Waipapa

Papanui-Innes Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Friday 26 October 2018

Time:                                    9am

Venue:                                 Board Room, Papanui Service Centre,
Corner Langdons Road and Restell Street, Papanui

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Ali Jones

Emma Norrish

Jo Byrne

Pauline Cotter

Mike Davidson

John Stringer

 

 

23 October 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Christine Lane

Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes

941 5213

christine.lane@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/

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 


 

 

 

Mihi

 

 

Tēnā koutou

Kua hui mai nei

Ki tēnei whare ō tātou

Ki te kōrero, ki te whakarongo

i nga kaupapa ō to hapori

Nau mai, haere mai.

Nā reira tēnā koutou katoa

 

Greetings

to all who have gathered

within our (communal) house

to speak and to listen to the

topics/conversations of your community

Welcome, welcome

Therefore, again I greet all present

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 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.......................................................................................................................... 5

B       2.       Declarations of Interest................................................................................................... 5

C       3.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes................................................................................. 5

B       4.       Public Forum.................................................................................................................... 5

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

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

B       7.       Briefings.......................................................................................................................... 13

Staff Reports

A       8.       Harewood Road Corridor Study Findings and Recommendations........................... 17

C       9.       Canterbury Playcentre Association -  Variation to Lease for Rebuild of Belfast Playcentre...................................................................................................................... 25

C       10.     Papanui-Innes Community Board - Proposed Road Names - Spring Grove Subdivision......................................................................................................................................... 49

C       11.     Prestons Road Proposed P3 Parking Restrictions....................................................... 57

C       12.     Momorangi Crescent Proposed No Stopping Restrictions........................................ 63

C       13.     Tuckers Road Proposed P3 Parking Restrictions........................................................ 69

C       14.     Proposed Bus Stop Improvement at 293 Hills Road................................................... 75

B       15.     Papanui-Innes Community Board Area Report - October 2018................................ 83

 

B       16.     Elected Members’ Information Exchange.................................................................... 88 

 

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 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 Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board meeting held on Friday, 12 October 2018  be confirmed (refer page 7).

 

4.   Public Forum

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

 

4.1

Positive Youth Development Fund Report – Georgia Eagle

Georgia Eagle will attend the meeting to report back to the Board on her attendance at the World Pipe Band Championships in Glasgow, Scotland in August 2018.

 

 

4.2

Positive Youth Development Fund Report – Anna Dabkowski

Anna Dabkowski will attend the meeting to report back to the Board on representing Heaton School at the 2018 AIMS Games Championship in Tauranga.

 

 

4.3

Positive Youth Development Fund Report – Jennifer Trieu

Jennifer Trieu will attend the meeting to report back to the Board on competing in the rhythmic gymnastics section of the New Zealand National Gymnastics Championships held in Tauranga from 1–6 October 2018.

 

 

4.4

Richmond Residents and Business Association – David Duffy

David Duffy, Secretary – Richmond Residents and Business Association, will attend the Board meeting to update the Board on achievements and issues.

 

 


 

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

Rebuild of the Belfast Playcentre

Noel Strez, Architect, and Lynette Park, Canterbury Playcentre Association, will attend the meeting to speak to the Board regarding the rebuild of the Belfast Playcentre.

 

5.2

Bus Stop Hills Road – John Whitford

John Whitford will attend the meeting to make a presentation to the Board on the bus stop on the northwest side of Hills Road close to the intersection with Acheson Avenue.

  

6.   Presentation of Petitions

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


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

 

Waipapa

Papanui-Innes Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Friday 12 October 2018

Time:                                    9.01am

Venue:                                 Board Room, Papanui Service Centre,
Corner Langdons Road and Restell Street, Papanui

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Ali Jones

Emma Norrish

Pauline Cotter

Mike Davidson

John Stringer

 

 

10 October 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Christine Lane

Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes

941 5213

christine.lane@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 PICB/2018/00095

Community Board Decision

That the apology for early departure from Pauline Cotter and absence from Jo Byrne be accepted.

Emma Norrish/Mike Davidson                                                                                                                               Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00096

3.1       That the minutes of the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board meeting held on Friday, 28 September 2018 be confirmed.

Emma Norrish/John Stringer                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

4.      Public Forum

Part B

4.1

Positive Youth Development Fund Report – Hannah and Laura Warner

Hannah and Laura Warner attended the meeting to report back to the Board on their participation in the NZ Choral Federation Big Sing Competition held in Wellington from 29 August to 2 September 2018.

After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Hannah and Laura Warner for their presentation.

 

4.2

Positive Youth Development Fund Report – Zavier Harema-Hughes

Zavier Harema-Hughes attended the meeting to report back to the Board on competing at the National 3x3 Schools Basketball Tournament in Tauranga from 20–24 March 2018.

After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked Zavier Harema-Hughes for his presentation.

 

4.3

Positive Youth Development Fund Report – Matt Munro

Matt Munro did not attend.

 

4.4

Christchurch Youth Council – Kate Burgess

Kate Burgess and Kendra Burgess-Naude attended the meeting to inform the Board on the “Community Series” initiative, in particular the Papanui area.

After questions from members, the Chairperson thanked both Christchurch Youth Council representatives for their presentation.

 

4.5

Bus Stop Hills Road – John Whitford

John Whitford sent an apology and will attend at a later date.

 

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00097

3.2       That the minutes of the Waitai/Coastal-Burwood and Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Boards’ joint meeting held on Wednesday, 3 October 2018 be confirmed.

Ali Jones/Mike Davidson                                                                                                                                          Carried

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.   Papanui-Innes Wards - Proposed Road Names - Canon Street

 

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00098 (Staff Recommendation adopted without change)

Part C

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board resolve to approve the following new right of way name:

1.         Canon Street (RMA/2018/1878), 109 Canon Street

·        Verlamio Lane

Ali Jones/Emma Norrish                                                                                                                                           Carried

 

 

8.   Mahars Road Proposed P3 Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00099 (Staff Recommendations adopted without change)

Part C

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Approves that, under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the part of Mahars Road as indicated in the drawing TG133409 Issue 1, dated 23/8/2018, as attached to the agenda for this meeting, is reserved as a parking place for any vehicles, subject to the following restriction: the maximum time for parking of any vehicle is three minutes between the hours of 8.15am to 9.15am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days only.

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

3.         Approves that these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

Emma Norrish/Pauline Cotter                                                                                                                                Carried

 

 

9.   Riselaw Street Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00100 (Staff Recommendations adopted without change)

Part C

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Approves that, under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the part of Riselaw Street as indicated in the drawing TG133079 Issue 1, dated 31/8/2018, as attached to the agenda for this meeting.

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

3.         Approves that these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

Emma Norrish/Mike Davidson                                                                                                                               Carried

 

 

 

10. Windermere Road Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00101 (Staff Recommendations adopted without change)

Part C

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Approves that, under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the part of Windermere Road and St James Avenue as indicated in the drawing TG133059 Issue 1, dated 30/7/2018, as attached to the agenda for this meeting.

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

3.         Approves that these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

Mike Davidson/Ali Jones                                                                                                                                          Carried

John Stringer requested that his vote against the decision be recorded.

 

 

11. Westminster/Fergusson Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

 

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00102 (Staff Recommendations adopted without change)

Part C

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Approves that, under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the part of Westminster Street and Fergusson Avenue as indicated in the drawing TG133408 Issue 1, dated 18/9/2018, as attached to the agenda for this meeting.

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

3.         Approves that these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

Ali Jones/Emma Norrish                                                                                                                                           Carried

John Stringer and Pauline Cotter requested that their vote against the decision be recorded.

 


 

 

12. Papanui-Innes Community Board Area Report - September/October 2018

 

Community Board Resolved PICB/2018/00103 (Staff Recommendation adopted without change)

Part B

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Receives the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board Area Report for September/ October 2018.

John Stringer/Pauline Cotter                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

 

Pauline Cotter left the meeting at 9:58 a.m. and returned at 10:00 a.m. during item 13.

13. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Part B

Board members exchanged information on matters of interest.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 10.00 a.m.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 26th DAY OF OCTOBER 2018.

 

 

Ali Jones

Chairperson

   


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

7.        Briefings

Reference:

18/1066935

Presenter(s):

Richie Moyle, Programme Manager Heritage

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Board will be briefed on the following:

Subject

Presenter(s)

Unit/Organisation

St Albans Community Centre

Richie Moyle

Programme Manager Heritage

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Notes the information supplied during the Briefing.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

St Albans Community Centre - Final Floor Plan

14

b

Email to St Albans Community Facility Working Party re Final Floor Plan Design

15

 

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

8.        Harewood Road Corridor Study Findings and Recommendations

Reference:

18/421177

Presenter(s):

Mark Gregory, Transport Network Planner

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Papanui-Innes Community Board to endorse the findings of the Corridor Study.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is being provided to Papanui-Innes Community Board to advise upon findings and recommendations of the corridor study (refer to Harewood Road Corridor Study separately attached).

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by review of the Significance and Engagement Policy (20th June 2017)

2.1.2   There is no Community Consultation required by this project.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

3.1       Endorses the Corridor study and recommended strategies.

3.2       Recommends to the Council that the Corridor study and recommendations be endorsed.

3.3       Specifically notes, and requests that the Council note, the report recommends to:

3.3.1   Adopt a network management based strategy to the Northwest city corridors, addressing service gaps as necessary including the following explicitly, for

·   Harewood Road

·     Address the issue of ‘design speed’

·     Address service gaps affecting pedestrians and cyclists, including safety matters

·     Address the safety concerns at Harewood road / Greers Road intersection

·   Sawyers Arms Road

·     Proceed with route improvements, as included in LTP.

3.3.2   Is aware of and notes, potential changes affecting strategic planning, including major schemes on Johns Road and higher industrial development rates in the west of the corridor: though these are considered lower probability outcomes at this stage.

3.3.3   Notes the LTP makes provision for a network-based approach to the Northwest, and that continuing support of specific LTP schemes is strongly recommended.

 

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       The corridor study has been undertaken in conjunction with a broader area study, in order to identify a network management plan for the future.

4.2       The study considers:

4.2.1   Crash safety and treatment priority analysis for all transport modes

4.2.2   Movement demands and efficiency for all transport modes

4.2.3   Overall provision for all modes

4.2.4   Predicted changes to network demands, based on different future options

4.2.5   Extent to which current corridor design and operations are ‘fit for future’

4.2.6   Extent to which draft LTP is likely to address future needs; and identification of specific future scheme design requirements

4.2.7   Recommended resolutions to above problems, including a broader network management perspective

4.3       For each point raised above, the key conclusions:

4.3.1   Crash safety and treatment priority analysis for all transport modes:

·   With the exception of pedestrian and cyclist crashes at Harewood Road / Greers Road,   the crash history of the corridor is not particularly high when measured against the whole of the city.

·   The majority of crashes are occurring at intersections and chiefly include drivers failing to give way in priority situations

·   The intersection of Harewood Road / Greers Road has the highest corridor ranking in city wide crash analysis (placed at 21st), with specific crash problems including:

·     An especially high number of crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists

·     Right turn movements from Greers Road (from north) failing to give way to opposing movements from the south

·     The Major cycle Route (MCR) project has capacity to improve the cyclists and pedestrian related crashes; the right turn crashes will likely reduce too as a consequence of falling vehicle demands following wider network improvements (through LTP)

·   Speeding is a problem in the corridor, particularly further west, and this is likely to impact upon safety in the future.

·   The intersection of Harewood / Gardiners / Breens Roads  has been reviewed, in response to requests for significant intervention, and the study concludes that:

·     There is a crash pattern at this location,

·     There was a spike in crashes, coinciding with the route being used as a diversion during transformative works on State Highway 1 (Johns Road), and since this time, the crash route has dropped from six crashes in 2014 to two crashes in the past three years.

·     The severity of crashes is low.

·     The intersection ranks as 62nd worst in the CCC network and 81st in the total network (including NZTA) and is therefore not recommended as a priority for safety works.

·     There would be no business case to support signals at the intersection. It is expected that the underlying crash factors can be addressed for a small fraction of the cost of signals.

·   For the corridor as a whole, vehicle demands are forecast to reduce which could result in fewer crashes, but if the matter of speed is not addressed crash outcomes could become more severe over time. Speeding is heavily influenced by the current road layout which includes wider lanes and geometry of a higher ‘design speed’ than the posted speed limit.

4.3.2   Movement demands and efficiency for all transport modes

·   The busiest intersection is Harewood Road / Greers Road. The worst movements are the Greers Road northbound movement (traffic approaching from the south), having the narrowest approach with the least number of traffic lanes; and the opposing right turn from Greers (from Northcote) west in Harewood (towards Bishopdale)

·   The two movements above as well as being most delayed are also noted as having the highest crash rate

·   The crashes do not occur during the AM peak when a right turn filter arrow runs. However, to run this arrow throughout the day would be to exacerbate delays affecting the opposing Greers Road northbound movement.

·   Queues can be observed on approaches to Harewood Road, most notably Farrington Avenue and Wooldridge Road; however, this is occurring for short periods within the day, mostly between 1700 and 1730 hours. Operations are expected to improve in the future.

4.3.3   Overall provision for all modes

·   There is an over provision of capacity for general traffic through much of the corridor, with particularly low flows observed for a two lane divided road. This results in speeding issues and marginalisation of non-motorised users.

·   Cycle facilities are inconsistent through the corridor, with extensive sections offering no facilities at all. Negotiating intersections can be difficult, for example the cycle lane around the roundabout carries cyclists through a middle of a conflict point. The intersection with Greers Road has a particularly high number of rashes involving cyclists.

·   Pedestrian facilities are provided alongside the roads, however alignment of crossings  (for example, location of the crossings of Harewood Road at Breens Road)

4.3.4   Predicted changes to network demands, based on different future options

·   The modelled outcome for the corridor is for a reduction in demand, with an increase in demands on Sawyers Arms Road. This has been found where:

·     LTP schemes for the Sawyers Arms Road – Northcote Road corridor increase capacity and the attractiveness of Sawyers Arms Road

·     A further decrease on Harewood Road is predicted to occur following the MCR scheme

·     A significant reduction would occur if the NZTA proceed with the Grade separation scheme of State Highway 1 / Sawyers Arms Road (as currently listed in the Land Transport Plan (albeit with a lower priority rating).

·   The decreases in demand will result in:

·     A decrease in delays at the Bishopdale ‘roundabout’

·     Reduction in the number of ‘car on car’ crashes in the corridor, simply because the exposure to risk will reduce as traffic demands fall.

·     Increase ‘speeding’, as less traffic reduces impediments to travelling at faster speeds

·   Changes to the strategic planning context:

·     Development of the rezoned industrial land (of up to 50 Hectares) west of Wooldridge Road is not currently forecast to occur at a rapid rate. However, if it does then the effects of development traffic are not anticipated to change the overall conclusions.

·     There is a scheme in the Regional Land Transport Plan, which includes major upgrades to the Johns Road / Sawyers Arms Road roundabout (and most likely include the Harewood Road roundabout as well) which would result in a further reduction in vehicle demands on Harewood Road to that currently forecast. However, this scheme has a low priority ranking, and would be considered unlikely to proceed at this stage.

·     The Council should be advised that if both the NZTA scheme and rapid development of the rezoned industrial land should occur, then there would be more significant effects on the Council network, due to the impact of adding more traffic to a situation that would include reducing access to and from the Johns Road via Harewood Road. Such a strategy would include providing an improved connection from Harewood Road (around Wooldridge Road) to Sawyers Arms Road. However, this can be considered a low likelihood scenario at this stage.

4.3.5   Extent to which corridor is ‘fit for future’

·   Overall, road layouts are for a higher design speed and cater for greater demands than those observed and predicted. This is likely to result in safety concerns moving forward and greater marginalisation of pedestrians and cyclists. Level of service for pedestrians and cyclists is low.

·   Specific matters include:

·     Road layout including some geometry that enables / encourages speeding

·     Safety concerns at Greers Road / Harewood Road intersection (ranked 21st most hazardous intersection in Christchurch)

·     A corridor wide level of service issue affecting cyclists

·     Stanleys Road will potentially be relied upon to serve access to a new employment site (47Ha of land rezoned from rural to Business Park through the District Plan Review)

·     The unlikely issues of NZTA scheme at Sawyers Arms Road, coinciding with a rapid rate of development of the rezoned industrial land.

4.3.6   Extent to which the draft LTP is likely to respond well to future needs and identification of specific future scheme requirements

·   The following schemes are included in the draft LTP, and with funding allocated:

·     Wheels to Wings Major Cycle Route (MCR) (Section 2, 2025 – 2029)

·     Intersection improvement: Greers / Northcote / Sawyers Arms Road (2026 – 2029)

·   The following schemes are included in the draft LTP, with no funding allocated:

·     Intersection improvement: Greers / Harewood

·     Intersection improvement: Harewood / Stanleys

·     Intersection improvement: Harewood / Wooldridge

·   The MCR is the most significant project on Harewood Road, and has capacity to:

·     Improve upon the ‘design speed’ issue of the corridor

·   The Greers / Harewood intersection will be traversed by the MCR, and the MCR scheme could address the current operational challenges at the intersection, including:

·     Reducing the crashes affecting cyclists and pedestrians by means of improving alignment and increasing conspicuousness

·     Indirectly improve efficiency of Greers Road: following the MCR, demands on Harewood Road are predicted to fall, allowing for greater ‘green time allocation’ to Greers Road movements: potentially increasing capacity without road widening.

·   Indirect effects of the Greers / Northcote / Sawyers Arms road intersection upgrades will include diversion of current right turn (north to west) movements at Harewood Road, thus reducing exposure to the current highest crash movement. (Reallocation of green time in favour of Greers Road would also likely be effective).

·   The District Plan includes an Outline Development Plan (ODP) (Chapter 16, Appendix 16.8.14) which indicates that the intersections of Harewood / Wooldridge and Harewood / Stanleys require improvement. These could potentially be developer funded, however this would not extend to the widening of Stanleys Road as well.

·   There is no provision in the LTP to address effects of rapid industrial development alongside NZTA Sawyers Arms Road intersection scheme, (e.g. an improved road connection to Sawyers Arms Road); however, this is considered a low probability scenario at this stage

·   Therefore, it is recommended that the LTP mostly addresses corridor issues, but that additional monies may be needed in the future to address Stanleys Road, if significant take up occurs at the rezoned business parkland.

4.3.7   Recommended resolutions to above problems, including a broader network management perspective

The Harewood Road corridor should be addressed as part of a broader network based strategy. Such a strategy includes provision of high quality connections for all users, which involves prioritising different models within different corridors. For the northwest of the City, this is achievable by providing:

·     A quality corridor for general traffic in Sawyers Arms Road. The LTP is making provision for a safer, higher capacity corridor, providing a quality connection within the strategic road network.

·     A quality corridor for cyclists and local access in Harewood Road. The MCR scheme can also address the ‘design speed’ issue currently affecting the corridor.

·   Through detailed investigation, the LTP projects have capability to address specific corridor issues and service gaps. Although the LTP line item of Greers / Harewood is unfunded, the MCR will make changes to the intersection that can both directly and indirectly improve safety.

·   A ‘joined up’ outcome for the network can be achieved through the current proposed LTP.

·   Note in section 4.3.6 the ‘indirect’ benefits of schemes on current operations.

·   In the unlikely event that the NZTA proceed with the Sawyers Arms Road scheme (noting again that this scheme is given a low priority ranking in the Regional Land Transport Plan) then the likely rate of industrial development should be reviewed and a strategy developed as necessary. (See section 4.3.4).

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       On 20th June 2017, the Council requested that a corridor study be undertaken for Harewood Road, in order to identify priorities for intersection improvements and renewals works.

·   The Corridor study has been prepared, engaging with:

·     NZTA crash data base (‘Crash Analysis System’) data and ‘KiwiRAP’ analysis of safety priority

·     The modelling of the corridor within the Council’s city wide traffic model (‘CAST’), including several scenarios from ‘Do nothing’, including the (current) draft LTP schemes and including possible but unlikely changes such as major improvements at Johns Road / Sawyers Arms Road.

·     The testing of more detailed scheme options

·     Several site visits, including traversing the corridor as a driver, pedestrian and cyclist.

·   A seminar was held on 5th March for the combined ITE Committee, Papanui-Innes Community Board and Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board including a progress report, and also a presentation given by the Major Cycle Route team.

·   Following concerns raised regarding the safety of Harewood/Gardiners/Breens intersection, an interim scheme is being developed (separate to the Corridor study).

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

 

Signatories

Author

Mark Gregory - Transport Network Planner

Approved By

Richard Holland - Team Leader Asset Planning

Lynette Ellis - Manager Planning and Delivery Transport

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

9.        Canterbury Playcentre Association -  Variation to Lease for Rebuild of Belfast Playcentre

Reference:

18/514098

Presenter(s):

Lisa Barwood, Leasing Consultant

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Papanui-Innes Community Board to approve a variation to the current lease with the Canterbury Playcentre Association (“Playcentre”).  The lease variations are:

1.1.1   A replacement lease plan that shows alterations to the building location and an increased building footprint; and

1.1.2   New building plans showing the proposed building that will replace the one destroyed by fire in 2017

1.2       Additionally approval is sort to remove and replace two trees that need to be removed to accommodate the new building.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report is staff generated at the request of the Association.

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by officers completing an assessment of significance.

·     Low number of people affected and/or with an interest in the rebuild of the playcentre.

·     Low level of community interest already apparent for the proposal or decision.

·     Low level of impact on Council carrying out its roles and functions.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Approves a variation to the lease to reflect the change to the lease plan to the Canterbury Playcentre Association Incorporated,  over that part of Sheldon Park being Section 1 Survey Office Plan 19018 having 955 square meters approximately,  to show the increased building footprint area and approve the rebuild plans for the Belfast Playcentre, subject to:

a.         the approval to the removing of two trees as shown on the site plan in Attachment A and photo in Attachment B-Figure 1, on condition that:

i.          All costs, including planting of replacement trees are met by the Canterbury Playcentre Association.

ii.         Replacement tree species are selected and planted in consultation with Council’s Arborist.

2.         Authorises the Property Consultancy Manager to conclude and administer the terms and conditions of the lease.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Community Facilities

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

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – approve the variation request to permit Playcentre to rebuild  (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – decline the variation request

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Provision of early learning facilities by third parties which meets the Council’s Strong Community Outcomes:

·     People have a sense of connection and participate in their community.

·     People have strong social networks.

·     Services are available locally within the urban areas.

·     People have the information and skills to enable them to participate in society.

·     A new fit for purpose playcentre that meets the Ministry of Education early childhood licensing requirements.

·     Families in the catchment area have a playcentre for their children to learn

4.4       The disadvantages of this option include:

·     A building on a park thereby reducing the available space for outdoor recreational activities (noting, however, that the overall leased area remains the same)

·     Removal of two park trees within the lease area.

 

5.   Context/Background

The Land

5.1       Sheldon Park is located at 710 Main North Road; legal description being Section 2 Survey Office Plan 496436 with an area of 4.9238 hectares more or less being classified as Recreation Reserve.      The lease area for Playcentre within Sheldon Park is Section 1 Survey Office Plan 19018 having 955 square classified as Local Purpose (Community Buildings) Reserve vested in the Christchurch City Council.

The Lease

5.2       The current lease to The Canterbury Play Centre Association (the ‘Association’) dated 28th June 1989 provides for a term of 21 years with a further right of renewal for 21 years. The finial expiry of the current lease is 31 December 2029.

5.3       The building and improvements are owned by the Association.

5.4       The Association contacted staff in October 2017 to say a fire had destroyed their building on Sheldon Park and that they will need to rebuild. They have found a building to move onto the site that can be altered to suit their needs.

Lease Variation - The Rebuild

5.5       The proposed replacement building, as shown in Attachment A, is larger in floor area due to Ministry of Education regulations.  A variation to the lease plan showing the increased building footprint is required.  Attachment A shows an overlay of the current and proposed building footprint.  The original lease plan is in Attachment C.

5.6       Approval of the building plans, as Landlord, does not constitute a regulatory or building consent approval; that is a matter separate to this report.  On approval of the variation, the Association will apply for the necessary building and resource consents.

5.7       The former playcentre has been demolished.

Delegations

5.8       Community Boards have been delegated the power to make decisions as to alterations and/or additions to any building , fence of structure or construction of the same on any land leased by the Council and administered by the Parks Unit to a third party where the lease specifies the requirement of Council (landowner) consent.

5.9       A building or a structure proposed to be installed on a park requires ‘land owner approval’ and is accordance with the lease provisions.

Tree Removal

5.10    The proposed new building location will necessitate the removal of two park trees, a native beech (Nothofagus sp.) and a native Pittosporum sp., that are within the existing lease area (shown on the site plan in Attachment A, and photo in Attachment B-Figure 1).

5.11    The applicant has provided an assessment of the trees from R Hyndman Landscape Architecture Ltd which opines that “… neither are particularly great examples of their variety, with the pittosporum in particular being extremely spindly.” The applicant proposes to replace the two trees with higher quality specimens in an appropriate location that will provide better shade for the children’s play area and higher visual amenity.

5.12    The Council’s Arborist has inspected the trees on site, and had the applicant’s report reviewed by Treetech Ltd, and is of the view that the trees are in fair condition with no indications for removal at this time. The approval of the Community Board is therefore required for their removal.

5.13    The applicant was asked if the proposed position of the new building could be changed to avoid removing the two trees. The applicant’s agent has explained that the Belfast Playcentre Committee is not in a financial position to fund a new rebuild, hence has opted for a relocatable classroom to be fitted out to their requirements and standards. The choice of buildings available was somewhat limited, so the proposed new building has a different footprint to the former building. This, in conjunction with a new veranda facing north, has resulted in the new building occupying the space where the two trees are located. Moving the building position forward would compromise the existing sandpit and outdoor adventure playground, as well as afternoon sun, and re-positioning of the playground equipment would incur considerable additional expense. 

5.14    Council staff have considered the site and are of the view that the playground equipment would be compromised by changing the building location within the lease area, and this would also likely require the removal of another park tree.

5.15    The option of an increase in the applicant’s total lease area to accommodate both the building and the trees was also considered by staff. The presence of several other park structures and facilities in the immediate surrounding area, along with the constraints of the required underlying classification of Local Purpose (Community Buildings) Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977, means that this is not feasible. The surrounding park environment has many mature trees that will aid in mitigating any loss of landscape amenity resulting from the removal of the two trees and the period of time needed for the young replacement trees to mature. (Refer to park photo in Attachment B-Figure 2).

5.16    On balance, staff believe that there are no reasonable alternative options that enable the Belfast Playcentre to rebuild their facility and avoid the removal of the two park trees. Therefore staff are recommending that the trees be removed, and that replacement tree species are selected and planted in consultation with Council’s Arborist, with all costs being met by the applicant.  A copy of the tree assessment completed on behalf of the Belfast Playcentre is found in Attachment E.  A copy of the Council’s internal tree assessment is found in Attachment F.

 

Factors to Consider

5.17    In accordance with the Parks Handbook 2018 Codes of Practice, a number of factors are considered when approving plans for new buildings on parks or reserves:

5.17.1 A lease is in place for the occupation of the land

5.17.2 The building does not unduly limit outdoor recreational use of the park;

5.17.3 No nuisance is caused to neighbouring properties by the building or activities associated with the use of the building or structure, including vehicle movements;

5.17.4 The amenity value and physical features of the park are not compromised;

5.17.5 Full account is taken of servicing requirements, eg sewer, stormwater, power, telephone, water supply, parking and vehicle access;

5.17.6 Buildings must be architecturally designed and sympathetic to the environment and vandal proof if possible;

5.17.7 Buildings should be multi-use and available for community use as well;

5.17.8 Buildings must have related car parking as required under the City Plan;

5.17.9 Buildings shall be appropriately landscaped.

5.18    The above factors have been taken into consideration and meet the Council’s desired outcomes.  The relocated building will undergo a makeover to refresh the exterior appearance; new landscaping will be undertaken to enhance the street appeal; replacement trees will be planted to provide greater amenity.

6.   Option 1 – Approve variation request for rebuild (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Approve variation to allow Canterbury Playcentre Association Incorporated to rebuild the  Belfast playcentre within the current leased area

Significance

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

6.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not required.

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

6.5       The Playcentre and their families are specifically affected by this option due to the need to provide facilities from which to participate in their activities.  Their views are supportive of this request.

6.6       Public advertising of the intention to vary the lease is not required under the Reserves Act 1977 as the total lease area and use of the land has not changed.

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 – there is no cost to Council other than staff time which is budgeted for.

6.9       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – costs to be met by the Playcentre

6.10    Funding source – not applicable

Legal Implications

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

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

6.13    The legal consideration is the Reserves Act 1977. The preparation of the Deed of Variation is a routine matter on which the legal situation is well known and settled.

Risks and Mitigations  

6.14    There is a risk the Playcentre ceases to operate caused by a lack of members.  This may result in the Playcentre abandoning the improvements thereby causing Council to have to remove the building and remediate the land. This will result in extra cost to the Council.

6.14.1 Residual risk rating: The residual rating of the risk is low.

6.14.2 Treatment:  the leases have provisions to cover this by stating the Playcentre must remove all improvements and make good the land.

Implementation

6.15    Implementation dependencies - Approval by Community Board

6.16    Implementation timeframe – Completion following Board resolution – lease documentation - one month

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.17    The advantages of this option include:

·   Provision of early learning facilities by third parties which meets the Council’s Strong Community Outcomes:

·     People have a sense of connection and participate in their community.

·     People have strong social networks.

·     Services are available locally within the urban areas.

·     People have the information and skills to enable them to participate in society.

·   A new fit for purpose playcentre that meets the Ministry of Education early childhood licensing requirements.

·   Families in the catchment area have a playcentre for their children to learn

6.18    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   A building on a park thereby reducing the available space for outdoor recreational activities.

·   Removal of two park trees within the lease area.

7.   Option 2 – Decline Variation Request

Option Description

7.1       Decline variation to rebuild the playcentre and request the Association clears the land and makes good.

Significance

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

7.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are not required.

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

7.5       The Playcentre and their families are specifically affected by this option due to the need to provide preschool education in the Belfast area.  Their views are not supportive of this option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

7.6.1   Inconsistency – does not support Council’s Long Term Plan (2018 – 2028)

7.6.2   Reason for inconsistency – the LTP provides a level of service to Identify and promote community facilities provided by third parties

7.6.3   Amendment necessary – changes to the LTP that would not support overall customer satisfaction with community facilities provided by a third party.

Financial Implications

7.7       Cost of Implementation – no cost to Council

7.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – not applicable

7.9       Funding source – not applicable

Legal Implications

7.10    There is not 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

Risks and Mitigations  

7.12    There is a risk by not approving the variation to the Community Board from not achieving levels of service set out by Council.

7.13    Risk reputational/image caused by Community Board not approving a variation to the lease. This may result in minor negative short term coverage to the Community Board.

7.13.1 Residual risk rating: The residual rating of the risk is medium.

7.13.2 Treatment:  The Community Board would be required to tolerate the risk and impact to the Playcentre in not approving the variation to the lease.

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies  - Community Board resolution

7.15    Implementation timeframe – the Playcentre lease doesn’t expire until 2029; officers would need to negotiate a plan with the Association to remove all remaining improvements from the site.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   There are no discernible advantages to this option

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   The Playcentre cannot go ahead with a new building after their building was burnt down thereby disadvantaging members and families in the Belfast area.  A copy of the proposed lease plan is shown in Attachment D.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Belfast Playcentre Building Plans

33

b

Sheldon Park - photo of trees proposed for removal

35

c

Belfast Playcentre - Current Lease Plan

36

d

Proposed Lease Plan

37

e

Tree Assessment - Simplexity Builders - Site Assessment

38

f

CCC Internal Tree Assessment

39

 

 

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

Lisa Barwood - Leasing Consultant

Joanne Walton - Policy Advisor

Approved By

Kathy Jarden - Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Bruce Rendall - Head of Facilities, Property & Planning

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizen and Community

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

 

10.    Papanui-Innes Community Board - Proposed Road Names - Spring Grove Subdivision

Reference:

18/1027276

Presenter(s):

Paul Lowe, Principal Advisor Resource Consents

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board to consider and approve the proposed road names arising from one local subdivision.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated resulting from naming request from the subdivision developer.

1.3       This report relates to the Spring Grove Subdivision, 30 William Nicholls Road and 21 Blakes Road.

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and/or with an interest.

2.1.2   Due to the assessment of low significance, no further community engagement and consultation is required.

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board resolves to approve the following new road names:

1.         Spring Grove Stage 3 (RMA/2018/212), 30 William Nicholls Road and 21 Blakes Road

·        Borderdale Street

·        Perendale Street

·        Romney Drive

 

4.   Background

4.1       Introduction

4.1.1   Road naming requests have been submitted by the developer for the Spring Grove Stage 3 (RMA/2018/212) subdivision.

4.1.2   The recommended road and/or right-of-way names have been checked against existing road names in Christchurch and bordering districts, for duplication, alternative spellings, or other similarities in spelling or pronunciation to avoid the potential for confusion. The recommended names are considered sufficiently different to existing road names.

4.1.3   The recommended road and/or right-of-way names have been checked against the Council’s Roads and Right-of-Way Naming Policy dated 2 November 1993. The recommended names are considered to be consistent with this policy.

4.1.4   The recommended road and/or right-of-way names and types have been checked against the Australian and New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4819:2011 Rural and urban addressing. The recommended names are considered to be consistent with this Standard unless otherwise stated below.

4.1.5   Under the Roads and Right-of-Way Naming Policy the names considered must be requested by the developer. There is not an ability to consider alternative names without first checking whether there are any duplications or similarities with other road and right-of-way names.

4.1.6   Consultation has been undertaken with Land Information New Zealand who have raised no concerns with the proposed road names.

4.1.7   The requests have been accompanied by an explanation of the background to the names which are summarised below and are included in attachment B.

4.2       Spring Grove (RMA/2018/212)

4.2.1   Road names have been requested by Spring Grove Land Limited for roads at the Spring Grove subdivision in Belfast which is bounded by Blakes Road, Thompsons Road and William Nicholls Drive.

4.2.2   Stages 1 and 2 of Spring Grove Subdivision had road names after historic land owners. Given the scale of development it is proposed that several road name themes are established.

4.2.3   At the previous Community Board meeting it was recommended that the names used were to be in relation to the theme sheep breeds. As there will be further roads to be named within the subdivision it would be appropriate to use the other road name themes as pre below;

·        Historical land and business owners (this theme was used for Stages 1-2)

·        Ka Putahi Stream ecology

·        Animal breeds that likely contributed to the meat processing plant

·        The names of plants being installed during the development works

4.2.4   The names that are all sheep breeds which are linked to the site via the historical connection to the meat processing plant  are:

·    Borderdale Street

·    Coopworth Lane

·    Romney Drive

·    Perendale Street

·    Arapawa Road

·    Texel Crescent

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Spring Grove Plan

52

b

RMA/2018/212 Background to Proposed Names

53

 

 

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

Laura Braddick - Senior Resource Consents Support Officer

Paul Lowe - Principal Advisor Resource Consents

Approved By

John Higgins - Head of Resource Consents

Leonie Rae - General Manager Consenting and Compliance

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

11.    Prestons Road Proposed P3 Parking Restrictions

Reference:

18/1000887

Presenter(s):

Wayne Anisy – Traffic Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board to approve the installation of P3 Parking restrictions on Prestons Road in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to requests from Redwood Primary School representatives concerned with the congestion on Prestons Road around school drop off and pick up times.

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 Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board approves:

1.         That under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of Prestons Road as indicated in the attached drawing TG133410 Issue 1, dated 29/8/2018, is reserved as a parking place for any vehicles, subject to the following restriction: the maximum time for parking of any vehicle is three minutes between the hours of 8.15am to 9.15am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days only.

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

3.         That these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This 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 - Install P3 Parking 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:

·     It provides a pick up/drop off area for parents and caregivers close to the school entrance.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Removes approximately nine unrestricted car parking spaces during the times stated on the proposal.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       Council has received requests from Redwood School representatives to look into the parking congestion issues being experienced on Prestons Road around school drop off and pick up times. Following site visits it is proposed to install a P3 parking restriction either side of the school crossing point. The reason this proposal has been initiated is that the school require a safe area for parents/caregivers to park and drop off/pick up children. The creation of a short term parking restriction will provide turnover of parking, maximising the ability for a car park in close proximity to the school during peak arrival/departure periods. The proposed P3 restriction area times will be from 8:15am to 9:15am and 2:30pm to 3:30pm, these restrictions will apply on school days only so residents or resident visitors parking will still available between these times, in the evenings and during school holidays.

5.2       In most situations where a school would request a P3 parking restriction there would be no further consultation as the restriction area would generally only affect the school’s frontage. However, for this proposal the P3 areas are in front of the residential frontages either side of the school’s current No Stopping restrictions which are required as part of the sightline distances for the Kea crossing.

5.3       Consultation was carried out with the property owners either side of the school in September with a total of eight letters delivered to residents and four letters posted to absentee owners. There were no objections to the proposal.

6.   Option 1 - Install P3 Parking Restrictions (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Install P3 Parking restrictions on Prestons Road in accordance with Attachment A. These restrictions are to apply between the hours of 8.15am to 9.15am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days only.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is low and is consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance includes the consultation with the owner and occupier of any property likely to be injuriously affected by the option.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       Consultation was carried out with the property owners either side of the school in September with a total of eight letters delivered to residents and four letters posted to absentee owners. There were no objections to the proposal.

6.5       The Team Leader 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 - $1,000 for the installation of traffic controls, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

6.8       Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

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

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 Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

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

Risks and Mitigations

6.13    There are no known risks associated with this option.

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

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

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   It provides a pick up/drop off area for parents and caregivers close to the school entrance.

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Removes approximately nine unrestricted car parking spaces during the times stated on the proposal.

7.   Option 2 - Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing parking and markings.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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 school’s requests for improvement to the congestion at pick up and drop off times.

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 - $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0

7.8       Funding source – Existing staff budgets.

Legal Implications

7.9       There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this option.

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:

·   Has no impact on unrestricted street parking.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not address the congestion issues being experienced on Prestons Road during school drop off and pick up times.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

TG133410-Prestons Road P3 Diagram for Board Report

62

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

 

Signatories

Author

Wayne Anisy - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

12.    Momorangi Crescent Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

Reference:

18/1002461

Presenter(s):

Wayne Anisy-Traffic Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board to approve the installation of 'No Stopping' restrictions on Momorangi Crescent in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to requests from local residents to improve safety and visibility around the 90-degree bends situated on Momorangi Crescent.

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 Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board approves:

1.         That under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the parts of Momorangi Crescent as indicated in the attached drawing TG133430 Issue 1, dated 17/9/2018.

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

3.         That these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This 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 - Install No Stopping Restrictions on Momorangi Crescent in accordance with Attachment A. (preferred option)

·     Option 2 - Do Nothing

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Reduces the risk of a crash by improving sightlines around the 90-degree bends situated on Momorangi Crescent.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Removes un-restricted car parking around all inside bends.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       There have been recent concerns raised by residents of Momorangi Crescent regarding the limited visibility around the 90-degree bends in this street. Following site investigations, it was identified that due to a road width of approximately 7.2 metres around these bends, when vehicles were parked on both sides of the road it creates a blind, one-way pinch point when vehicles were travelling in both directions.

5.2       No Stopping lines on the inside curve of the bends while retaining parking on the outside curves has been identified as a potential solution to the problem. This will still allow residents and their visitors a place to park in close proximity to their properties if needed.

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

Option Description

6.1       Install No Stopping Restrictions on Momorangi Crescent 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.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance includes the consultation with the owner and occupier of any property likely to be injuriously affected by the option.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       Consultation was carried out in September 2018. Affected property owners and residents were advised of the recommended option by way of letter drop and door knock. Residents fully support this option.

6.5       The Team Leader 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 - $250 for the installation of traffic controls, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

6.8       Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

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

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 Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

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

Risks and Mitigations

6.13    There are no risks associated with this option.

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

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

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Reduces the risk of a crash by improving sightlines around the 90-degree bends on Momorangi Crescent.

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Removes unrestricted car parking around all inside bends.

7.   Option 2 - Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing 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 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 requests from local residents to improve safety and visibility around the 90-degree bends situated on Momorangi Crescent.

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 - $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0

7.8       Funding source – Existing staff budgets.

Legal Implications

7.9       There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this option.

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:

·   Has no impact on unrestricted street parking.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not address the request to improve safety and visibility at this location therefore the safety risk is not dealt with.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

TG133430-Momorangi Crescent No Stopping Diagram for Board Report

67

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

 

Signatories

Author

Wayne Anisy - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

13.    Tuckers Road Proposed P3 Parking Restrictions

Reference:

18/1017467

Presenter(s):

Wayne Anisy – Traffic Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board to approve the installation of P3 parking restrictions on Tuckers Road in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to requests from Northcote Primary School representatives concerned with the congestion on Tuckers Road around school drop off and pick up times.

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 Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board approves:

1.         That under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of Tuckers Road as indicated in the attached drawing TG133438 Issue 1, dated 28/9/2018, is reserved as a parking place for any vehicles, subject to the following restriction: the maximum time for parking of any vehicle is three minutes between the hours of 8.15am to 9.15am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days only.

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

3.         That these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This 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 - Install P3 Parking Restrictions in accordance with Attachment A. (preferred option).

·     Option 2 - Do Nothing.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     It provides a pick up/drop off area for parents and caregivers on Tuckers Road, close to the school entrance.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Drivers wanting to park for longer periods have to park elsewhere at pick up and drop off times. 

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       Representatives of Northcote Primary School have approached Council with a request to look into the congestion issues being experienced on Tuckers Road during school drop off and pick up times.  The school requires a safe area for parents/caregivers to park and pick up/drop off children.

5.2       Staff visited the site and discussed the issues with the school’s representatives.  Following this visit the proposal was to install a P3 parking restriction area. The creation of a short term parking restriction will provide turnover of parking, maximising the ability for approximately seven car park spaces in close proximity to the school during peak arrival/departure periods.  This type of parking management is common outside most school frontages.

6.   Option 1 - Install P3 Parking Restrictions (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Install P3 parking restrictions on Tuckers Road in accordance with Attachment A. These restrictions are to apply between the hours of 8.15am to 9.15am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days only.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is low and is consistent with section 2 of this report.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance includes the consultation with the owner and occupier of any property likely to be injuriously affected by the option.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       The school requested and is supportive of this option. 

6.5       While on site, staff did consult with the dental centre which is on the school grounds and has an off-street car parking area for their customers.

6.6       There has been no further consultation regarding this option as this was a direct request from the school and does not affect any other residential or business frontage.

6.7       The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports this option.

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 - $1,000 for the installation of traffic controls, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report.

6.10    Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

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

Legal Implications

6.12    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.

6.13    The Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.14    The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.15    There are no known risks associated with this option.

Implementation

6.16    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

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

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.18    The advantages of this option include:

·   It provides a pick up/drop off area for parents and caregivers on Tuckers Road, close to the school entrance.

6.19    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Removes approximately seven unrestricted car parking spaces during the times stated on the proposal. Investigations have identified that there would be sufficient available parking space near the school grounds which will accommodate the displacement of vehicles that were previously parking close to the school entrance for any un-restricted length of time.

7.   Option 2 - Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing parking and markings.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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 school’s requests for improvement to the congestion on Tuckers Road, near the school entrance at pick up and drop off times.

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 - $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0.

7.8       Funding source – Existing staff budgets.

Legal Implications

7.9       There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this option.

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:

·   Has no impact on unrestricted street parking.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not address the congestion issues being experienced on Tuckers Road, close to the school entrance during school drop off and pick up times.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

TG133438-Tuckers Road P3 Diagram for Board Report

73

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

 

Signatories

Author

Wayne Anisy - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

14.    Proposed Bus Stop Improvement at 293 Hills Road

Reference:

18/1023539

Presenter(s):

Wayne Anisy – Traffic Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board to approve the installation of Bus Stop markings and associated No Stopping restrictions at the existing bus stop adjacent to 293 Hills Road, in accordance with Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to recent and previous customer service requests from local residents who are frequent users of the bus stop.

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 Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board approves:

1.         That under clauses 7 and 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of Hills Road as indicated in the attached drawing TG133426 Issue 1, dated 1/10/2018, is reserved as a marked Bus Stop including all associated No Stopping restrictions.

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

3.         That these resolutions take effect when there is evidence that 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 - Install Bus Stop markings and associated 'No Stopping' restrictions at the existing Bus Stop location on Hills Road in accordance with Attachments A and B. (preferred option).

·     Option 2 - Do Nothing.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Addresses the concerns raised in the customer service request relating to the accessibility, comfort and convenience for existing users of the bus stop.

·     Increases the visibility and legibility of public transport.

·     Bus stop road markings adhere to the recommended bus stop road markings as indicated in the Christchurch City Bus Stop Guidelines (2009).  Adherence to the recommended bus stop length improves passenger accessibility, as buses have sufficient space to straighten and stop parallel to the kerb.

·     Improved clear line of sight between bus drivers and public transport customers waiting at the bus stop.  This improves road safety as the bus driver has more time to safely plan for the bus to stop at the bus stop, rather than making an abrupt stop which reduces the reaction time of drivers traveling behind the bus.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Removes approximately two on-street parking spaces.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       In August 2018, Council received a customer service request from a local resident and frequent user of the existing Hills Road bus stop adjacent to 293 Hills Road to investigate and consider upgrading the bus stop location. After speaking with the resident, staff determined the reason for the request is that on several occasions passengers were not being picked up due to vehicles being parked on the stop, preventing the bus from being able to pull over.

5.2       Staff have observed vehicles were parking on the stop on several occasions. This was unnecessary as there is sufficient on-street parking available either side of the existing bus stop location. With any unmarked bus stop the law is that no vehicle is to park within six metres either side of the bus stop sign.   Due to previous and ongoing parking issues either side of the stop it has now become necessary to have the stop formally marked.

5.3       Consultation was carried out in September 2018. Affected property owners and residents were advised of the proposal by email and absentee owners by way of post.

6.   Option 1 - Install Bus Stop markings and No Stopping Restrictions (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Install Bus Stop markings and associated 'No Stopping' restrictions at the existing Bus Stop location on Hills 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.  Engagement requirements for this level of significance includes the consultation with the owner and occupier of any property likely to be injuriously affected by the option.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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       Affected property owners and residents were consulted on this option by email and post. At the time this report was prepared there were no objections.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.1       Staff professional services costs - $1,400, which covers planning, consultation and approval.

6.2       Cost of Implementation - The estimated cost of this proposal is about $3,200, which includes the cost of installing a seat at the bus stop.

6.3       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - Transport and City Streets, Operations Expenditure budget, includes maintenance of bus stop infrastructure, as and when it is needed.

6.4       Funding source - Traffic Operations, Capital Expenditure budget for bus stop installation.

Legal Implications

6.5       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.

6.6       The Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.  The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the resolution of stopping restrictions and traffic control devices.

6.7       The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with traffic control devices must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Risks and Mitigations

6.8       There are no known risks associated with this option.

Implementation

6.9       Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

6.10    Implementation timeframe - The timeframe for implementation is dependent on the contractor’s workload, but should occur within three months of the proposed parking restriction resolutions being approved.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.11    The advantages of this option include:

·   Addresses the concerns raised in the customer service request relating to the accessibility, comfort and convenience for existing users of the bus stop.

·   Increases the visibility and legibility of public transport.

·   Bus stop road markings adhere to the recommended bus stop road markings as indicated in the Christchurch City Bus Stop Guidelines (2009).  Adherence to the recommended bus stop length improves passenger accessibility, as buses have sufficient space to straighten and stop parallel to the kerb.

·   Improved clear line of sight between bus drivers and public transport customers waiting at the bus stop.  This improves road safety as the bus driver has more time to safely plan for the bus to stop at the bus stop, rather than making an abrupt stop which reduces the reaction time of drivers traveling behind the bus.

6.12    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Removes approximately two on-street parking spaces.

7.   Option 2 - Do Nothing

Option Description

7.1       Retain existing parking and markings.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to 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 community requests to improve accessibility, visibility and legibility to the existing bus stop location.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

7.5.1   Inconsistency – the bus stop layout does not meet the recommendations of the Christchurch City Council Bus Stop Guidelines (2009).

7.5.2   Reason for inconsistency – As above.

7.5.3   Amendment necessary – Adopt Option 1. 

Financial Implications

7.6       Cost of Implementation - $1,400 for consultation and the preparation of this report.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0.

7.8       Funding source – Existing staff budgets.

Legal Implications

7.9       There is not a legal context, issue or implication relevant to this option.

Risks and Mitigations

7.10    There are no known risks associated with this option.

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:

·   Has no impact on unrestricted street parking.

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Does not address the concerns raised in the customer service requests relating to the accessibility, visibility and legibility to the existing stop location.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Hills Road Bus Stop Satellite View

80

b

Hills Road Bus Stop - Road view

81

 

 

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

Wayne Anisy - Traffic Engineer

Brenda O'Donoghue - Passenger Transport Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

15.    Papanui-Innes Community Board Area Report - October 2018

Reference:

18/1063051

Presenter(s):

Elizabeth Hovell, Community Board Advisor

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

This report provides information on initiatives and issues current within the Community Board area, to provide the Board with a strategic overview and inform sound decision making.

2.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board:

1.         Receive the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board Area Report for October 2018.

2.         Endorse the final floor design for the rebuild of the St Albans Community Centre agreed upon by the St Alban’s Community Facility Working Party and refer the design to staff to progress the project.

 

3.   Community Board Activities and Forward Planning

3.1       Memos/Information/Advice to the Board

3.1.1   Information sent to the Board

·     CNC Alliance: QEII Project Update (circulated 5 October 2018)

·     CNC Alliance: Western Belfast Bypass (WBB) (circulated 8 October 2018)

·     CNC Alliance: WBB circulation error (circulated 9 October 2018)

·     CNC Alliance: QEII Diversion Update (circulated 11 October 2018)

·     Heritage – Medway Footbridge Memorandum (circulated 11 October 2018)

·     Richmond Roading Update (circulated 16 October 2018)

·     Start Work Notice: Petrie/Randall Sts and Stapletons Rd (circulated 18 October 2018)

·     CNC Alliance: Waimakariri Bridge contraflow Chaneys closure (circulated 19 October 2018)

3.1.2   Christchurch Events App

Download this free app and keep up to date with what’s going on in Christchurch.

The app is available for iOS devices and Android devices.

Discover what’s going on in our great city! From gigs to exhibitions, sports events to local markets, there's heaps going on and the Christchurch Events app will help you find it.

Enjoy easy, fast access to real-time information on awesome events in Christchurch.

Features

•     See what's coming up

•     Find an event near you by using the interactive map

•     Search by date, category or price

•     Find out about changes and cancellations

•     Subscribe to the events that interest you.

3.2       Board area Consultations/Engagement/Submission opportunities

3.2.1   Draft Heritage Strategy (10 Oct – 12 Nov 2018)

The purpose of the Heritage Strategy is to weave together, strengthen and provide for all aspects of heritage and taonga tuku iho (heritage) in Christchurch and on Banks Peninsula. It will assist the Council in partnership with the respective papatipu rūnanga and working together with the wider community to better provide for our taonga.  The Council will facilitate the development of a Heritage Charter that acknowledges the value of heritage to the communities of Christchurch and Banks Peninsula. 

3.2.2   Draft QEII Park Master Plan (12 Oct-13 Dec 2018)

The Council have developed a draft master plan for QEII Park.  While some features are already set in stone – including the new $38.6 million Taiora: QEII Recreation and Sport Centre, an area leased to the Christchurch School of Gymnastics (CSG), and the combined Shirley Boys’ High School and Avonside Girls’ High School campus currently being built – a vision for the park’s remaining 36.63 hectares can now be created.

The draft plan proposes a long-term vision for QEII Park, considering opportunities and development priorities.

3.2.3   Earthquake prone buildings (15 Oct - 15 Nov 2018)

Feedback is sought on proposed strategic routes and high pedestrian and vehicular traffic areas in metropolitan Christchurch. These routes and areas will be used to prioritise the repair or demolition of earthquake-prone buildings.

3.2.4   Draft Suburban Parking Policy  (17 Oct - 21 Nov 2018)

Council is reviewing how it manages suburban parking, in particular on-street parking, to help prioritise public space and create safer more friendly people streets.  The Policy is about developing a Christchurch-wide strategy on how to address these competing demands for public space in suburban streets and council car parks. This will then shape how the Council manages parking issues in individual areas where parking issues are identified. 

3.3       Annual Plan and Long Term Plan matters

3.3.1   Annual Plan 2019-20

A seminar with governance staff has been scheduled for early November 2018.

3.3.2   Board Reporting

The Board are asked to consider topics for inclusion in Newsline, the newsletter and the report to the Council.


 

4.   Significant Council Projects in the Board Area

4.1       Strengthening Community Fund Projects

4.1.1   Te Ora Hou (TOH) AGM

The Te Ora Hou AGM was held on site on 23 October 2018. It was a positive night filled with stories of the past year’s achievements and, once again, a celebration of all that TOH continues to do for the youth sector and their whanau.

4.1.2   Neighbourhood Trust

The Liberty Project Webinars will be launched on 13 November at the Papanui Youth Development Trust. The details have been entered into Board member’s diaries.

4.1.3   Neighbourhood Links

The Papanui Baptist Freedom Trust community worker has taken over the Northcote community worker’s role around the running of the Breakfast Club.  

4.2       Other partnerships with the community and organisations

4.2.1   Papanui Business Community group

Local Papanui businesses are meeting regularly at Black and White Coffee Culture to discuss the general Papanui business community. Local staff are working to support the Papanui business community to ensure awareness of local business needs.

4.2.2   Papanui Bush

Staff are working with Papanui High School on a mural for the Bridgestone Reserve. The mural will start in late November when workloads have decreased at the school. Papanui High School is likely to come to the DRF for funding for this project.

Staff are also working with Papanui Heritage to enhance the original black map for the Papanui Bush area so that it can be displayed on the park.

4.3       Community Facilities (updates and future plans)

4.3.1   Redwood Plunket Rooms

Construction continues and completion is aimed for early December 2018.

4.3.2   10 Shirley Road

Staff continue to hold conversations with other council units around the wider Shirley community and future partnerships that would benefit the whole Shirley/Richmond area at this site.

4.3.3   St Albans Community Facility

The St Albans Community Facility Working Party met on 15 October for their last meeting. The Working Party agreed to the amended design and recommended that the Papanui‑Innes Community Board move forward with the project as per the briefing received earlier in this meeting, refer Item 7.

Staff would therefore recommend the following:

“That the Papanui-Innes Community Board endorse the final floor design for the rebuild of the St Albans Community Centre agreed upon by the St Alban’s Community Facility Working Party and refer the design to staff to progress the project.”

 

4.3.4   St Albans Park

  

   August                                                                                    October

St Albans Park has progressed well this month. The lift station chamber is now in place and operational.  All the irrigation and drainage laterals are in situ and operational. 

Sand slitting is almost complete and preparation for the application of the sand surface will commence if the ground conditions are suitable.

Optimistic

Realistic

Pessimistic

November 2018

December 2018

January 2018

 

5.   Community Board Funding Update

5.1       The 2018/19 financial year’s Positive Youth Development and Discretionary Response Funds Balance Sheet is attached (refer Attachment A of this report).

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papanui-Innes Community Board DRF and PYDF Balance Sheet as at 25 October 2018

87

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Christine Lane - Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes

Elizabeth Hovell - Community Board Advisor

Lyssa Aves - Governance Support Officer

Stacey Holbrough - Community Development Advisor

Helen Miles - Community Recreation Advisor

Dane Moir - Community Development Advisor

Sharon Munro - Community Support Officer

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

  


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 


Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board

26 October 2018

 

 

16.  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.