Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

A meeting of the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Friday 9 March 2018

Time:                                    9am

Venue:                                 Council Chamber, Environment Canterbury,
200 Tuam Street

 

 

 

2 March 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

                           
                   


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

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

Committee Members

 

 

 

Greater Christchurch Partnership Independent Chair

Bill Wasley

 

Christchurch City Council

Mayor Lianne Dalziel, Councillors Phil Clearwater and Sara Templeton

 

Environment Canterbury

Chairman Steve Lowndes, Councillors Cynthia Roberts and Peter Skelton

 

Selwyn District Council

Mayor Sam Broughton, Councillors Malcolm Lyall and Mark Alexander

 

Waimakariri District Council

Mayor David Ayers, Councillors Kevin Felstead and Neville Atkinson

 

Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu (Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri and Ngāti Wheke)

Dr Te Maire Tau, Jane Huria and Gail Gordon

 

Canterbury District Health Board

Tā Mark Solomon

 

New Zealand Transport Agency (Non-Voting Member)

Jim Harland

 

Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (Non-Voting Member)

Kelvan Smith

 

Regenerate Christchurch (Non-Voting Member)

Ivan Iafeta

 

 

 

Partnership Manager

Keith Tallentire

ph 941 8590

 

Committee Adviser

Aidan Kimberley

ph 941 6566

 


 

 

1.       TERMS OF REFERENCE

1.1.        The role of the Committee is to:

                                   i.            Foster and facilitate a collaborative approach between the Partners to address strategic challenges and opportunities for Greater Christchurch.

                                  ii.            Show clear, decisive and visible collaborative strategic leadership amongst the Partners, to wider stakeholders, agencies and central government and to communities across Greater Christchurch.

                                iii.            Establish, and periodically review, an agreed strategic framework to manage growth and address urban development, regeneration, resilience and long-term economic, social, cultural and environmental wellbeing for Greater Christchurch

                                iv.            Oversee implementation of strategies and plans endorsed by the Committee and ratified at individual partner governance meetings, including through the adoption and delivery of an annual joint work programme.

                                 v.            Ensure the Partnership proactively engages with other related partnerships, agencies and organisations critical to the achievement of its strategic goals.

1.2.        The functions of the Committee are to:

                                   i.            Establish an agreed strategic framework to manage growth and address urban development, regeneration, resilience and long-term wellbeing for Greater Christchurch. This is currently expressed through the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy (2007) and the associated Strategy Update (2016).

                                  ii.            As required, develop new and review existing strategies and plans to enable Partners to work more collaboratively with each other and to provide greater clarity and certainty to stakeholders and the community. Existing strategies and plans endorsed by the UDSIC and inherited by this Committee are:

a.       Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy (2007)

b.      Greater Christchurch Travel Demand Management Strategy and Action Plan (2009)

c.       Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Action Plan (2010)

d.      Greater Christchurch Transport Statement (2012)

e.      Greater Christchurch Freight Study and Action Plan (2014/15)

f.        Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Update (2016)

g.       Resilient Greater Christchurch Plan (2016)

                                iii.            Recommend to Partners for ratification at individual partner governance meetings any new or revised strategies and plans.

                                iv.            Adopt and monitor the delivery of an annual joint work programme to deliver on strategic goals and actions outlined in adopted strategies and plans.

                                 v.            Undertake reporting on the delivery of adopted strategies and plans, including in relation to an agreed strategic outcomes framework.

                                vi.            Identify and manage risks associated with implementing adopted strategies and plans.

                              vii.            Establish and maintain effective dialogue and relationships (through meetings, forums and other communications) with other related partnerships, agencies and organisations to the support the role of the Committee, including but not limited to:

a.       Healthy Christchurch (and any similar arrangements in Selwyn and Waimakariri Districts) and other health partnerships

b.      Safer Christchurch (and any similar arrangements in Selwyn and Waimakariri Districts)

c.       Greater Christchurch Public Transport Joint Committee

d.      Canterbury Mayoral Forum

e.      New Zealand Police and other emergency services

f.        Tertiary institutions and educational partnerships

g.       Regeneration agencies, including Ōtākaro Limited and Development Christchurch Limited

h.      Strategic infrastructure providers

i.         Government departments

                             viii.            Undertake wider engagement and consultation as necessary, including where appropriate seeking submissions and holding hearings, to assist the development of any strategies and plans.

                                ix.            Advocate to central government or their agencies or other bodies on issues of concern to the Partnership, including through the preparation of submissions (in liaison with the Canterbury Mayoral Forum as necessary).

 

1.3.        In undertaking its role and performing its functions the Committee will consider seeking the advice of the Chief Executives Advisory Group.

2.       QUORUM AND Conduct of meetings

2.1.        The quorum at a meeting of the Committee consists of the majority of the voting members

2.2.        Voting shall be on the basis of the majority present at the meeting, with no alternates or proxies.

2.3.        For the purpose of clause 2.2, the Independent Chairperson:

                                   i.            has a deliberative vote; and

                                  ii.            in the case of equality of votes, does not have a casting vote (and therefore the act or question is defeated and the status quo is preserved).

2.4.        Other than as noted in this Agreement, the standing orders of the administering Council at the time, shall apply.

 

3.       MEETING FREQUENCY

The Committee shall meet monthly, or as necessary and determined by the Independent Chair in liaison with the Committee.

 

 

4.       DELEGATIONS

4.1.        Establishing, and where necessary amending, protocols and processes to support the effective functioning of the Committee, including but not limited to those relating to the resolution of conflicting views, communications and public deputations.

4.2.        Preparing communication and engagement material and publishing reports relevant to the functions of the Committee.

4.3.        Undertaking engagement exercises in support of the terms of reference and functions of the Committee

4.4.        Making submissions, as appropriate, on Government proposals and other initiatives relevant to the role of the Committee.

4.5.        Selecting an Independent Chair and Deputy Chair in accord with any process agreed by the Committee and the requirements of the LGA 2002.

4.6.        Appointing where necessary up to two additional non-voting observers to the Committee.

 

5.       FINANCIAL DELEGATIONS

1.              The Committee can make financial decisions within an agreed budget envelope and as long as the decision does not trigger any change to the statutory plans prepared under the LGA 2002, the RMA 1991, and the LTMA 2003.

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

AGENDA ITEMS

 

1.       Apologies................................................................................................................................... 8

2.       Declarations of Interest............................................................................................................ 8

3.       Deputations by Appointment.................................................................................................. 8

4.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes.......................................................................................... 8

STAFF REPORTS

5.       Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment for Greater Christchurch....... 15

6.       Scope for developing the Future Development Strategy for Greater Christchurch......... 19

7.       Natural Environment Group - Programme and Progress Report....................................... 23

8.       Urban Development and Regeneration Update - February 2018....................................... 37   

 


 

Standing Items

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

1.   Apologies

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

2.   Declarations of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant and to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

3.   Deputations by Appointment

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

4.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee meeting held on Friday, 3 November 2017  be confirmed (refer page 9).


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Friday 3 November 2017

Time:                                    9.45am

Venue:                                 Council Chamber, Environment Canterbury, 200 Tuam Street

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Members

Bill Wasley                                         

Chairman Steve Lowndes , Environment Canterbury        

Councillor Cynthia Roberts , Environment Canterbury      

Councillor Peter Skelton , Environment Canterbury           

Deputy Mayor Malcolm Lyall , Selwyn District Council       

Councillor Mark Alexander , Selwyn District Council           

Mayor David Ayers , Waimakariri District Council    

Deputy Mayor Kevin Felstead , Waimakariri District Council        

Mayor Lianne Dalziel , Christchurch City Council      

Councillor Phil Clearwater , Christchurch City Council        

Councillor Sara Templeton , Christchurch City Council       

Jane Huria , Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu  

Gail Gordon , Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu            

Tā Mark Solomon , Canterbury District Health Board         

(Non-Voting Member) Ivan Iafeta , Regenerate Christchurch   

 

 

2 November 2017

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

 

  

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

 

 

Committee Resolved GCPC/2017/00021

That the apologies from Mayor Sam Broughton, Dr Te Maire Tau, Neville Atkinson and Kelvan Smith be accepted.

Tā Mark Solomon/Councillor Mark Alexander                                                                                                Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Deputations by Appointment

There were no deputations by appointment.

4.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Committee Resolved GCPC/2017/00022

Committee Decision

That the minutes of the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee meeting held on Friday, 6 October 2017 be confirmed.

Councillor Peter Skelton/Deputy Mayor Malcolm Lyall                                                                               Carried

 

 

5.   Draft Canterbury Spaces and Places Plan

 

Committee Comment

Kevin Collier and Julyan Falloon from Sports Canterbury, and Richard Lindsay from Visitor Solutions, presented on this item, and highlighted the following points:

·    The document is intended to be an inventory of all existing and planned sports facilities from both the public and private sector.

·    The plan is not intended to be a future strategy, but provides evidence to support strategic planning and decision making.

·    Sports Canterbury have continued to liaise with the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG) since presenting to the Committee in 2016. CEAG encouraged Sports Canterbury to continue developing the plan and advised them to complete it in time to support decision making on Long Term Plans.

·    Community facilities are out of scope for this project, but the plan does list regional and international level facilities.

During the subsequent discussion, the following points were raised:

·    Committee members noted some details in the plan which are now out of date. This was acknowledged, the data will need to be updated regularly and Sports Canterbury will take responsibility for this task.

·    Committee members requested that the data in the plan be presented visually on maps to make it easier to interpret.

·    Gail Gordon queried why Banks Peninsula is not listed in the plan. The representatives explained that this was because sports facilities on Banks Peninsula fall into the category of community facilities, which are outside the scope of this project.

·    The Committee discussed the risk of disjointed planning between the private and public sector and discussed what could be done to avoid situations where the two sectors both invest in similar facilities, leading to oversupply. There was agreement that working closely with the private sector is desirable, but there might be situations where the only feasible solution is to adjust public sector projects.

·    Malcolm Lyall expressed concern that the public sector might be constructing too many swimming pools, and noted the need for a discussion about the level of public funding for elite sport.

·    David Ayers noted the importance of distinguishing between replacing facilities lost in the earthquake, and facilities which are meeting new demand.

·    Peter Skelton noted the relatively low number of golf courses relative to the population and queried what this infers. The committee was advised that this could be a result of several factors, including increased popularity of nine hole courses to cater for tourists, and a desire to adjust the supply model towards a smaller number of higher quality courses.

 

Committee Resolved GCPC/2017/00023

Part C

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Receive the presentation and draft Canterbury Spaces and Places Plan.

2.         Request that Councils and other Partners use the draft Plan as part of deliberations regarding Long Term Plans and other strategic and regeneration planning.

3.         Note that the draft Plan will be circulated to the sports sector for comment and is likely to be periodically updated as new and more detailed information becomes available.

4.         Request that CEAG work with Sport Canterbury in advancing the Plan, including appropriate implementation and funding arrangements at a Greater Christchurch and Canterbury level.

Deputy Mayor Malcolm Lyall/Jane Huria                                                                                                           Carried

 

 


 

 

6.   Greater Christchurch Partnership summary document

 

Committee Comment

Keith Tallentire introduced this item and noted that the document is a collation of content from various other Partnership documents. The intention is to provide an overview of the Partnership’s functions to be used, for example, as a briefing to an incoming Government minister. During the discussion on this item, the following points were raised:

·    Bill Wasley asked staff to ensure the Partnership’s messaging is consistent.

·    Committee members requested staff to review the document to improve its readability.

·    Committee members requested staff to include details of the Partnership’s key aspirations and topics of interest, such as intensification and public transport uptake.

·    Mayor Lianne Dalziel requested more background information, for example how the Committee was originally focused on implementing the Urban Development Strategy but has evolved to assume a broader local leadership function.

·    The Committee requested staff to include the Partnership’s view of lessons learnt over the disaster recovery period.

·    The Committee requested more details on the role of various public agencies active within the Greater Christchurch area, including Crown agencies.

·    The Committee requested staff to invite relevant Government Ministers to meet with the Partnership, commencing with the incoming Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration.

·    During the discussion on item 7, the Committee requested staff to quantify the costs associated with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity compared to the value added, and include this in messaging to the incoming Government.

 

Committee Resolved GCPC/2017/00024

Part C

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Note the draft Greater Christchurch Partnership summary document.

2.         Note that a revised draft will be circulated to the Committee and the final draft will be circulated to Committee members for approval.

3.         Request staff to invite the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration to a Partnership meeting.

Tā Mark Solomon/Councillor Phil Clearwater                                                                                                  Carried

 

Jane Huria left the meeting at 11:45 am.

7.   Urban Development Indicators - second quarterly monitoring report

 

Committee Comment

Keith Tallentire introduced this item and explained that some of the data is not updated as frequently as this monitoring report is brought to the Committee; to compensate each report will focus more closely on specific topics to take advantage of fresh data.

During the discussion the following points were raised:

·    The Committee requested advice on what it can do to respond to the data presented in the report.

·    There was general agreement that the Committee has thoroughly explored its aspirations for Greater Christchurch and is now seeking advice on tangible actions it can take to implement its vision.

 

Committee Resolved GCPC/2017/00025

Part C

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Endorses the second quarterly monitoring report of Urban Development Indicators included as Attachment A to this report.

2.         Requests that individual councils ratify this second quarterly monitoring report, if appropriate in line with any delegation arrangements adopted by each organisation.

Deputy Mayor Malcolm Lyall/Councillor Cynthia Roberts                                                                           Carried

 

 

8.   Urban Development and Regeneration Update

 

Committee Comment

The Chairperson noted correspondence to the Committee received from the Westall Trust. Mayor Lianne Dalziel explained that the main issue raised in the correspondence is a matter for the Christchurch City Council to respond to and suggested referring the correspondence to Council staff.

 

Committee Resolved GCPC/2017/00026

Part C

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

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

Councillor Mark Alexander/Councillor Peter Skelton                                                                                   Carried

 

  The Chairperson indicated that the December Committee meeting would be shifted to Friday December 15th.

The Chairperson also advised the Committee that the 2018 meeting schedule is likely to comprise bimonthly meetings on the second Friday of the respective months, with informal workshops occurring during the in-between months.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 11:56am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 9th DAY OF MARCH 2018.

 

Bill Wasley

Chairperson

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

5.        Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment for Greater Christchurch

Reference:

18/203848

Presenter(s):

Keith Tallentire, Partnership Manager, Greater Christchurch Partnership

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement of the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document, being a key deliverable as part of the agreed Settlement Pattern Review.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       The Committee resolved at its meeting on 3 March 2017 that a Settlement Pattern Review be the first phase of a Strategy Review, as outlined in Priority Action C in the 2016 UDS Update document.

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Notes the finding of the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document, from the assessment work undertaken to date, is that across Greater Christchurch there is likely to be adequate land available for housing and business land demand for the initial period of up to 10 years.

2.         Endorse the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document, included as Attachment A.

3.         Recommend that partner councils ratify the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document at their respective Council meetings in order to meet the requirement for local authorities to complete such an assessment as part of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.

4.         Note that at this time the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document, and supporting technical reports and appendices, will not address the detailed elements of housing feasibility work.

5.         Delegate authority to the Independent Chair, in liaison with the Chief Executives Advisory Group (CEAG), to make any minor amendments to the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document following feedback from this Committee and partner council ratification.

6.         Note that the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document, together with supporting technical reports and appendices will be published on the Partnership website to coincide with planned awareness raising communications as part of the release of a consultation draft of a future development strategy.

7.         Note that the Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment summary document, together with supporting technical reports and appendices, will be provided to officials from the Ministry for the Environment and Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) for evaluation purposes.

8.         Agree that the challenges and questionable value of the approach to assessing commercial feasibility, outlined in the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity and supporting guidance, is raised as part of Partnership discussions with relevant Ministers and Government officials.

 

4.   Context/Background

Settlement Pattern Review (SPR)

4.1       This Committee endorsed the SPR project scope at its meeting on 7 April 2017.

4.2       The SPR project has been structured to ensure that it enables the partner councils to meet the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC) through a collaborative process that also reviews and advances the existing strategic planning context outlined in the Urban Development Strategy, the Land Use Recovery Plan and Chapter 6 of the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement.

National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

4.3       The NPS-UDC directs local authorities to provide sufficient, feasible development capacity for housing and business growth to meet demand in the short (3 years), medium (10 years) and long term (30 years).

4.4       Two key deliverables are the completion of a Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment (a 'capacity assessment') by the end of 2017 and a future development strategy by the end of 2018. This report addresses the first of these deliverables, a separate report on this agenda outlines the proposed approach to the preparation of a future development strategy during 2018.

5.   Capacity Assessment for Greater Christchurch

5.1       A Capacity Assessment has been completed collaboratively for the Greater Christchurch area, and the summary document is included as Attachment A (to be circulated separately). The NPS-UDC strongly encourages such a collaborative approach in preparing capacity assessments, recognising that the functional market area will often cross local authority jurisdictions.

5.2       The purpose of the Capacity Assessment is to outline the anticipated future housing and business demands matched against the capacity enabled through district plans and the current commercial feasibility of that capacity. It is a point-in-time assessment having regard to current and future drivers and trends. It informs planning responses to be considered as part of a future development strategy but does not direct them.

5.3       CEAG considered the summary document at its meeting in February and approved that it now be presented to this Committee.

5.4       The summary document is supported by technical reports and appendices that outline the methodologies used and detailed findings below those aggregated within the summary. A significant amount of work has occurred to integrate the models used by each territorial authority (some existing and some in development during the course of completing this work) to formulate a consistent and coherent Greater Christchurch picture.

5.5       At this stage, the feasibility assessment tool provided by MBIE is not considered to be sufficiently robust to generate meaningful results. Partner staff and consultants have further developed the tool and refined the development cost estimates it initially contained to reflect local circumstances. Nevertheless, the complexities of undertaking such an exercise and the limitations of the underlying data have not been fully resolved at this stage to provide reliable outputs.

5.6       The housing feasibility section of the summary report therefore outlines this position and does not report any figures derived from the feasibility tool. A draft technical report on housing feasibility is also not part of the material recommended for endorsement or publication.

5.7       CEAG has recommended that the challenges and questionable value of the approach to assessing commercial feasibility, outlined in the National Policy Statement and supporting guidance, is raised as part of Partnership discussions with relevant Ministers and Government officials.

Findings from the Capacity Assessment

5.8       The resulting findings, as outlined in the summary document, still have important caveats and limitations but represent a substantial improvement on the previous evidence base.

5.9       The overall conclusion from the capacity assessment is that at a Greater Christchurch level there is enough land for the short and medium term but there may be some emerging shortages in relation to projected housing or business demands in Selwyn and Waimakariri districts.

5.10    Work to add to and refine this evidence base over time is also detailed. The NPS-UDC requires that such an assessment is completed at least every three years.

5.11    Key findings contained in the report are outlined in the executive summary of the document and include:

a.    the Greater Christchurch area could see its population grow to around 640,000 people by 2048 (150,000 more than today) translating to demand for around 75,000 new dwellings (as previously reported to this Committee as part of agreeing appropriate population projections to be used within this capacity assessment work);

b.    collectively the district plans of Christchurch, Selwyn and Waimakariri already enable a significant amount of additional dwellings to be created in and around its urban areas through identified greenfield locations or redevelopment in existing zoned areas. However, more than 75% of this capacity is within the City and the projected demand for housing in Selwyn and Waimakariri districts could outstrip current supply in these areas in around ten years;

c.     analysis of the breakdown of the projected housing demand highlights significant matters relating to the increasing demand for renting and multi-unit dwellings, and continuing issues around housing affordability;

d.    the current and future commercial feasibility of providing housing (standalone houses, townhouses and apartments) in the locations identified in district plans is uncertain, especially in areas of the City where redevelopment of sites to provide medium and higher density housing is envisaged;

e.    collectively the capacity for future industrial needs that is enabled through district plans is generous, although monitoring and review of uptake in some locations will be needed;

f.     commercial floorspace (primarily office and retail) is also well provided for across Greater Christchurch, at least over the short to medium term. Again ongoing monitoring and review of uptake in some locations will be needed;

g.    the land identified to accommodate future business growth is generally considered to be commercially feasible;

h.    the majority of areas currently identified for growth are either already serviced with the necessary infrastructure for development to proceed, or will be following the completion of infrastructure projects identified in the respective Council’s Long Term Plans (LTPs). Feedback from other infrastructure providers (electricity and telecommunications) support this finding;

i.      post-earthquake disruption and land use change has contributed to trips originating from and terminating at a wider range of locations in Greater Christchurch. This has exacerbated a preference for travel by car and low public transport patronage;

j.     the recent investments in the strategic transport network and the completion of projects currently underway will support journey time improvements and reliability for a period, but without changes in travel behaviour and mode choice, the projected growth will place significant pressure on the network. The potential effects are likely to be most severe for trips from Selwyn, Waimakariri and western Christchurch into the central city;

k.    although there remains a large amount of rural zoned land within the Greater Christchurch area, some of this land is constrained by a range of environmental, planning and physical factors, especially around the City’s edge.

6.   Next steps

6.1       The NPS-UDC requirement to produce a capacity assessment is placed on local authorities and so the Partnership is asked to endorse the summary document but then recommend that it is ratified at respective Council meetings of the partner councils – Canterbury Regional Council, Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council and Waimakariri District Council.

6.2       A team of Government officials from the Ministry for the Environment and Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment are currently evaluating the capacity assessments emerging from high growth councils across New Zealand. To ensure that these evaluations are undertaken with the full information available from the capacity assessment for Greater Christchurch it is recommended that the summary document together with the supporting technical reports and appendices are provided as soon as possible, noting that this material awaits ratification by partner councils.

6.3       The capacity assessment will help inform the work required during the remainder of 2018 in order to produce a future development strategy. A separate report on this agenda outlines the proposed approach to this next phase of work and places the capacity assessment in context with the wider considerations that guide the preparation of such a future development strategy.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment Summary (Under Separate Cover)

 

 

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

6.        Scope for developing the Future Development Strategy for Greater Christchurch

Reference:

18/205269

Presenter(s):

Keith Tallentire, Partnership Manager, Greater Christchurch Partnership

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement of the proposed approach for the development of a future development strategy during the remainder of 2018. This is the next key deliverable, following the finalisation of a capacity assessment, as part of the agreed Settlement Pattern Review.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       The Committee resolved at its meeting on 3 March 2017 that a Settlement Pattern Review be the first phase of a Strategy Review, as outlined in Priority Action C in the 2016 UDS Update document.

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Endorse the proposed approach to the development of a future development strategy, as outlined in this report.

2.         Note that further advice signalled in this report will be provided by the Chief Executive Advisory Group (CEAG) at future meetings of this Committee.

 

4.   Context/Background

Settlement Pattern Review (SPR)

4.1       This Committee endorsed the SPR project scope at its meeting on 7 April 2017.

4.2       The SPR project has been structured to ensure that it enables the partner councils to meet the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC) through a collaborative process that also reviews and advances the existing strategic planning context outlined in the UDS, the Land Use Recovery Plan and Chapter 6 of the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement.

National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

4.3       The NPS-UDC directs local authorities to provide sufficient, feasible development capacity for housing and business growth to meet demand in the short (3 years), medium (10 years) and long term (30 years).

4.4       Two key deliverables are the completion of a Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment (a 'capacity assessment') by the end of 2017 and preparation of a Future Development Strategy by the end of 2018. A separate report on this agenda seeks endorsement of a capacity assessment for Greater Christchurch. This report addresses the second of these deliverables and outlines the proposed collaborative approach to the preparation of a future development strategy during the remainder of 2018.

 

4.5       The NPS-UDC Policies PC12-14 outline the requirements of an FDS as being to:

·    demonstrate that there will be sufficient, feasible development capacity in the medium and long term.

·    set out how minimum targets will be met (Policies PC5-11 require regional councils and territorial authorities to set minimum targets for the medium term and long term for sufficient, feasible development capacity for housing for the sub-region and the territories respectively);

·    identify the broad location, timing and sequencing of future development capacity over the long term in future urban environments and intensification opportunities within existing urban environments;

·    balance the certainty regarding the provision of future urban development with the need to be responsive to demand for such development;

·    be informed by the relevant Long Term Plans and Infrastructure Strategies required under the Local Government Act 2002, and any other relevant strategies, plans and documents;

·    undertake a consultation process that complies with Part 6 of the Local Government Act or Schedule 1 of the RMA;

·    be informed by the capacity assessment; and

·    have particular regard to Policy PA1 (that local authorities shall ensure that at any one time there is sufficient housing and business land development capacity).

4.6       An associated Guidance document has been published by the Ministry for the Environment and Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment and this has been considered as part of the proposed approach outlined in this report.

5.   Proposed approach to the development of a Future Development Strategy (FDS)

5.1       CEAG considered a scoping paper regarding the development of a FDS at its meeting in February and approved that the key elements from this paper be presented to this Committee for endorsement. This would then enable immediate tasks to be commence and detailed project planning for later elements to be completed by the partner staff project team.

5.2       Key CEAG considerations that guide the approached outlined in this paper were:

·    ensuring the FDS builds on and supports the agreed UDS vision and strategic goals and the approaches outlined in existing documents such as the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement

·    assessing the likely impact of emerging Government policy, including that relating to urban development, infrastructure funding and migration

·    maximising compliance with NPS-UDC requirements

·    providing sufficient direction to district plan reviews underway in Selwyn and Waimakariri

·    linking with related processes underway, including Council Long Term Plans and infrastructure strategies, the Regional Land Transport Plan as well as regeneration and resilience programmes

·    acknowledging the inherent uncertainties that exist over a thirty year horizon, especially for Greater Christchurch following a period of earthquake recovery but also in relation to matters such as population growth, demographic change, structural changes in the economy and the impact of technological change

·    completing the work within existing Partnership resources and by December 2018

·    working collaboratively and maintaining Partnership unity.

Proposed milestones

5.3       The scope agreed by CEAG and recommended to this Committee comprises the following key stages or milestones:

I.       phased release of three succinct issues leaflets during May to July to raise awareness of the process, remind stakeholders of the current UDS, and outline some of the broad challenges/opportunities (drawing from the Outcomes and Challenges briefing paper provided to this Committee and findings from the Capacity Assessment).

II.     endorsement of a public consultation draft FDS at the GCP Committee on 13 July 2018

III.    release of the consultation draft FDS in August for a four week submission period, followed by a hearings process (with a panel constituted largely from representatives of this Committee) in accordance with Part 6 of the LGA.

IV.    approval of a final FDS document at the GCP Committee on 14 December 2018

V.     ratification of the final FDS document at individual partner governance meetings in February 2019.

Proposed FDS content

5.4       Without pre-determining a final FDS document that has benefitted from the stakeholder and community feedback received through the proposed submissions process the current intent is that the FDS document would:

I.       outline the full context and current environment in which the SPR is being undertaken, including the long term urban development outcomes sought and already detailed in the UDS and the unique post-earthquake circumstances relevant to Greater Christchurch;

II.     explain the identified challenges (drawing from the Outcomes and Challenges briefing paper provided to this Committee and findings from the Capacity Assessment) and emerging national policy in this area;

III.    explain the focus for this FDS, being to address short to medium term issues, with wider and longer term issues identified in an implementation section for further action subsequent to the completion of the FDS;

IV.    link the resolution of longer term issues to the timeframes to inform the scheduled review of the regional policy statement;

V.     ensure integration of Ngāi Tahu values and aspirations, including opportunities to further support kāinga nohoanga in Tuahiwi and Papakainga in Rāpaki;

VI.    clearly signal the funding and implementation challenges arising, and likely to arise, from NPS-UDC compliance and the need to work with Government and others to address these matters.

Proposed FDS document and language

5.5       The proposed document brief for the FDS is to prepare a 30-40 page document that is non-technical, plain English and includes appropriate graphics and images. Some associated technical reports will likely be required but would not form part of the main document.

5.6       The ‘future development strategy’ terminology is a general term used as part of the NPS-UDC but in the context of Greater Christchurch could likely confuse stakeholders and the community. The Partnership in some ways already has such a strategy, the UDS. This work will review settlement pattern outlined in the UDS and detailed within the regional policy statement. As such the proposal is to drop further use of NPS-UDC terminology and focus language that reflects the local context. As previously reported, following communications advice the engagement term ‘Our SPACE’ has been adopted.

5.7       The FDS document would remain as standalone document, which complements the UDS 2007 in a similar manner to the UDS Update 2016, until such time it is incorporated into a single new strategy document.

5.8       Some identified issues that may form further advice to CEAG and the Committee include:

·    agreement on the approach to setting and inserting minimum housing targets into the regional policy statement and district plans

·    the level of Section 32 analysis undertaken as part of developing the FDS to assist any separate and future minor change to RMA documents that may be required

·    the proposed composition and responsibilities of a Hearings Panel for submissions on the FDS, and the logistical arrangements to enable hearings to be completed and a final FDS to be completed by December 2018.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

7.        Natural Environment Group - Programme and Progress Report

Reference:

18/16067

Contact:

Sam Bellamy

sam.bellamy@ecan.govt.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide the Committee with a progress report prepared by the Greater Christchurch Partnership Natural Environment Group (NEG). The report covers the period 1 April 2017 to 30 September 2017.

2.   Relationship to Partnership Objectives

2.1       The work of the NEG aims to implement priority action h. of the Urban Development Strategy Update 2016:

Enhanced natural environment

Enhance the natural environment in Greater Christchurch by:

·    recognising the ecosystem services a healthy environment provides;

·    improving the health and values of urban waterways;

·    ensuring the continued supply of clean and healthy untreated drinking water; and

·    taking a coordinated approach to identifying and improving biodiversity.

 

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Receive the Natural Environment programme and progress report – April to September 2017

2.         Recommend that the report be circulated as appropriate within partner organisations for information

 

 

4.   Context

4.1       The table in Attachment A sets out NEG projects and actions of the Greater Christchurch Partners. These are provided as relevant for, or of interest to, the Partnership.

4.2       The table sets out information categorised under:

·    Natural hazards

·    Coasts, estuaries and hāpua

·    Waterways

·    Wetlands

·    Groundwater and springs

·    Indigenous biodiversity and biosecurity and Mahinga Kai

·    Open space, outdoor recreation and amenity

·    Waste management.

4.3       This is the second report provide by the NEG, as a continuation of earlier Natural Environment Recovery Programme (NERP) reports. It was intended that it be presented to the December meeting of this Committee however with cancellation of that meeting this is the first opportunity to formally present the report.

4.4       This update has been reformatted and made more concise for readability on devices (portrait format).  Clearer alignment is provided between topics and current actions for the 6-month timeframe.

4.5       Of interest in this report are:

a.    The completion of the Whakaraupō/Lyttelton Harbour Catchment Management Plan by December 2017. This plan was initiated through a commitment in the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan and partners have worked together to achieve a draft for further discussion.

b.    The collaboration between Environment Canterbury, Christchurch City Council and the university to monitor and manage sediment discharge from the Port Hills fires, and on restoration planting projects in areas affected by the fires.

c.     The extensive work programme the City Council has instigated to mitigate flooding on the Heathcote River/Ōpāwaho. The work under way includes:

·    dredging the Woolston Cut;

·    doing work to stabilise the Heathcote River’s banks;

·    constructing four new storage basins in the Upper Heathcote area;

·    investigating dredging the Heathcote River downstream of Hansen Park;

·    using low stopbanks upstream of Hansen Park; and

·      using the Council’s Flood Intervention Policy to help property owners whose homes frequently flood.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Natural Environment Group Programme and Progress Report 1 April - 30 September 2017

25

 

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

 

8.        Urban Development and Regeneration Update - February 2018

Reference:

18/15602

Contact:

Keith Tallentire

keith.tallentire@greaterchristchurch.org.nz

941 8590

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide the Committee with an update on current urban development and regeneration activities across the Greater Christchurch area.

1.2       These updates are compiled monthly and collate contributions from partners and a range of other agencies and government departments.

1.3       The February 2018 update is Attachment A to this report. The November 2017, December 2017, and January 2018 updates can be accessed from the Greater Christchurch Partnership website.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee:

1.         Receive the attached Urban Development and Regeneration Update.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Urban Development and Regeneration Update - February 2018

38

 

 


Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee

09 March 2018

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator