Coastal-Burwood Community Board Submissions Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Tuesday 10 April 2018

Time:                                    1pm

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

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Linda Stewart

Tim Baker

Kim Money

Tim Sintes

 

 

11 April 2018

 

 

 

 

 

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

 


Coastal-Burwood Community Board Submissions Committee

10 April 2018

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

1.   Apologies

There were no apologies.

2.   Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Christchurch City Council Draft 2018-2028 Long Term Plan – Board Submission

         Part C

 

The purpose of this meeting was for the Submissions Committee to formulate on the Board’s behalf, a submission on the Council’s Draft 2018-2028 Long Term Plan..

The Committee reviewed the following documentation:

•          Draft 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.
•          Consultation Document
•          Coastal-Burwood Wards – Capital Programme Changes
•          Results of Board Hosted Community Workshops

Arising from this consideration, the Committee subsequently finalised the completion of the attached submission on behalf of the Board.

 

Committee Resolved CBSC/2018/00001

Part C

That the Coastal-Burwood Community Board’s submission to the Christchurch City Council Draft 2018-2028 Long Term Plan as attached be adopted.

Linda Stewart/Kim Money                                                                                                                                      Carried

 

 

 

Meeting concluded at 3.00pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 16th DAY OF April 2018

 

Linda Stewart

Chairperson


 

SUBMISSION TO:                Christchurch City Council

ON:                                          Draft Long Term Plan 2018-2028

BY:                                            Coastal-Burwood Community Board

CONTACT:                              Linda Stewart

Chairperson Submissions Committee

C/- PO Box 73023

CHRISTCHURCH 8154

027 405 3257

linda.stewart@ccc.govt.nz  

 

Attachments

Attachment A: Letter of expectation of 14 April 2016 between the previous Minister Supporting Christchurch Regeneration and the Mayor.

Attachment B: Styx Working Party Resolutions.      

 

Council Key Issues/Topics

Board Submission

The big question

Our overarching proposal is to prioritise some areas over others to enable us to keep our proposed average rates as low as possible, at 5.5 per cent. 

Have we got the balance right?

Looking across all the services, projects and activities that Council delivers, have we prioritised the right things?

Do you have a project or programme that you think should be prioritised?

The Coastal-Burwood Community Board appreciates the opportunity to make this submission to the Christchurch City Council Draft Long Term Plan 2018-28 (LTP).

The Board would like to speak to this submission at the hearings.   

 

Regarding the capital programme proposed across the Coastal and Burwood wards, the Board supports all proposals for the wards as shown in the draft LTP but sees the current budget for the ward as not equitable or reflective of the current regeneration needs of our area.

 

Many in our community are still practically, visually and mentally dealing with the impacts from the Canterbury earthquakes on a daily basis.  “Normal” day to day life has been significantly changed since the earthquakes 7 years ago and a lot of earthquake related work including permanent flood mitigation in the area has been or is still “on hold” awaiting decisions to be made (such as the Ōtākaro-Avon River Corridor and the Southshore, South Brighton Regeneration Strategy) – refer to Attachment A.  The implications for our citizens of things being “on hold” has is lack of certainty over their most important asset, their home, as well as other implications such as limiting growth in the area (i.e. difficulty rebuilding with new planning rules) which has negative effects on other aspects of the community. This uncertainty is hugely affecting people’s wellbeing and the Community Board urges Council to take steps to address this uncertainty.

 

Resolving these issues is a very high priority. Examples are ensuring adequate permanent flood management, adequate land drainage, estuary edge earthquake repairs, Styx River catchment management, funding for regeneration plans/strategies, and road/footpath repairs.

The Board supports the Council taking an equity approach, as opposed to equality. The Coastal-Burwood wards are only just beginning their regeneration and in some areas such as the Ōtākaro-Avon River Corridor and Southshore, South Brighton, we have not yet begun this regeneration. Therefore the Coastal-Burwood Wards will require funding in the current and future Long Term Plans to support the regeneration of these areas.  

 

The Council has asked – have we got the balance right? Given the above comments our Community Board would say no, on the basis that we don’t believe there is an equitable distribution of budgets to address priority issues within our ward.   As noted above these are:

-          Ensuring adequate permanent flood management;

-          Adequate land drainage;

-          Estuary edge earthquake repairs;

-          Styx River catchment management;

-          Funding for regeneration plans/strategies, and

-          Road/footpath repairs.

 

The Board would like to see equity taken into consideration before decisions are made on proposed Council projects to help to ensure that recovery in the wards does not get deprioritised.

 

The Coastal-Burwood ward is a receiving area for water from new and existing developments across the city into the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai and Styx River. While significant improvements have been made in areas of the city to improve these issues, the receiving areas have not had complementary budget to make improvements so that this water can be received without flooding implications.  The earthquakes have exacerbated the water issues and funding needs to be allocated to address these issues.

 

The Board sees this LTP as a “catch up time” for the wards given the significant damage that occurred through the earthquakes that has not yet been addressed.  Our city needs to attract residents and visitors and we believe our wards have significant offerings in this regard.  Therefore the investment in the area will be offset by increased visitors and rate take from new developments.  

 

Specific additional projects the Board would like to see funded in the Coastal-Burwood wards are:

 

-          The Board would like funding in the LTP in FY 18/19 to enable Thomson Park safety improvements to be made to address current safety issues in this popular and well utilised park.  A project has been initiated with funds from the Community Board annual plan project to address issues in the Thomson Park carpark.  Funding in the FY18/19 year of the LTP would enable safety improvements to be made concurrently with the carpark works enabling a comprehensive project to be delivered to address the safety issues in the park.  

 

-          The Board would like funding to be included in the LTP to enable projects in the 2007 Rawhiti Domain Management Plan to be implemented within the next five years.   This would be from FY18/19 to FY22/23 for $350,000 per annum. The Board supports the two projects in the draft LTP in Rawhiti  Domain and wish for them to remain -  Rawhiti Domain Sports Turf Upgrade (CPMS 2245) and Tennis Courts (CPMS 2247).

-          The Board notes the wastewater treatment plant is located in the Linwood-Central-Heathcote ward area and is pleased to see funding in the draft LTP for midge management.  The Board believes this is essential in order to make progress to addressing the midge infestation issues. The Board considers that the wastewater treatment plant is a city-wide asset and supports appropriate funding for addressing the midge issue. The Board requests Council consider increasing the current draft LTP budget to $360,000 per annum over the next 10 years to enable the full midge management plan to be implemented. The budget in the draft LTP will not enable the full midge management plan to be implemented.  

 

Projects in the draft LTP that the Board request Council consider reprioritising or deferring are:

 

-          Metro Sports facility – recommend consideration is given to deliver aspects of this facility in other locations.  The Board requests that Council consider that a 50 Metre pool and dive well is located at the QEII Sports and Recreation Centre.  This would enable the city to benefit from the facility without the immediate significant cost of building the full metro sports facility. The Board received a lot of feedback at the ‘What’s Your View at QEII’ QEII Masterplan event to say that the community would like to see a 50 Metre pool and dive well back at QEII the Board believes pool capacity at QEII will not be sufficient to meet current and future demands with staff endeavouring to meet the challenge of providing for various organisations need for pool space.  Pressure on the space for community will increase further when the two high schools open next year - having a 50 Metre pool would address this demand.          

 

-          Multi Use Arena and Metro Sports Facility – The Board feels at this point in time that there are more pressing needs. We are aware of the wish to keep rates to 5.5% and see deferral of all or part of these facilities as a means to enable funding to be allocated to projects of a higher priority as highlighted within this submission.

 

-          Board members have spoken to members of the community during the consultation period and we have heard consistently that the proposed spending on Cycleways infrastructure is not a current priority. The Board would like to know if it is possible for the Government to provide the city with an extension to the subsidy offer given the city is in recovery phase, and, accordingly there are other priorities that should take precedence.  The Board supports the Cycleways being delivered and recognises the need for cycleway networks, particularly to enable safe cycle access to schools and other key facilities however requests they are deferred to enable higher priority work to take place first.

 

The Board notes its support of the South New Brighton Park Development and track renewal project (CPMS 43671 and 43690). 

 

The Board notes the Government’s announced proposal for a Capital Acceleration Fund of $300 Million – the Board believes that some of this funding could be allocated to assist the Council to deliver some of the things mentioned in the Boards submission.

 

To summarise, the Board believes equitable prioritisation of investment in the LTP will:

-          Enable active citizenship and connected communities.

-          Maximise opportunities to develop a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable 21st century city

-          Climate change adaptation that shows leadership

-          Informed and proactive approaches to natural hazard risks.

-          Improved transport experience through repaired roading network.

-          Safe and sustainable water supply and improved waterways.

 

 

 

 

We’re making progress

In 2018/19 ChristchurchNZ will receive $10.2 million from the Council, to enable it to carry out a range of activities including attracting major events, economic development and promoting the city. To fulfil this role they are seeking additional funding of $1.4 million. The rates impact of the additional seed fund activities would be 0.31 per cent in 2018/19 on top of the 5.5 per cent average rates increase.

What do you think of the Council providing additional funding to ChristchurchNZ so that it can bid for major events on behalf of the city, support new events through sponsorship and test the feasibility of new concepts?

 

In principle, the Board is supportive of Council providing additional funding to ChristchurchNZ so that it can bid for major events on behalf of the city, support new events through sponsorship and test the feasibility of new concepts.  Given our area is a perfect location for major events, the Board requests that some of these major events are in our ward area.

 

 

Our rates proposal

We propose an average rates increase of 5.5 per cent in 2018/19, with the increase tracking down over subsequent years of the LTP to settle at a level in line with local government inflation.

We propose continuing to prioritise our work on horizontal infrastructure (roads, pipes etc) so that the most urgent work is done first, based on the condition of the asset, its importance and weighing the benefits gained in doing the work against the consequences of not doing the work.

What do you think of this plan for an average rates increase of no more than 5.5 per cent, reducing over the next 10 years?

 

The Board supports this proposed rates increase of no more than 5.5 per cent reducing over the next 10 years.   If the rates remain at 5.5 per cent, reducing over the next 10 years, the Board believes reprioritisation of the draft LTP is required to enable earthquake repairs and regeneration projects to be prioritised along with other essential activities within our ward.

 

 

 

Alternative sources of funding

An issue we think may be important to you is identifying alternative means of funding the Council’s activities. At the moment we meet most of our costs from rates, borrowing, and dividends from our trading organisations.

Do you think we should investigate other ways to raise funding?

A local fuel tax could help us to reduce rates. Would you support us exploring this option to generate more money for transport-related projects?

 

The Board supports the proposal to explore alternative means of funding the Council’s activities but requests that each proposal explored be the subject of separate community consultation as the Board feels it is important for the community to be able to assess the merits of each specific proposal with further information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flood protection

Since the earthquakes, houses along parts of the Heathcote/Ōpāwaho River have been more susceptible to flooding. We understand the effects of this on residents. To reduce the risk of homes flooding we propose speeding up our programme to dredge the river between the Woolston Cut and Radley Park and through to Hansen Park.

What do you think of us prioritising this project over other land drainage recovery work, so we can complete it within two rather than three years?

 

The Board supports the prioritisation of this project to reduce the risk of homes flooding.

 

The Coastal-Burwood ward has had much of its underground infrastructure repaired after the earthquakes. Our area may not be considered as a growth area - this is a concern for us given the draft LTP refers to being able to provide for “growth” areas and comply with resource consents.  We would like to be considered as an area that provides an opportunity for growth within the city and therefore investment in storm water management and flood protection in our wards is critical. This will allow the city to benefit from a faster growing rate base (as mentioned on page 20 of the LTP document).  

 

The Coastal-Burwood ward is a receiving area for water from new and existing developments across the city into the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai and Styx River. While significant improvements have been made in areas of the city to improve these issues, the receiving areas have not had complimentary budget to make improvements so that this water can be received without flooding implications.  The earthquakes have exacerbated the water issues and funding needs to be allocated to address these issues.

 

The Board would support increasing the stormwater and flood protection budget over the next 10 years as we believe this is critical for the wards and that there is currently insufficient budget allocated to address the issues.

 

 

Drinking water, wastewater, stormwater and flood protection

We propose prioritising work to maintain our drinking water, stormwater and flood protection infrastructure over work to maintain our wastewater infrastructure.

What do you think our approach to managing our drinking water, wastewater, stormwater and flood protection assets, and how we’re prioritising the work?

Drinking Water

The Board support prioritising work to remove the temporary chlorination of our water as soon as possible.  The Board do not support permanent chlorination of our drinking water. 

 

Flood Protection

Where it exists, all flood protection in the Coastal-Burwood wards is currently temporary.  The impact of ‘temporary’ protection is that citizens in the area do not have certainty in relation to building, consenting and insurance.  This is hugely affecting the community’s wellbeing.  The Board would like to see funding allocated in the LTP for permanent flood protection in the Coastal-Burwood area and believes this work should be prioritised to give residents greater certainty about their home and community.

 

The Board believes the following projects need to be prioritised the land drainage recovery programme:

 

-          Permanent flood protection to replace the current ‘temporary’ protection.

-          Permanent mitigation of the Southshore/South Brighton flooding from the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai - the Board supports the recommendation in the OCEL Consultants NZ Ltd. report of December 2016 “Southshore Inundation protection Levee” which was initiated and supported by the Southshore community.

-          The Board requests funding is allocated within the Parks budget for repair of the South Brighton estuary edge in order to protect the recreation and access values of this area. This funding would be for the repair of Reno Mattresses and Gabion Baskets which were damaged in the earthquakes.  The Board requests $750,000 is allocated to enable this work to be delivered.

 

These projects will deliver the Land Drainage Recovery Programme points given on page 34 of the LTP document:

-          Mitigate the effects of the earthquakes in the worst-affected areas by restoring flood risk to pre-earthquake levels.

-          Help restore community resilience and wellbeing by reducing the risk of flooding.

 

The following feedback was received on 14 October 2017 from the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai Trust.

 

“To the mayor and the board members of the Coastal Burwood/Pegasus Board.

 

As the future of the estuary edge in South new Brighton is currently being considered by the Council and the Coastal-Burwood Community Board, the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai Trust has also discussed this matter and at its meeting on 11th October 2017 resolved as follows –

 

That in light of City Council discussions about flood protection in the South Brighton area, the Estuary Trust states that;

       a)    For the area from Bridge Street to the South Brighton jetty, there are significant wetlands that should be protected and enhanced, and the Trust believes a combination of wetland   protection and flood protection is easily compatible

       b)   For the area from the jetty to the Jellicoe marsh, recreational and access values are significant and that erosion protection is necessary to safeguard those values.

 

For your information the Jellicoe marsh is the area enclosed by the boardwalk at the south end of the South New Brighton Park.

 

on behalf of the Board members

www.estuary.org.nz”

 

-          The Pūharakekenui / Styx River Catchment covers an area of approximately 70 km2, extending for 22km from its headwaters in Harewood and Bishopdale to the Brooklands Lagoon. Ongoing development and extensive settlement within the catchment over the last two centuries, combined with the earthquakes have seen a degradation of catchment values.

 

The Coastal-Burwood Community Board has worked closely with the joint Styx River working party which has made a number of resolutions to address the current issues.  The Board supports these resolutions but notes it will be subject to the Land Drainage staff determining the timing of the works within their project prioritisation.  Refer Attachment B to this submission.

 

-          Flood mitigation in the Avondale/Dallington areas, which have the potential for high tide property flooding in areas adjacent to the red zone, is also a priority.

 

 

Waste Water

For the Board and community, clean rivers are a high priority. The prevention of sewerage overflow into our rivers and estuary will assist with this. The Board supports the proposal for the renewal of wastewater pipes for $308m.

 

The Board notes community concern around the efficacy of the vacuum wastewater system in Aranui and alerts the Council of the need to make financial provision to rectify this.

 

Savings from the proposed deferral of some or all of the Multi Use Arena would assist with enabling this work to be prioritised.

 

Storm Water

The storm water network is vital for flood management and given the ward receives water from the entire city, good storm water management is something the Board supports prioritising.  Please refer to comments in the ‘Flood Protection’ section. 

 

 

 

Transport

Making our city safer for people to travel in, whether by car, bicycle or on foot, has been a priority for this Council. We are keen to press on with these initiatives, to complete the network of cycleways, improve safety at more intersections and make the central city more accessible for everyone. We also want to restore our road condition to a level that is similar to other New Zealand cities over the next 20 years.

What do you think our approach to managing our transport projects, and how we’re prioritising this work?

There has been a lot of feedback express community concerns about the dangers presented at a range of intersections (for example, Harewood, Breens and Gardiners Roads) and the state of many streets and footpaths. As a Council we wish to agree on a framework for prioritising intersection improvement and street and footpath renewals, to ensure we meet our residents’ needs.

What do you think we should take into account when prioritising the work that needs to be done?

Do you think the priorities should be informed by the local Community Board?

Transport Network

We support the wish to restore our road condition to a level that is similar to other New Zealand cities over the next 20 years.

 

The Board notes the prioritisation of works is based on condition and traffic volume. The Board is concerned that in the east, current-low traffic volume roads that are in a poor condition may not meet the threshold to be renewed/ repaired.   

 

The Ward has significant projects currently in development (examples include the following government initiatives: Shirley Boys’ and Avonside Girls’ High Schools, Burwood Hospital Redevelopment as well as the following Council initiatives: the QEII Recreation and Sport Centre, the Christchurch Hot Pools, New Brighton CBD and the Beachside Playground).  Therefore traffic volumes in the ward will increase.  In order for these project to operate successfully, infrastructure needs to be developed / repaired ahead of time to support this. The Board feels the capital funding in the draft LTP does not adequately provide for this.

 

$263m for road pavement, footpath, kerb and channel renewals and carriageway resealing and surfacing. This is very relevant to our wards and supported on the basis that earthquake damaged roads have not yet all been repaired.  Earthquake damage roads and footpaths should be a top priority for repair and replacement.  The Board specifically highlights the need for the New Brighton Road earthquake repairs (CPMS 28802 - Burwood & North Shirley SCIRT 11091 damage renewal).  

 

$65m public transport infrastructure. The Board suggests equity between areas and would encourage smaller buses more frequently. Intersection safety issues have been noted for the following – Burwood Road/Mairehau Road roundabout; Rothesay Road/Burwood Road.

 

Board members have spoken to members of the community during the consultation period and we have heard consistently that the proposed spending on Cycleways infrastructure is not a current priority. The Board would like to know if it is possible for the Government to provide the city with an extension to the subsidy offer given the city is in recovery phase, and, accordingly there are other priorities that should take precedence. 

 

The Board supports the Cycleways being delivered and recognises the need for cycleway networks, particularly to enable safe cycle access to schools and other key facilities however requests they are deferred to enable higher priority work to take place first.  The Board believes cycle routes to schools should be a higher priority than the other cycleways.

 

The Board also notes the 30km/hour speed limit in the central city is assisting with improving cycle safety in the city.  

$29 Northern Arterial is supported.

 

$20m Page Road bridge is supported and essential element in the rejuvenation of New Brighton noting that Development Christchurch Ltd. proposals tie in with this. This route is also critical for access in and out of the area in events.

 

$30m Sumner Road is supported.

 

$32m Road pavement smoothing supported.   

 

 

 

 

Facilities

In this document we list our top priorities. The funding allocated will allow us to improve or complete a wide range of facilities that will benefit Christchurch now and in the future.

Do we have the priorities rights? Are there other projects you would prioritise, and if so, what would you defer to free up funding?

In this document we discuss a new funding method for community assets that are not owned by the Council but which benefit the community.

What do you think of using a targeted rating system to help progress non-Council community projects?

Are there projects in your community that could benefit from such an approach?

Communities need adequate community facilities. The Board believes that local community facilities should be prioritised and suggest a needs analysis of who benefits from the investment is undertaken when prioritising funding for facilities.

 

The areas of Avondale, Dallington and Burwood were impacted severely by the Canterbury Earthquakes.  They lost large areas of their community, shops, schools and churches within their suburbs.  They were under-provided with meeting facilities to begin with and none have been initiated because of the uncertainty surrounding the future recovery outcomes until Regenerate’s media announcement 11 April withdrawing interest in any of the rowing lake proposals.  Now after 7 years we feel the uncertainty around the future recovery for these communities removed, recovery for these suburbs should be a high priority.  We feel the most important project is providing an area-wide Community Meeting Facility that would be accessible to these three suburbs.    This has been highlighted as a need by the many community organisations and community leaders in the 2017 Coastal/Burwood Wards Needs Analysis.  To support this study, the Board has actioned a Feasibility Study to identify what a facility would consist of. 

The Board would like to see funding in this LTP contributing to a community-led project to establish a “fit for purpose community centre.” Further, with land options on council-owned land appropriately located, one location has been brought to our attention.  This being part of the former Burwood School Site which is currently in the disposal process by Ministry of Education and LINZ.  We feel it is a high priority for Council to investigate this location with the aim of securing this for building of the facility.

The Board notes its support of the projects focused on the regeneration of New Brighton.

 

The Board requests that Council consider that a 50 Metre pool and dive well is located at the QEII Sports and Recreation Centre.  This would enable the city to benefit from the facility without the immediate significant cost of building the full metro sports facility. The Board received a lot of feedback at the ‘What’s Your View at QEII’ QEII Masterplan event to say that the community would like to see a 50 Metre pool and dive well back at QEII the Board believes pool capacity at QEII will not be sufficient to meet current and future demands so having a 50 Metre pool would address this.   

 

Multi Use Arena: The Board believes at this point in time that there are more pressing needs. We are aware of the wish to keep rates to 5.5% and see deferral of all or part of these facilities as a means to finance other projects.

 

To support community groups that are building their own community facilities, the Board requests that Council consider a rebate towards resource and building consent fees.  Examples of community initiates that could benefit from this include Pleasant Point Yacht Club and the Pukeko Centre in Parklands.

 

The Board would like Council to consider funding avenues for the Pukeko Centre – a community-led hub that is being established to meet needs in the Parklands area.

 

 

 

 

Heritage

We are keen to know your views on the almost depleted Central City Landmark Grant Fund, through which we have helped fund work to restore heritage buildings that are in private ownership.

Do you think the Council should continue to contribute $1.9 million per year to Landmark Grant Fund for the next three years?

We support the proposals outlined in the Have Your Say document at Page 50.

 

The Board would like to see $200,000 allocated in the LTP for the beautification of the built area south of New Brighton Pier including the New Brighton Cenotaph War Memorial and surrounds. The Board would like to lead a project in collaboration with the community, the New Brighton Returned and Services Association and Development Christchurch Ltd. aiming to remove the anti-Graffiti panels that the New Brighton Returned and Services Association and community raised concerns about and to achieve a highly visual metropolitan beach amenity area which is used for national and international events.

10 

 

 

 

Any other comments

The Board notes the items in the LTP documentation that are listed as “projects with no funding in the LTP”, have for the most part been provided for within programme or other funding streams.


For transparency, and for future planning, it is recommended these items be itemised in future LTP and Annual Plan documentation.  

 

This enables the process of the community and Board providing feedback to Council about the proposed LTP/ Annual Plan to be efficient and accurate.

 

With regard to the service standards for parks and beach maintenance, the Board supports the Council increasing the levels of maintenance. Our foreshore is a metropolitan asset and has national and international events on a regular basis.

 

 


 

Attachment A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Attachment B

 

LTP submission Styx River working party 10 April 2018

Papanui-Innes Community Boards and the Coastal – Burwood Community Board

The working party agrees that the following issues should be included in the community board submissions to the LTP.

1.      The working party has been meeting since July 2017 to provide community input into decision making about the Styx River catchment particularly in its lower reaches.

 

2.      The working party notes the following LTP strategic priorities and considers that its submission aligns with achieving positive outcomes :

 

·         Maximising opportunities to develop a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable 21st century

·         Climate change leadership

·         Informed and proactive approaches to natural hazard risks

·         Safe and sustainable water supply and improved waterways

 

3.      At the meeting on the 21 Feb 2018 the working party resolved - That the Joint Working Party wish to consider both short term and long term actions to mitigate flooding in the Styx Communities and that this be implemented with some urgency. The short term priorities are flooding, earthquake damage, and lateral spread and drainage issues.

 

4.      In the short term the LTP budget should allow for an increase in the operations budget for the Styx catchment area in the lower reaches by $400,000 annually  for the following items:

 

·         Further dredging of river blockage areas in 2018/21 years where identified as appropriate

·         Lateral spread/earthquake damage – remediation alongside dredging in 2018/21 years

·         Active identification of further flooding issues – staff time to work with community knowledge of the river to identify strategies for short term actions to reduce flooding

·         Allocation of further water level measurement systems where necessary

 

Note: Aquatic weed removal budget remains as 2017 budget with minimum of 3 cuts per year 2018/21 years.

            Agreed

5.      In the long term it is recommended that the LTP budget contain a provision for the staff to investigate and report on a suitable process for a long term Styx River Masterplan and implementation strategy be developed over the next two year period and that appropriate budgets be allocated to an amount of $600,000.  Noting that the community be engaged with the masterplan from the commencement. 

 

Establishment, research costs and compilation of a documentary 100 year plus plan which is open to continual improvement to be incorporated in cross council work programmes as an outcome of the strategic priorities in particular:

·         Maximising opportunities to develop a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable 21st century

·         Climate change leadership

·         Informed and proactive approaches to natural hazard risks

·         Safe and sustainable water supply and improved waterways

This planning to consider the following matters:

·         Flooding

·         Lateral spread/Earthquake damage

·         Aquatic weed removal

·         Water measurement levels

·         Tidal gates

·         Ponding areas in adjacent properties

·         Issues related to the Waimak river mouth lagoon and consequent flooding

·         State of related drains

·         Land development areas – water shed into the Styx River

·         Riparian planting plans

·         River management strategies for the long term including whether or not the river is treated as a drain; natural ponding area; swamp or other use such as a rowing/recreation lake

·         Changes in industrial land use/dewatering and effect on water table and discharges to Kaputone Creek

·         Link to the multi-hazard approach ( which picks up climate change, coastal hazards)

·         Brooklands red zone issues

·         Collaboration with the community and agencies

·         Inclusion of Environment Canterbury

·         Collaboration with and resource input from Regenerate Christchurch  

Agreed

6.      The working party recommends that the Council dredge the river between the Marshlands River Bridge and the mouth at a cost of $40 million dollars ( GHD report ) as a one off action over a 3 year period to compensate for the under - maintenance of the river since 1993. The need is evidenced by:

 

·         Gradual increase in water levels of the river over time

·         River banks closing in and silting up of the floor of the river

·         Continual flooding of properties adjacent to the river

·         Damage to the river banks form the earthquakes

·         Blockages to the rivers flow from tree and root growth and pinch points

·         Blockages caused by low maintenance of the river since 1993

·         Aquatic weed eating is insufficient to lower the water levels adequately

·         Dredging in 2013 noting that limited dredging over a short time has an effect but silt may move and continue to build up. This result of this dredging was a reduction in water levels of 150mm. This cost $349,500 and removed 2812 m3 of sediment

            Agreed

Refer LTP Have your say document (page 35)

7.      The working party recommends that the Council should adopt the proposal to increase the LTP funding by $522 million in the LTP for storm water and flood protection. This to include immediate work on the Styx River to a level proportionate to the land and population size of the Styx catchment. This is to reduce flooding in the lower Styx catchment local areas in consideration of the following:

 

·         That because the LTP has a legislative requirement to provide infrastructure for growth and development we believe the conveyancing capacity of the Styx River and its ability to manage the current storm water and any additional storm water due to developments within this catchment area should be a high priority.

          Agreed