolution to Exclude the Public

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Note

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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


Council

05 October 2017

 

 

 

ITEM NO.

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED

SECTION

SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT

PLAIN ENGLISH REASON

WHEN REPORTS CAN BE RELEASED

12

Council Owned Heritage Buildings Status Report

s7(2)(h), s7(2)(i)

Commercial Activities, Conduct Negotiations

The estimated costs associated with the strengthening and repair works, as well as the funding requirements initially estimated from the Council are commercially sensitive at this stage. Until such time as contracts are entered  into, releasing the information is likely to undermine Council's negotiating position.

Once contracts are entered into by Council and the information is no longer commercially sensitive.

13

Vbase Ltd - Independent Director's Fees

s7(2)(f)(ii)

Protection from Improper Pressure or Harassment

To allow Councillors to consider undisturbed the issue of whether to pay for the services of independent directors on the Vbase board, in view of there being one independent director already appointed. 

After Vbase has been notified of the Council's decision

14

Christchurch Civic Awards 2017

s7(2)(a)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons

Protection of Privacy

Only names of successful candidates will be released after Council confirmation. No personal information will be released.

15

Public Excluded Civic Awards Committee Minutes - 20 September 2017

 

 

Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.

 

16

Public Excluded Health and Safety Committee Minutes - 15 September 2017

 

 

Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.

 

17

Provision of Council Request Management and Digital Services Technology

s7(2)(h), s7(2)(i)

Commercial Activities, Conduct Negotiations

The document contains commercially sensitive information

Full report on completion of the agreement; A redacted version at the conclusion of the contract negotiations.

18

Appointment of Independent Member to Finance and Performance Committee

s7(2)(a)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons

The report contains confidential information supplied by candidates as part of the appointment process.

An announcement may be made once the appointment has been confirmed.