Waikura

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Monday 29 October 2018

Time:                                    3.00pm

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sally Buck

Jake McLellan

Alexandra Davids

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Brenda Lowe-Johnson

Deon Swiggs

Sara Templeton

 

 

24 October 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Matthew McLintock

Manager Community Governance, Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood

941 6231

matthew.mclintock@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Note:  The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted.  If you require further information relating to any reports, please contact the person named on the report.
To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/meetings-agendas-and-minutes/

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

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

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

B       4.       Public Forum.................................................................................................................... 4

B       5.       Deputations by Appointment........................................................................................ 4

B       6.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 4

Staff Reports

C       7.       292 Opawa Road, Hillsborough - Proposed No Stopping restrictions...................... 13

C       8.       Tuam Street at England Street, Phillipstown - Proposed Give Way Control and No Stopping Restrictions.................................................................................................... 21

C       9.       352 Barbadoes Street - Proposed Accessible Parking................................................ 27

C       10.     Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk - Request for Proposals Results and New Lease............ 33

 

B       11.     Elected Members’ Information Exchange.................................................................... 46

C       12.     Resolution to Exclude the Public................................................................................. 47  

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 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.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Wednesday, 17 October 2018  be confirmed (refer page 5).

4.   Public Forum

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

 

It is intended that the public forum session will be held at 3.10pm.

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

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

5.1

Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk (Agenda Item 10 refers)

 

1.    Jenny Gillies will speak on behalf of The Colourful Company Limited.

 

2.    Ali Jones, will speak to the Board relating to the Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk.

 

3.    Alan Jolliffe, President and Ray King, Vice President will speak on behalf of the Canterbury Horticultural Society.

 

4.    Jeanette Christensen, will speak on behalf of the Friends of the Botanic Gardens.

 

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

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


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

 

Waikura

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 17 October 2018

Time:                                    10.00am

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

  

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sally Buck

Jake McLellan

Alexandra Davids

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Deon Swiggs

Sara Templeton

 

 

17 October 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Matthew McLintock

Acting Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central -Heathcote

941 6231

matthew.mclintock@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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


Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00148

That the apologies received for absences from Tim Lindley and Brenda Lowe-Johnson, and for lateness from Deon Swiggs and Jake McLellan, be accepted.

Alexandra Davids/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                         Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00149

That the minutes of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Monday, 1 October 2018 be confirmed.

Darrell Latham/Sally Buck                                                                                                                                        Carried

 

4.   Public Forum

Part B

 

4.1       Victoria Neighbourhood Association - Presentation of Book

             Marjorie Manthei, Chairperson of the Victoria Neighbourhood Association addressed the Board in relation to the Victoria Neighbourhood Association’s Photo History Book and how to obtain a copy of it. A copy of this book will be held in Tūranga and Eastgate Library.

             The Chairperson thanked Marjorie Manthei for her presentation.

 

4.2       Phillipstown Community Hub

             Viviana Zanetti of the Phillipstown Community Hub, addressed the Board in relation to the Community Hub occupancy at the former Phillipstown School site.  The Community Hub Licence to Occupy expires in 2021;  the hub are working with the Ministry of Education to enable the Community Hub to stay at the site.

             After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Viviana Zanetti for her presentation.

 

The Board agreed to write a letter of support to the Ministry of Education supporting the Phillipstown Community Hub’s desire to stay at the former Phillipstown School site in Nursery Road.

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

5.1       Radley Park Landscape Plan

             Michael Reynolds and Sienna Reynolds, representing Roimata Community Food Hub, addressed the Board in support of the Radley Park Landscape Plan report.

             After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Mr and Miss Reynolds for their presentation.

Item 11 of these minutes refers to the Board’s decision on this matter.

 

Jake McLellan arrived at 10.24am.

 

11. Radley Park Landscape Plan

 

Staff in attendance spoke to the accompanying report.

 

The Board also took into consideration the deputation from Michael and Sienna Reynolds (Item 5.1 of these minutes refers).

 

 

Staff Recommendations

1.         Approve the Radley park Landscape Plan as per Attachment A of this Agenda

 

2.         Recommends that Council approves the additional minor maintenance funding requirements of $107.61 for Radley Park be provided for in 2019-2020 Annual Plan commencing the financial year 2020.

 

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00150

Part C

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to:

1.         Approve the Radley Park Landscape Plan as per Attachment A of the staff report attached to the agenda except for  the renewal of the dog agility equipment and request staff to investigate the possibility of fencing of the dog exercise area as an alternative and report back to the Board.

Yani Johanson/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                               Carried

 

Community Board Recommendation LCHB/2018/00151

Part A

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommend that the Council:

2.         Approves the additional minor maintenance funding requirement of $107.61 for Radley Park be provided for in the Annual Plan commencing financial year 2020.

Yani Johanson/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                               Carried

6.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

7.   Major Hornbrook and Mount Pleasant Road - Proposed P2 and No Stopping Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00152 [Original Staff Recommendations accepted without change]

Part C

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to approve:

1.         That pursuant to section 591 of the Local Government Act 1974 and Part 1 section 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw,  the part of Major Hornbrook Road, as indicated in the drawing TG133412 Issue 1, dated 28/6/2018 and TG133413 Issue 1, dated 26/9/18, attached to the agenda for the meeting, is specified as a parking place for any vehicles and parking isrestricted to a maximum period of two minutes (between 8.00-9.00am and 2.30-3.30pm on school days)

2.         Under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that a marked Bus Stop, for the purposes of picking up and dropping off passengers only, be installed on the part of Major Hornbrook Road as shown on the plan TG133412 Issue 1 dated 28/6/2018 attached to the agenda for the meeting.

3.         Under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles on the part of Mount Pleasant Road as shown by broken yellow lines on the  plan TG133141 issue 1 dated 28/8/18 attached to the agenda for the meeting, is prohibited.

4.         That any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in 1,2,or 3are revoked.

5.         That these resolutions take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in 1,2,or 3the staff report are in place.

Yani Johanson/Alexandra Davids                                                                                                                          Carried

 

 

8.   Jordan Street, Sydenham - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00153 [Original Staff Recommendations accepted without change]

Part C

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to approve:

1.         Under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles on the part of Jordan Street and Hargest Crescent as shown by broken yellow lines on the plan TG133423 issue 1 dated 6/9/2018 attached to the agenda for the meeting, is prohibited.

2.         That any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in 1.are revoked.

3.         That these resolutions take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in 1.are in place.

Jake McLellan/Sara Templeton                                                                                                                             Carried

 

 

9.   Linwood-Central-Heathcote Wards - Proposed Road Names - Kea Mews

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00154 [Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change]

Part C

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to approve the following new right of way name:

1.         Kea Mews (RMA/2018/1820), 14, 20 Mathesons Road and 15 Olliviers Road

·        League Lane.

Darrell Latham/Alexandra Davids                                                                                                                         Carried

 

 

10. Woolston Park Drainage Report

 

Community Board Decided LCHB/2018/00155 [Original Staff Recommendations accepted without change]

Part A

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommend that the Council:

1.         Approve Option 1 as detailed within the agenda report be implemented to mitigate land drainage issues at Woolston Park.

2.         That this work be prioritised following consultation with relevant stakeholders for the sports field component of the works.

3.         That the playground project proceed noting that community consultation is complete.

Yani Johanson/Sara Templeton                                                                                                                             Carried

 

12. Application to Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote 2018/19 Youth Development Fund - Scarlett Ruby Girvan

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00156 [Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change]

Part C

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approve a grant of $200 from its 2018/19 Youth Development Fund to Scarlett Girvan towards representing Canterbury at the Gymsports NZ Nationals competition in rhythmic gymnastics in Tauranga from 2 to 6 October 2018.

Alexandra Davids/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                         Carried

 

13. Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - October 2018

 

Staff Recommendations 

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for October 2018. 

2.         Consider submitting on the Council’s Draft Heritage Strategy 2019-2029 and Draft Suburban Parking Policy.

3.         Consider items for inclusion for the Board Report to the Council’s 1 November 2018 meeting.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2018/00157

Part B

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for October 2018. 

2.         Include in the Board Report to the Council’s 1 November meeting updates on:

a.    Linwood Pool

3.         Request staff advice on the progress of the following Board Requests:

a.    The Woolston Cut and Lower Heathcote River Landscape and Maintenance Plan.

b.    The Greening of East project information being presented to the Board.

c.     Rudds Road

·      Canterbury Indoor Bowls car parking being open for overflow car parking.

·      Formalising some parking on the berm nearest to park.

·      Any potential for overflow car parking in Council's vacant section.

·      Basic maintenance of Council's vacant section being undertaken so it doesn’t look so neglected.

·      Any Resource Consent for Celebration Church sports development or Council’s planned sports development.

·      Matuku Takotako: Sumner Centre installation of flagpoles.

 

4.         Request staff provide advice on the costings of the proposed Doris Lusk Park children’s interactive play art.

Darrell Latham/Alexandra Davids                                                                                                                         Carried

 

14. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Part B

Elected members shared the following information:

·     Sumner Residents’ Association – the Board were updated on the proposed meeting with the Canterbury Police District Commander in relation to policing in the Sumner area.  The Board agreed to support Darrell Latham to attend the meeting. 

·    Ferrymead Golf Course – the Board were advised that a golf ball recently hit from the golf course had struck a walker who was walking on the adjacent walking track, a service request has been lodged for signs alerting people to be aware of wayward golf balls.

 

Meeting concluded at 11.57am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 29th DAY OF OCTOBER 2018

Sally Buck

Chairperson

   


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

7.        292 Opawa Road, Hillsborough - Proposed No Stopping restrictions

Reference:

18/739299

Presenter(s):

Barry Hayes – Traffic Engineer, Traffic Operations Team

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve the installation of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on Ōpāwa Road in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report was staff generated in response to requests from the local community, who expressed various concerns relating to inconsiderate parking.

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by comparing factors relating to this decision against the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles on the part of Ōpāwa Road as shown by broken yellow lines on the attached drawing TG133065 issue 1 dated 4/7/2018, is prohibited.

2.         That any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this report are revoked.

3.         That these resolutions take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       The recommendations in this report are consistent with the anticipated outcomes of the Traffic Safety & Efficiency Service Plan in the Councils Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028).

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Provide No Stopping restrictions (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – Do Nothing

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Ensures that the risk of a parked vehicle blocking turns in and out of a driveway is removed

·     Assists large vehicles such as rubbish trucks, delivery vehicles and emergency vehicles to drive through safely

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Displaces parking to other locations

 

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       Two local residents raised concerns relating to parking activity on both sides of the service road that cause severe difficulties accessing driveways and affect the safe and clear passage of large vehicles, such as for deliveries and rubbish collection. 

5.2       The location of interest is a one way service road, situated parallel to State Highway 76.  Both the state highway and the service road is classified as Ōpāwa Road. The properties affected front onto the service road.

5.3       This section of service road is a 100 metre long section, situated between the start of the northbound service road, just north of the Brabourne St/Ribbonwood Place intersection up to Hillsborough Park. At present, there are no parking restrictions and vehicles park on both sides of the one way service road, which is 7.3m wide.  There are a few restrictions at the entrance to the service road.

5.4       The crash records were investigated, which showed that none had been recorded. This is not considered surprising as vehicle speeds appear to be quite low. The local residents have indicated that there has been instances of parked vehicles being damaged due to the limited space for passing vehicles.

5.5       Staff visited the site at different times of the day, to evaluate the situation.  During the working day, parking demands are quite high. It is suspected that workers based at the businesses on the east side of Ōpāwa Road park on both sides of the service road.  For a road width of 7.3m, parking on both sides (assuming 2 x 2.1m) leaves only 3.1m for passing vehicles. This is sufficient for most cars at a slow speed, though larger vehicles risk clipping door mirrors. 

5.6       This width also present difficulties for larger SUVs and towed trailers which need to turn in and out of driveways. In fact for many cases this has proven impossible for trailers and caravans, which were forced to park some distance away from the resident’s property. It is also expected that emergency, waste collection trucks and deliveries will struggle to proceed through the service road during the working day.

5.7       Consequently, staff recommend no stopping restrictions on the right hand side of the service road to facilitate turning in and out for residents.  The installation of the additional no stopping restrictions will provide a safer path for residents and larger vehicles that use the service road.


 

6.   Option 1 - Install No Stopping Restrictions (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Provide no stopping restrictions on this section of Ōpāwa Road in accordance with Attachment A

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       Letters of consultation with a site plan have been issued to the tenants and property owners at the 10 nearest properties on Ōpāwa Road.

6.5       Four responses were received who fully supported the proposal.  One of the businesses located within the business park acknowledged the intense parking demands and supported the restrictions to assist access for residents. Three residents requested a short extension to the restrictions northwards towards Hillsborough Park; this has since been incorporated.

6.6       The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports this option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.8       Cost of Implementation - $600 to provide road markings plus $750 for the consultation and preparation of this report.

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

Funding source

6.10    Traffic Operations Budget.

Legal Implications

6.11    Part 1, clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to install parking restrictions by resolution.

6.12    The Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board has delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations. The list of delegations for the Community Board includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.13    The installations of any sign and/or road markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.14    There is a possible risk of parking being displaced to other residential streets nearby. This may result in further requests by other residents for parking restrictions.

6.15    Staff are working with the Travel Demand Management team to approach the major employers in the area to promote developing Travel Plans and the promotion of alternatives to car based travel.

Implementation

6.16    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

6.17    Implementation timeframe - approximately six weeks once the area contractor receives the request.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.18    The advantages of this option include:

·   Ensures that the risk of a parked vehicle blocking turns in and out of driveways is removed

·   Assists large vehicles such as rubbish trucks, delivery vehicles and emergency vehicles to drive through safely

6.19    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Displaces parking to other locations

7.   Option 2 – Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain the unrestricted parking.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

7.4       This option is inconsistent with the request for improving access to properties and service access in the local area.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.6       Cost of Implementation – not applicable

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – not applicable

7.8       Funding source – not applicable

Legal Implications

7.9       Not applicable.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    Not applicable.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies  - not applicable

7.12    Implementation timeframe – not applicable

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   Retains some unrestricted parking spaces

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Does not support the concerns of local residents

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

292 Opawa Rd NSR site plan

18

b

292 Opawa Rd location plan

19

 

 

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

Barry Hayes - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Senior Traffic Engineer

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

8.        Tuam Street at England Street, Phillipstown - Proposed Give Way Control and No Stopping Restrictions

Reference:

18/1053428

Presenter(s):

Barry Hayes – Traffic Engineer, Traffic Operations Team

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve no stopping restrictions and a give way control at the intersection of Tuam Street and England Street as indicated on Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report was staff generated in response to a request from a local resident who expressed safety concerns at this location, specifically that sight lines were impaired by parked vehicles. 

1.3       These measures have been requested to:

·   Formalise priorities at this location by establishing give way signs and markings

·   Maintain good sight lines for drivers on England Street as they turn onto Tuam Street. 

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by comparing factors relating to this decision against the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board approve:

1.         That pursuant to section 334 of the Local Government Act 1974 and clauses 2.1 and 10.1 of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004, give way control is imposed at all times and road markings and signs erected on England Street, at its intersection with Tuam Street, as indicated in the attached drawing TG133441 issue 1 dated 28/9/2018.

2.         Under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles on the part of Tuam Street and England Street as shown by broken yellow lines on the attached drawing TG133441 issue 1 dated 28/9/18, is prohibited.

3.         That any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this report are revoked.

4.         That these resolutions take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       The recommendations in this report are consistent with the anticipated outcomes of the Traffic Safety & Efficiency Service Plan in the Councils Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028) .

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·   Option 1 - Approve give way control and provide no stopping restrictions (preferred option).

·   Option 2 – Do nothing.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·   Parking is deterred from locations that could impair sight lines

·   Give Way control resolves an identified crash risk, by formalising intersection priority

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       A resident based near this intersection have expressed safety concerns at this intersection. The resident referred to local observations that inappropriate parking occurs close to the intersection, which caused difficulties for drivers turning out of Tuam Street.

5.2       Staff visited the site at different times of the day, to evaluate local conditions.  The site is a three arm uncontrolled intersection, with a solid centre line on England Street and flush median on Tuam Street. On street parking is unrestricted on all sides and vehicles were observed to park at locations that affected sight lines for drivers turning out of England Street.

5.3       The site is located near to ‘The Pump House’ and attracts customers and visitors who generally park on Tuam Street.  Tuam Street has substantial parking opportunities on both sides, which, if displaced, would cause only a minor inconvenience to visitors or staff.

5.4       Staff reviewed the crash history of this area. Three crashes were recorded over the last 5 years at the intersection, all involving vehicles turning from England Street. All resulted in a minor injury.

5.5       Consequently, staff have recommended the establishment of a give way control at the intersection, and the removal of parking to improve sight lines and safety in this area.

5.6       The installation of give way control combined with no stopping restrictions will improve safety at this location and displace parking to more appropriate locations. 

6.   Option 1 – Install Give Way Control and No Stopping Restrictions (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Provide give way control on England Street at its intersection with Tuam Street and no stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       Letters of consultation with a site plan were initially issued to all tenants and property owners at the nearest 10 properties.  Two responses were received, both supporting the proposal. 

6.5       The Team Leader of Parking Compliance supports this option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.7       Cost of Implementation - $600 to provide road markings and one new sign and post, plus $750 for the consultation and preparation of this report.

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

6.9       Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

Legal Implications

6.10    Part 1, clauses 7 and 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to install parking restrictions by resolution.

6.11    The Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board has delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations. The list of delegations for the Community Board includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.12    The installations of any sign and/or road markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.13    No risks identified. 

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

6.15    Implementation timeframe - Approximately six weeks once the area contractor receives the request.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Parking is deterred from locations that could impair sight lines

·   Give Way control resolves an identified crash risk, by formalising intersection priority n

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Displaces parking to other locations. 

7.   Option 2 – Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Maintain an uncontrolled intersection and unrestricted parking. 

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

7.4       This option is inconsistent with the request for improving road safety in the area.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.6       Cost of Implementation - Not applicable.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Not applicable.

7.8       Funding source - Not applicable.

Legal Implications

7.9       Not applicable.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    If the give way control and stopping restrictions are not installed there could be issues raised with the Council for allowing parking to continue after potential traffic safety issues have been recognised.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

7.12    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   Retains unrestricted parking spaces 

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Does not support the safety and operational concerns of the resident 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Tuam St England St site plan

26

 

 

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

Barry Hayes - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Senior Traffic Engineer

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

9.        352 Barbadoes Street - Proposed Accessible Parking

Reference:

18/1053370

Presenter(s):

Barry Hayes – Traffic Engineer, Traffic Operations Team

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve the conversion of an existing on-street parking space to an accessible parking space on Barbadoes Street in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report was staff generated in response to a request from a resident living at this property, who requires a disabled parking space nearby. The resident is unable to access a parking space for most of the day near this address. The nearest designated mobility parking spaces are located at least 400m away, at Margaret Mahy playground, which is an unacceptably long distance for the resident concerned.

1.3       These measures have been requested to enable an appropriate space to be available within a convenient distance of the place of residence.

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by comparing factors relating to this decision against the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board approve:

1.         That the parking of vehicles be reserved for vehicles with an approved disabled person's parking permit, prominently displayed in the vehicle, in accordance with section 6.4.1 of the Land Transport - Road User Rule 2004 on the east side of Barbadoes Street as shown on the attached drawing TG133440 issue 1 dated 8/10/2018.

2.         That any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this report are revoked.

3.         That these resolutions take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       The recommendations in this report are consistent with the anticipated outcomes of the Traffic Safety & Efficiency Service Plan in the Councils Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028) .

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·   Option 1 - Provide an accessible parking space (preferred option)

·   Option 2 – Do nothing

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (preferred option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·   Provides a convenient location for drivers with a mobility impairment to access the residential property and any adjacent amenities

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Displaces parking to other locations

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       A resident who own an apartment at 352 Barbadoes Street approached Council parking enforcement staff requesting access to parking near this address. This property is a modern apartment block that excludes on-site parking.  The property has a small driveway which has access purely for service vehicles.

5.2       Whilst parking is available on-street, the resident is registered as disabled and has a Mobility Permit.  He has requested a space close to the property, due to his physical requirements.  As parking is fairly intensive on Barbadoes Street, opportunities to do so near the property is often limited during the working day. 

5.3       Outside normal workdays, spaces are often available, not causing an issue. However, the resident indicated that he was typically at home during the working day and drove away only occasionally, which often resulted in a lack of parking on his return, hence a regular need for parking nearby during daytime.

5.4       Staff investigated the local street environment. This section of Barbadoes Street, between Kilmore Street and Chester Street East has mostly unrestricted parking on both sides of the street, with some residents permit only parking (2 spaces) and P60 (3 spaces).  On the various times of day that were experienced, it was evident that there were consistently some on-street parking opportunities during the working day. However, from the perspective of a disabled person, a location close to the property could only rarely be assured.

5.5       The installation of the accessible parking space would enable a convenient space to be consistently available for the disabled resident and any other visitors to the area who may have similar needs.

6.   Option 1 – Install an accessible parking space on Barbadoes Street (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Provide an accessible parking space on the east side of Barbadoes Street in accordance with Attachment A.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       Staff contacted all tenants and owners at the apartment block at 352 Barbadoes Street, as well as the nearest 4 properties.  Two responses of support were received and none in opposition or requesting amendment.

6.5       The Team Leader of Parking Compliance generated this request and has subsequently confirmed his support for this option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.7       Cost of Implementation - $400 to provide road markings with a sign and post plus $750 for the consultation and preparation of this report.

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

6.9       Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

Legal Implications

6.10    Part 1, clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to limit the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles on any road to any class of vehicles.  Classes of vehicle include those displaying an appropriate permit, which is in this case would be a Mobility Parking Permit.

6.11    The Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board has delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations. The list of delegations for the Community Board includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.12    The installations of any sign and/or road markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.13    There is a risk of parking being displaced to other locations.  However, this proposal affects only one parking space and the effects are expected to be negligible.

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

6.15    Implementation timeframe - Approximately six weeks once the area contractor receives the request.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Provides a convenient location for the resident and other drivers with a mobility impairment to access the residential property and adjacent amenities

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Displaces one unrestricted parking demand to another location

7.   Option 2 – Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain the unrestricted parking.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

7.4       This option is inconsistent with the request to improve accessible parking at this location.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.5       This option is not consistent with Council’s Transport Strategic Plan 2012-42, which includes objective 1.2: Balancing the network and states that ‘Council will deliver better connectivity and accessibility for people with mobility impairments’.

Financial Implications

7.6       Cost of Implementation - Not applicable.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Not applicable.

7.8       Funding source - Not applicable.

Legal Implications

7.9       Not applicable.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    This option is inconsistent with the request for accessible parking to assist residents and visitors with mobility issues.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

7.12    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   Retains one unrestricted parking space

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Does not meet the needs of residents and visitors with mobility issues

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

352 Barbadoes St site plan

32

 

 

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

Barry Hayes - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Senior Traffic Engineer

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

10.    Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk - Request for Proposals Results and New Lease

Reference:

18/1087259

Presenter(s):

Luke Rees-Thomas, Property Consultant

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to recommend to Council that a new lease be granted over premises contained within the Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk Building for a total period of five years.

1.2       The Botanic Gardens are classified as Local Purpose (Botanic Gardens) Reserve and administered under the Reserves Act 1977.  In essence this Act requires any use within the building to exist with a purpose that is consistent with the classification (Botanic Gardens) and to support patrons of the grounds.

1.3       The Botanic Gardens are administered under the Reserves Act 1977 and deemed a metropolitan asset, therefore final decision needs to be made by the full Council, via recommendation from the Community Board.

Origin of Report

1.4       This report is being provided to fulfil Council resolution CNCL/2018/00150:

Council Resolved CNCL/2018/00150

             That the Council:

1.      Approve the operational use for the available premises within the Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk building be determined as community based for the duration of a fixed term lease.

2.      Issue a closed Request for Proposals (RFP) process to both Request for Information applicants. This ‘RFP’ to include a definition of what constitutes a ‘community use’, with relevant evaluation attributes in order to allow effective comparison. The results of that process would then be reported via the Community Board to Council for decision.

Councillor Swiggs/Councillor Templeton                                                                           Carried

1.5       Staff have now completed a closed RFP evaluation process.  The results of which are now presented to the Council for consideration and final decision.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of low-medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by the project being low cost and affecting a limited group of residents (visitors to the Botanic Gardens).  While the decision is not easily reversible, this is not significant enough to change the overall significance value.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommend to Council:

1.         A new lease be granted to the Canterbury Horticultural Society, pursuant to Section 61(2) of the Reserves Act 1977, for a period of five years, over premises located within the Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk building, being approximately 200 square metres, on terms as consistent with the report.

2.         Note the willingness of the Canterbury Horticultural Society to promote the building as a shared community space, with a portion of the premises able to be utilised by other groups.

3.         Note upon expiry of the five year lease term, the Council will review and determine, in their sole discretion, whether a further extension be granted.

4.         Grant delegated authority to the Manager Property Consultancy to conclude all necessary lease negotiations and documentation with respect to Recommendation 1.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028):

4.1.1   Activity: Parks & Foreshore

·     Level of Service: 6.2.2.0 Overall customer satisfaction with the presentation of the City’s Parks - Botanic Gardens & Mona Vale presentation: resident satisfaction =95%.

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Grant new lease to the preferred respondent (preferred option)

·     Option 2 - Decline new lease to preferred respondent, negotiate with second  respondent

·     Option 3 – Do not grant a lease to either party

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Certainty will be provided on the medium term operational use for the Tea Kiosk building.

·     A fixed term lease will be granted to a stable Lessee with strong ties to the Botanic Gardens.

·     The premises layout will invite the public to enter at no cost.

·     The majority of the premises will be reconfigurable space and utilised by the Lessee for various uses which support the surrounding area.

·     The Lessee will work with other like-minded community groups and incorporate these groups into a booking schedule (for uses that support visitors to the Botanic Gardens).

·     The premises will not be altered and the heritage value will be preserved.

·     The Council will be able to review progress in 5 years and consider whether any further term is warranted.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     The Council will only receive a market rent over a portion of the leased space (approximately 25%).

·     No other entity will be able to book the space on a permanent basis.

4.4       Staff are recommending an option which seeks to accommodate an established community group with existing ties to the Botanic Gardens, whilst also ensuring continued access for other groups and the general public.

4.5       Should the Council elect to grant a new lease to the Canterbury Horticultural Society, the Council will have the ability to review progress upon the five year expiry and determine whether any further term is appropriate.

4.6       The Canterbury Horticultural Society understand the significance of the Tea Kiosk Building and have recorded a willingness to work with the Council in order to achieve a positive outcome for patrons of the Botanic Gardens.

 

5.   Context/Background

Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk Building

5.1       The land encompassing the Botanic Gardens is classified as Local Purpose (Botanic Gardens) Reserve and administered under the Reserves Act 1977.  The grounds receive approximately 1.2 million visitors per year and are a major draw card for tourists and locals alike.

5.2       The Tea Kiosk building is situated in a pivotal location within the Botanic Gardens.  As patrons enter the grounds via the Armagh Street foot bridge, they are immediately greeted with the building entrance.  Originally constructed in 1910, the facility sustained fire damage and was rebuilt in the 1920’s.  Historically, the building has mainly housed public café operations, hence the ‘Tea Kiosk’ name.  Following the Canterbury Earthquake events in 2011, this heritage building received a full repair and strengthening programme.

5.3       Currently, a portion of the building is leased by the operators of the ‘Duck Duck’ Ice Cream Shop, this lease also includes an adjoining commercial kitchen which services the Ilex Café (located in the new Visitor Centre).  That lease will remain in place and has a term which expires 29 October 2032.  The balance of the building (which is the focus of this report) comprises of an octagon shaped room with internal toilet/storage area.  This space has been occupied by a Floral Art Exhibition since late 2016.

5.4       With the current occupant’s agreement now approaching expiry, it has been prudent for the Council to consider all uses for the building in order to ensure value is achieved for the public.  As such, the Council’s Property team were instructed to initiate a process to gauge leasing interest. That process resulted in the Council resolving to allocate the space for a community use.

Premises Limitations

5.5       The building and location constrains the ability for any Lessee:

§ Reserves Act Classification – The land upon which the grounds are located is classified as Local Purpose (Botanic Gardens) Reserve. The governing legislation (Reserves Act 1977) requires any use of the building to be in keeping and exist to serve patrons of the surrounding grounds. Therefore this rules out a portion of the general leasing market i.e. a shop could not operate which sold items that had no obvious link or benefit to the gardens and visitors.

§ Fit-out Limitations – The building fabric is of a heritage nature and fit-out alterations are likely to be extremely limited. The building has undergone a substantial repair and strengthening programme post-earthquake. The premises are being made available in an ‘as is’ state with only portable fit-out being preferable.

Procurement Practices

5.6       The Council’s leasing policy states:

§ Where the Council recognises there is only one logical lessee for a public property, the Council will unilaterally deal with that lessee.

§ However, when seeking to lease premises where there is an obvious and potentially broader market and public interest, the Council shall not deal unilaterally, but shall seek tenants through an open transparent and public process e.g. by tender, by request for proposal or by using a sound public advertised marketing process to attract tenants.

5.7       In this case, recent enquiries have shown there exists a broader market (multiple applications) and public interest in these premises.

Request for Information (RFI) Process

5.8       On 14 February 2018 the Council advertised a public Request for Information (RFI) process.  The purpose being to determine potential uses and receive interest in leasing the available Tea Kiosk premises.  The key driver from Council staff is to ensure the premises are utilised in a capacity which will provide benefit to visitors of the Botanic Gardens.

5.9       Results of the RFI process were submitted within an options report to the Community Board (2 July 2018) and Council (2 August 2018).  The Council resolved for a community use to be applied to the premises in question. Staff were instructed to complete a closed RFP evaluation process between the two  remaining applicants, being:

§  The Canterbury Horticultural Society (CHS)

§  The Jenny Gillies Art Exhibition (incumbent tenant)

Request for Proposals (RFP) Process

5.10    On 22 August 2018 Council staff issued RFP documentation to both parties.  The RFP documentation included the Council’s requirements for use of the premises, including a definition of what the Council considers to be a ‘Community Use’:

“A community use is envisaged as a space which may meet the following general criteria:

§ A space which is open, inviting and accepting of visitors to the Botanic Gardens

§ A space which has potential to cater for adaptable uses

§ A use that is affordable for visitors of the Botanic Gardens

§ A use that is aligned to the nature of the Botanic Gardens

A premises used for a community use provides either artistic, social or cultural facilities or community support services to the public. The tenant will be a not for profit organisation in that the use of the premise would not be primarily commercial in purpose and profits are not distributed to a set of directors, stockholders or managers. Generally non-profit organisations can generate surpluses in the course of their operations, but any such surpluses must be reinvested in the objectives of the organisation.

The Lessee must provide:

§ An image that is welcoming and vibrant

§ A high standard of presentation

§ A high level of general cleanliness

§ A philosophy and presentation style which is ‘in keeping’ and appropriate for this Property

§ A friendly and accessible environment

§ Cooperation with the Council operations team with in the Botanic Gardens”

5.11    Legal advice previously sought by the Council staff, did not conclusively determine whether or not the Jenny Gillies Exhibition should be considered a ‘community use’.  This uncertainty remains, however for the purposes of achieving a balanced outcome to this process, this issue has been put to the side.

5.12    Responses to the RFP were to be received on or before 19 September 2018. Both responses were received on time - refer Attachments A & B.

RFP Evaluation

5.13    An evaluation panel was established to review, discuss and score the received proposals. This team consisted of a chairperson, three evaluators and a probity service provided by the Council’s procurement team.  The appointed evaluators were Council staff that hold a professional connection to the premises and are well versed in the applicable subject matter.

5.14    RFP responses were graded on the following criteria:

A.        Personnel and Track Record – 30%

B.         The Proposed Use meets the Community Use Criteria – 35%

C.         Lease and Conformity with Management Plan – 35%

D.        Financial Viability – Pass/Fail

5.15    Criteria sections A, B & C included a number of specific questions that delve into the history, operating model and relevance to the Council’s specific requirements. Section D is a straight forward pass or fail score based on the Respondent’s financial operating status.

5.16    Proposal Evaluation:

Upon receipt of all information, consideration and discussion between the evaluation panel members concluded the final consensus scoring as follows:

Section

Canterbury Horticultural Society (CHS)

Jenny Gillies Art Exhibition (JG)

TOTAL

75.3

63.3

 

5.17    Evaluation commentary (summarised):

Section A - Personnel and Track Record

 

CHS - The Respondent has solid experience relating to the ownership and management of a large community space.  Several good references provided and no issues noted with their approach to health & safety.  An established hierarchy of staff on hand to assist with operations, along with members/volunteers.

 

JG - The Respondent has operated the existing lease without issue. It appears the operation relies heavily on the involvement of Jenny Gillies with part time staff in support.  Basic health and safety statement provided, which is acceptable.

 

Section B - The Proposed Use meets the Community Use Criteria

 

CHS - Detailed information has been provided, including a large range of diverse uses proposed for the premises.  The Respondent has clarified and reassured the evaluation panel of the group’s core offering.  The group has outlined an ambitious vision which includes other community groups and volunteers.  The group understands how to connect and interact with visitors of the Botanic Gardens.  The group facilitates many events including educational programmes.  The panel noted it may be a test for the group to coordinate the large volumes of projected participation.

 

JG - The proposal includes a static exhibition which does hold relevance to the surrounding setting. However the offering is limited in certain areas, such as flexibility to incorporate other uses and what level the use connects to wider community outcomes.  There was discussion amongst the panel that the exhibition is potentially more aligned with art/fashion than horticulture or botany.

 

Section C - Lease and Conformity with Management Plan

 

CHS - The respondent has requested a longer lease term than offered.  The proposed use(s) would be a clear fit within the Botanic Gardens.   The Respondent provides a series of objectives and a primary goal which is consistent with the Reserve Management Plan.  Clarity was needed around the Group's funding model, which has been advised as a combination of; grants, membership fees, sponsorship and community events.  The respondent is offering a market rental over 25% of the premise and a nominal rental for the balance.

 

JG - The respondent is able to meet lease terms offered under the RFP.  A link has been provided to the Reserve Management Plan, the relationship appears to hold a greater connection to art with a lesser effect on horticultural education.  The respondent is offering a nominal rental over the entire premises, in return for a three yearly painting obligation.

 

Section D – Financial Viability

 

CHS - No financial concerns are noted. The respondent holds substantial funds and investment scheme from the sale of their building in Hagley Park. The letter of support from ANZ and the CHS's accountant provides sufficient reassurance.  Pass mark determined.

 

JG - The respondent’s financial viability is supported by their accountant and the company is solvent. However the Tea Kiosk operation itself has run at a loss (for the year ended 31 March 2018) and there are concerns whether the Tea Kiosk operation is viable.  In response, the company directors have committed to personally guaranteeing any shortfall incurred by the Tea Kiosk operation.  Pass mark determined.

 

5.18    The tender process was managed within the Property team with probity support, to ensure the evaluation was conducted in a transparent manner and was fair to all participants, from the Councils Procurement and Contracts unit.  A professionally qualified procurement manager attended all of the appropriate evaluation sessions to confirm no bias was applied to either respondent based on professional or personal knowledge and that the recommendations were sourced directly from the information provided in support of each prospective tenant.

5.19    Further clarifications sought from each party were also witnessed and assurance provided as to the overall robustness of the tender and evaluation process.  In the professional opinion of the procurement manager acting as probity, this process was free from undue influence and focussed solely on determining the best outcome for the community and people of Christchurch.

RFP Evaluation Summary and Recommendation

5.20    A Preferred respondent has been appointed by the evaluation panel and a subsequent recommendation is made, that a lease be granted to The Canterbury Horticultural Society, for the following primary reasons:

§ Tenure would be provided to a group with clear ties to the Botanic Gardens, including horticulture, education and sustainability.

§ The Council will seek a balance between community benefit and financial return.

§ The CHS are in a strong financial position to meet ongoing lease obligations.

§ The group have shown a willingness to promote and operate the space as an ‘open door’ community facility on a no fee basis.

§ The CHS coordinate many different initiatives throughout the year, these events will seek to increase park patronage and general community engagement with the grounds.

§ The CHS will incorporate several other community groups within their endeavours.

5.21    Staff believe in these circumstances, an important factor to consider is visitation frequency. If the space is flexible in layout and offering, then the chance of repeat visitation is increased. The preferred Respondent has detailed in their proposal the varied uses they are able to apply to the premises.

5.22    When reviewing the available use options, elected members need to consider which avenue will provide a balance of certainty for the building, a financial return and also maximum benefit to the majority of park visitors.

Proposed Lease – Canterbury Horticultural Society

5.23    The CHS are an Incorporated Society administered by a board of nine members.  The Canterbury Horticultural Society began with the colonisation of Canterbury in the 1850’s.  It was originally called the Christchurch Agricultural, Botanical and Horticultural Society.  In 1861 the group split and the horticultural arm became the Christchurch Horticultural Society.  This changed its name in 1898 to become the Canterbury Horticultural Society, which today is the largest horticultural club for home gardeners in New Zealand.  Further information is publically available on the group’s website - www.chsgardens.co.nz

5.24    Under the group’s proposal, the CHS intend to partner with other like-minded entities, including ‘The Friends of the Botanic Gardens’, who would also occupy the space sporadically.  ‘The Friends’ currently utilise the adjacent ‘Old Information Centre’ building.  This building is booked for Council staff exercises and earmarked for a new Science Hub within the Long Term Plan.  As a spin off benefit, any new lease of the Tea Kiosk premises would also solve a future issue for that group.

5.25    Summarised, the CHS propose to use the space for a diverse number of activities which would benefit both their members and general visitors;

Office Space / Hot desks

Seminars/Workshops

Speaker Series

Education / Training

Displays/Exhibitions

Society Member Meetings

Digital Displays

Tea/Coffee Facilities

Meeting Space (other groups)

Floral Design

Base for Guided Tours

Plant Sales

Information/Conservation Hub

CCC Programmes

Use within Autumn Garden Show

5.26    The CHS have signalled their intent to ensure the adaptable portion of the premises (150m2) are utilised to their potential and will be promoted for the use by other groups.  The CHS intend to promote availability of the space on their website and other mediums.

5.27    It is noted CHS membership numbers have declined by approximately 10% over the period 2016-2017.  Council staff understand that the group are currently prioritising efforts to promote the benefits of Society membership to the younger generation and regain growth into the future.

5.28    Staff have not pre-determined the decision of elected members, however in order for full consideration of this option to take place, indicative lease terms have been discussed with the respondent to ensure the option is viable.

5.29    A rent structure would be likely based on the following apportionment:

§ A market rent for the area of permanent office space, being 50m2 (subject final measure and registered Valuer’s report).  Rental reviews to be completed an annual Consumers Price Index (CPI) basis.

§ The balance of the space, being 150m2 will be leased on a nominal rate which would allow the Lessee to recoup their costs including management of the space and consumables.

5.30    The CHS have provided the Council with their Annual report for year end 31 December 2017.  The Council’s Finance team have reviewed the group’s position and provide comment:

“The CHS having sold its building in Hagley Park and settled its insurance claim on that building have an investment portfolio of $2.2 million.  This is currently invested via ANZ Private Bank in conservative investment funds. The CHS has indicated that it is looking to preserve the capital value of the portfolio long term.

 

The CHS has a strong balance sheet at 31 December 2017 which can support the financial obligations which the proposed lease would place on the organisation.”

 

5.31    Staff are satisfied that the CHS hold sufficient ties to the Botanic Gardens and regional horticulture in order to recommend a lease be granted under the Reserves Act. Staff are also confident in the ability of this group to perform as their proposal promises including a continued level of access to the space for other groups.

Transition and Fit-out

5.32    Should the Council elect to proceed with a lease to the Canterbury Horticultural Society, Council staff would seek to accommodate a smooth transition from the current occupant to a new lessee.

5.33    Given the heritage nature of the building and post-earthquake refurbishment, any incoming lessee would only be permitted free-standing fit-out items.  Alterations to the building structure are unlikely to be approved.

5.34    The CHS have provided an indicative layout plan for the premises, which is included on page 46 within Attachment A.

Delegations

5.35    Section 61(2) of the Reserves Act 1977 determines the administering body of a local purpose reserve (that is vested in the administering body) to be a ‘leasing authority’ of that reserve for the purposes of the Public Bodies Leases Act. Under Sections 7(c) and 8(6) of the Public Bodies Leasing Act, the ‘leasing authority’ may grant a lease of up to five years at will without necessarily running a public tender. Granting a lease pursuant to Section 61(2) of the Reserves Act does not require a public notification process.

5.36    The Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board hold the delegation to grant new leases over reserve land. However, the Botanic Gardens as a whole is considered a metropolitan asset, i.e. a local asset with city-wide recognition.  Therefore the recommendations contained within this report require the resolution of the Council.


 

 

6.   Option 1 - Grant new lease to the preferred Respondent (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       The Community Board recommend, that the Council grant a new lease to the Canterbury Horticultural Society for five years.

6.2       This option seeks to achieve a positive balance for both rental income and community benefit.

6.3       The Society proposes to pay a commercial rental on a 50m2 area allocated for permanent office space, the balance of 150m2 would be an adaptable area that can be utilised by other like-minded groups.

Significance

6.4       The level of significance of this option is low-medium and consistent with section 2 of this report.

6.5       Engagement requirements for this level of significance have been met.  The Council, as territorial authority, holds existing powers to grant leases over Local Purpose Reserves to a voluntary organisation, under Section 61 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

6.7       Patrons of the Botanic Gardens are affected as the Tea Kiosk building is located in a prime location within the park.  The space has historically been occupied by lessees that exists to serve public clients.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.9       Cost of Implementation – Staff time to finalise lease negotiation and documentation.

6.10    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Lease management over five years.

6.11    Funding source – Existing budgets.

Legal Implications

6.12    There is a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

6.13    This report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

6.14    The legal consideration is lease documentation requires drafting.

Risks and Mitigations  

6.15    There is a risk that the lessee may not facilitate use of the space as agreed. This will result in the premises not being used to their potential. In the unlikely event this occurs, Council staff would enforce lease conditions and monitor the situation through to resolution.

Implementation

6.16    Implementation dependencies - Council decision, time to finalise lease terms and draft agreement.

6.17    Implementation timeframe – Three months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.18    The advantages of this option include:

·   Certainty will be provided on the medium term operational use for the Tea Kiosk building.

·   A fixed term lease will be granted to a stable Lessee with strong ties to the Botanic Gardens.

·   The premises layout will invite the public to enter at no cost.

·   A majority of the space will be adaptable and utilised by the Lessee for multiples uses which support the surrounding area.

·   Lease conditions will allow other community groups to book a portion of the space (for uses that support visitors to the Botanic Gardens).

·   The premises will not be altered and the heritage value will be preserved.

·   The Council will be able to review progress in five years and consider whether any further term is warranted.

6.19    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   The Council will only receive a market rent over a portion of the leased space.

·   No other entity will be able to book the space on a permanent basis

7.   Option 2 - Decline new lease to preferred Respondent, negotiate with Second Respondent

Option Description

7.1       Following recommendation from the Community Board, should the Council determine that the Canterbury Horticultural Society are unsuitable for valid reasons in accordance with the RFP terms, then endorse staff to commence negotiations with the second respondent.

Significance

7.2       The level of significance of this option is low-medium and consistent with section 2 of this report.

7.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance have been met.  The Council, as territorial authority, holds existing powers to grant leases over Local Purpose Reserves to a voluntary organisation, under Section 61 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

7.5       Patrons of the Botanic Gardens are affected as the Tea Kiosk building is located in a prime location within the park.  The space has historically been occupied by lessees that exists to serve public clients.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

7.6.1   Inconsistency – Declining a new lease over Council premises.

7.6.2   Reason for inconsistency – The Council would generally approve an operator that is recommended via an evaluated RFP process.

7.6.3   Amendment necessary – Elect to resolve on Option 1 as recommended.

Financial Implications

7.7       Cost of Implementation - Additional staff time will be incurred.

7.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Lease management over five years.

7.9       Funding source - Existing budgets.

Legal Implications

7.10    There is a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

7.11    This report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

7.12    The legal consideration is lease documentation requires drafting.

Risks and Mitigations  

7.13    There is a risk of negative media or even legal challenge from the preferred respondent.

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies - Council decision, time to finalise lease terms and draft agreement.

7.15    Implementation timeframe - Three months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   A lease would be installed and provides certainty for the building’s medium term future.

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Time will be incurred to negotiate with the runner up respondent.

·   A lesser rental income will be received than option 1, The Jenny Gillies Exhibition has requested a nominal rental charge i.e. $1 per annum.

·   A negative perception of the Council’s decision making processes may be incurred.

8.   Option 3 – Do not grant a lease to either party

Option Description

8.1       Following recommendation from the Community Board, should the Council determine that neither the Canterbury Horticultural Society, nor The Jenny Gillies Exhibition are suitable for valid reasons in accordance with the RFP terms, then terminate the process and request staff to source a future operator through a different process.  The current operator will continue to occupy the premises on a month to month basis until a future occupant is sourced (or a different use is determined for the premises).

Significance

8.2       The level of significance of this option is low-medium and consistent with section 2 of this report.

8.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not required as no lease is being granted.

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.

Community Views and Preferences

8.5       Patrons of the Botanic Gardens are affected as the Tea Kiosk building is located in a prime location within the Park. The space has historically been occupied by lessees that exists to serve public clients.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

8.6       This option is inconsistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

8.6.1   Inconsistency – Declining a new lease over Council premises.

8.6.2   Reason for inconsistency – The Council would generally approve an operator that is recommended via an evaluated RFP process.

8.6.3   Amendment necessary – Elect to resolve on Option 1 as recommended.

Financial Implications

8.7       Cost of Implementation – Additional staff time will be incurred in order to either source a different operator or review the Council’s use of the premises.

8.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – None.

8.9       Funding source – Existing budgets.

Legal Implications

8.10    There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

8.11    This report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

Risks and Mitigations  

8.12    There is a risk of negative media should the Council elect not to make a decision on the future use of the premises. There is also potential for the building to become unoccupied should the incumbent tenant decide to make other arrangements.

Implementation

8.13    Implementation dependencies - A new Request for Proposals process to be run, followed by Council reporting for decision.

8.14    Implementation timeframe – 6 to 8 months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.15    The advantages of this option include:

·   None.

8.16    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Substantial time and staff resource will be incurred to re-run a tenant sourcing process in order to find a new kiosk operator.

·   A negative perception of the Council’s decision making processes may be incurred.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a  

Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk Request for Proposal -Canterbury Horticultural Society Response - Confidential

 

b  

Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk Request for Proposal  - Jenny Gillies Response - Confidential

 

 

 

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

Authors

Luke Rees-Thomas - Property Consultant

Keith Murphy - Manager Procurement

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizen and Community

   


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

11.  Elected Members’ Information Exchange

 

This item provides an opportunity for Board Members to update each other on recent events and/or issues of relevance and interest to the Board.

 

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

12.  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:


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

29 October 2018

 

 

 

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

10

Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk - Request for Proposals Results and New Lease

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment 1 - Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk Request for Proposal -Canterbury Horticultural Society Response

s7(2)(i)

Conduct Negotiations

Protection of Applicant's submitted information

Upon expiry of said lease

 

Attachment 2 - Botanic Gardens Tea Kiosk Request for Proposal  - Jenny Gillies Response

s7(2)(i)

Conduct Negotiations

Protection of Applicant's submitted information

Upon expiry of said lease