Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū

Banks Peninsula Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Monday 4 February 2019

Time:                                    10am

Venue:                                 Lyttelton Community Boardroom,
25 Canterbury Street, Lyttelton

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Pam Richardson

Jed O'Donoghue

Felix Dawson

Tyrone Fields

Janis Haley

John McLister

Tori Peden

Andrew Turner

 

 

30 January 2019

 

 

 

 

 

Joan Blatchford

Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Lyttelton

941 5643

joan.blatchford@ccc.govt.nz

 

Penelope Goldstone

Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Akaroa

941 5689

penelope.goldstone@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/

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

B       7.       Reserve Management Committee Meeting Minutes................................................. 19

B       8.       Briefing - Orion New Zealand Ltd - Proposed Electricity Upgrade - Lyttelton Tunnel 21

Staff Reports

A       9.       Lyttelton Seafarers Welfare.......................................................................................... 23

C       10.     Pedestrian Improvements - Godley Quay/Voelas Road, Lyttelton........................... 27

C       11.     London Street Lyttelton, Parking Controls................................................................. 51

C       12.     Oxford/Winchester Street Pedestrian Improvements. Additional Parking Space.. 73

C       13.     Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - February 2019............................ 77

 

B       14.     Elected Members’ Information Exchange.................................................................... 94 

 

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

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 Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board meeting held on Monday, 17 December 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

Corsair Bay Maintenance

 

Diana Harrison will speak regarding parks issues in Corsair Bay.

 

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.

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

 

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

6.1

Donna and Martin Richardson will present a petition regarding their lease for the Dark Star Café.  The prayer of the petition states:

 

Sadly we’ve made a family decision to stop trading as Dark Star Café and bar in March 2019.  This petition seeks your support to demand that the Christchurch City Council allow the café building lease to remain in place, until such time as new services are built on the Godley House site, so that new owners can continue to serve the community, visitors & tourist after we finish.

The February 2011 earthquake destroyed Godley House, and the café and bar building was built to provide a temporary business for the Godley House tenants who operated a restaurant, function centre, accommodation and take-away services. This also ensured that the community, and the large number of seasonal visitors, retained a number of food service alternatives to choose from until such time as a replacement venue was built on the Godley House site. Despite the considerable efforts of the local community and the Community Association, there are no immediate Council plans for any new building, and our community still suffers from a lack of hospitality services to offer locals and visitors.

During the summer season there is insufficient hospitality capacity in Diamond Harbour to cater for all the visitors, and removing the café and bar building will almost certainly detrimentally affect the quality of visitor experience, and also remove a social venue that is highly valued by locals year-round.

While there are still two years remaining on the temporary building lease, the Council proposes to cancel the lease in March and remove the café and bar from our community.

Please help us stop this needless loss and sign our petition.

Many thanks, Donna, Martin & Family

 

Staff Recommendation

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board receive the petition and refer it to Property Consultancy Staff for consideration.

 

 

Staff Comment

 

Staff have met with the owners of Dark Star Café (the current lessees) and have listed relevant points as follows:

 

·     The current lease for the Dark Star Café is governed by the Canterbury Earthquake (Resource Management Act Permitted Activities) Order 2011 (the ‘Earthquake Order’) which expired April 2018; the legislation has been extended and expires 30 June 2021.

·     The lease was originally issued in 2012 to provide a temporary use after Godley House was demolished to permit activity post quakes.

·     The lease is for the land only – the tenant owns or leases all buildings and structures.

·     The 9289m2 of land that the buildings sit on is zoned commercial under the Christchurch City District Plan.

·     The land is held as a reserve and is subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

·     The lease is currently holding over on a month to month basis (either party able to give the other, one months’ notice in writing to end).

·     Council would consider (by mutual agreement) an extension of the Lease to 30 June 2021 by issuing approval through a Warrant under the Earthquake Order, and have communicated this to the lessees.

·     A Warrant is personal to the holder and not assignable (transferable).

·     After 30 June 2021 the earthquake legislation ends and thereafter all Council procurement processes, consenting requirements under the Building Act and Resource Management Act as well as the legislation under the Reserves Act would need to be met and the activity would need to comply with the Christchurch City District Plan provisions.

·     Any new lease issued after the export of the earthquake order on 30 June 2021 would need to meet the requirements and regulations.  An options report would be considered by the local Community Board who have the delegation to grant leases on land held as reserves in conjunction with the Reserves Act.

·     The Council’s Parks team need to carry out a public consultation on the future use of the Godley House site.

·     A Reserve Management Plan is required to be developed which is subject to statutory processes.  The Godley House site is not included in the current Stoddart Point Reserve Management Plan.

·     The Community Board has the delegation to grant commercial leases on reserve land for a period of up to 33 years if it benefits the reserve.

·     Parks are yet to consult with the local community on the management plan for this site.

·     The outcome of this public consultation will determine the future use.

·     Council cannot predetermine the outcome prior to the public consultation.  The community and Community Board will indicate what future use they want for this site.

·     Once any requirement for a commercial use (if any) is determined these are effected under the provisions of the Reserves Act.

·     Any new lease would be required to be publically advertised through a Council procurement process ensuring an opportunity for all to participate in an open and transparent process.

 

Summary:

 

The current lessees are permitted to remain on the land until 30 June 2021 by way of the Earthquake Order Legislation.

 

The current lessees need to advise staff if they wish to seek a new warrant extending the current month to month arrangement until 30 June 2021.

 

The Council is unable to offer any certainty on lease tenure for the lessee beyond 30 June 2021.

 

 

The Council would consider an alternative lessee should a purchaser for the business be secured.  Any new purchaser would have to meet the requirements set by Council which includes review of their business plan, financial position, experience, etc.

 

 

As a minimum requirement, any new purchaser would need to commit to the Warrant (Lease) terms and conditions that include among other things, the removal of the buildings and structures at no cost to ratepayers at the end of the warrant expiry being 30 June 2021.

  


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

 

Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū

Banks Peninsula Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Monday 17 December 2018

Time:                                    10am

Venue:                                 Akaroa Boardroom, 78 Rue Lavaud, Akaroa

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Pam Richardson

Jed O'Donoghue

Felix Dawson

Tyrone Fields

Janis Haley

John McLister

Tori Peden

Andrew Turner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joan Blatchford

Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Lyttelton

941 5643

joan.blatchford@ccc.govt.nz

 

Penelope Goldstone

Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Akaroa

941 5689

Penelope.Goldstone@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

 

 

Mihi/Karakia Timatanga: John McLister. 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

Community Board Decision

There were no apologies received for this meeting.

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

 

Pam Richardson declared an interest in Items 5 and 10 and John McLister declared an interest in Item 6.5.1.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00140

Community Board Decision

That the minutes of the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board meeting held on Monday, 12 November 2018 be confirmed.

Jed O'Donoghue/Janis Haley                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

4.   Public Forum

Part B

4.1       Jan Whitehead

Jan Whitehead spoke to the Board regarding the Akaroa Tennis and Netball courts and a proposal to re-establish a multi sports body to redevelop the croquet, tennis and netball area in Akaroa to better fit the needs of the Clubs and the greater Banks Peninsula community.

The Board agreed to pass the information circulated by Ms Whitehead to staff for comment.

 

 

 

 

4.2       Victoria Andrews

Victoria Andrews spoke to the Board regarding the 2017 Marine, River and Lake Facilities Bylaw.  She tabled a number of questions relating to how the cruise ship visits to Akaroa fitted with the bylaw.

The Board agreed to forward Ms Andrews questions, including two additional questions she asked, to staff for reply:

·    How did the Council decide that only one cruise ship per day will access the new Lyttelton cruise ship terminal yet Akaroa must accept between 2-4 ships with its inadequate infrastructure?

·    Lyttelton currently hosts 14-20 cruise ships so why can more not be directed to Lyttelton to take pressure off Akaroa in the 2019-2020 season?

·    Will the Council equalise wharf fees between Lyttelton and Akaroa through the upcoming Annual Plan/Long Term Plan process?

·    What is the safe carrying capacity of the wharf on a daily basis? Where is the evidence to support increased use (8,754 in 2010-2011; 278,080 in 2018-2019) and that the Council has undertaken due diligence with regard to public health and safety on and around the wharf and through the town?

·    Are the tents/gazebos that are erected on the wharf/pontoons by cruise ship staff licensed?

·    How can Council provide fair and equitable access to the Akaroa Wharf for all users at all times?

The Board also requested answers from staff in response to its questions as follows:

·    What is the process for determining the number of ships that can come into the Akaroa Harbour at any one time?

·    On what basis is that number determined?

·    Why are “double cruise ship days” allowed?

·    Is there a legal mechanism to restrict the number of cruise ship visits?

 

4.3       Friends of Akaroa Museum - David Miller

David Miller, President of the Friends of Akaroa Museum (FOAM), spoke to the Board regarding the activities of FOAM over the past year.  He also spoke about the upcoming review of the Akaroa Museum Advisory Committee, saying that FOAM members were unanimous in their support of retaining the Committee.

 

4.4       Mike Norris

Mike Norris spoke to the Board regarding the untidy state of Akaroa, its lack of appropriate public toilets and the state of the traffic management signage associated with the cruise ship visits.  He asked the following questions:

·    Why can Council not find a more suitable location for the temporary toilets?

·    Why can the traffic management signage not reflect the nature of Akaroa as a tourist town?

·    Can the traffic cones that are stored inside a fence at the temporary information site be stored out of sight?

The Board agreed to pass these questions to staff for reply.

 

         The Chairperson thanked the Public Forum speakers for their presentations.

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Pam Richardson declared an interest in this item and Item 10 on the agenda, and took no part in the Board’s discussion and/or voting thereon.  She vacated the Chair, which was taken by Deputy Chairperson Jed O’Donoghue for the hearing of Items 5 and 10.

Part B

5.1       Akaroa Community Health Trust

Paul de Latour and Gordon Bloxall, on behalf of the Akaroa Community Health Trust, spoke to the Board regarding the Akaroa Community Health Centre Funding Request report. (Refer Item 10).  They asked that Council consult with the community on a suggested rates levy to help fund the Akaroa Community Health Centre, and indicated that the Trust preferred the levy to be a fixed charge levied over a four year period.

 

5.2       Craig Hastie

Craig Hastie spoke to the Board regarding the Akaroa Community Health Centre Funding Request report. (Refer Item 10)  He voiced his opposition to a proposed rates levy to help fund the Akaroa Community Health Centre and asked that the Board decline the proposal.

 

5.3       Guardians of Akaroa Hospital

Allison Craw spoke on behalf of the Guardians of Akaroa Hospital regarding the Akaroa Community Health Centre Funding Request report. (Refer Item 10)  She said the Guardians group fully supported the request from the Akaroa Community Health Trust for a rates levy to help fund the Akaroa Community Health Centre.

 

10. Akaroa Community Health Centre Funding Request

Board Comment

The Board generally felt that it could support this proposal, but only if the Akaroa Ward community was fully consulted and showed its support for the proposed rates levy.  Board members also expressed a wish to be involved in the production of any consultation document to ensure that all possible options for the levying of such a rate were covered.

 

Staff Recommendations 

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board recommends to Council that it either:

1.         Agrees in principle to the request from the Akaroa Community Health Trust to provide it with One-off Council Grant funding up to a maximum of $1,300,000. The Grant to be used to fund the Trust’s outstanding funding commitment to the Canterbury District Health Board for the Akaroa Community Health Centre.

Or:

Declines the Akaroa Community Health Trust request for One-off Council Grant funding up to a maximum of $1,300,000.

Or:

Defers consideration of the request for funding until the end of 2019 to enable the Akaroa Community Health Trust to have a clearer view of its eventual funding requirements. 

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board recommends to Council that if it agrees in principle to provide the Akaroa Community Health Trust with One-off Council Grant funding (Option 1 above), that:

2.         The Council proposes that the Grant be paid for from a Grants Targeted Rate on properties in the Akaroa and Bays area, on the basis that the Rate is:

a.         Applied to all rateable units in the Akaroa subdivision of the Banks Peninsula ward;

b.         Calculated on a proportional basis according to the capital value of each Rating Unit;

c.         Applied for a maximum of ten years from 1 July 2019  – 30 June 2028/29;

d.         Limited in total revenue raised to a maximum of $1,300,000 adjusted for interest revenue and interest costs arising from the difference in timing between when the Targeted Rate revenue is received and when the One-off Council Grant is paid;

e.         Calculated based on the interest rate earned by ratepayers on Targeted Rate amounts paid to Council before the Grant is paid in 2022/23 being 3.0 per cent (being an estimate of what the Council would earn by investing those funds on term deposit);

f.          Calculated based on the interest rate paid by ratepayers on Targeted Rate revenue received after the Grant is paid in 2022/23 to be 4.5 per cent (being an estimate of what the Council would pay on borrowing over this period);

g.         Reduced if the Trust receives further funding from other sources – the Grants Targeted Rate will be the funder of last resort.

3.         The Council uses a decision making process that includes appropriate community consultation that:

a.         proposes the Council’s preferred option as well as any other options the Council considers practicable; 

b.         meets the requirements of section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002;

c.         is focused on the communities directly affected by the proposal but be open to all Christchurch residents;

4.         The Council agrees that a Hearings Panel be convened at the completion of the consultation period to receive and hear submissions on the proposal, deliberate on those submissions, and to report back recommendations to the Council.

 

Community Board Decided BKCB/2018/00141

Part A

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board recommends to Council that it:

1.         Agrees in principle, subject to community consultation, to the request from the Akaroa Community Health Trust to provide it with One-off Council Grant funding up to a maximum of $1,300,000.  The Grant to be used to fund the Trust’s outstanding funding commitment to the Canterbury District Health Board for the Akaroa Community Health Centre, subject to the Council using a decision making process that includes appropriate community consultation as follows:

a.      proposes the Council’s preferred option as well as any other options the Council considers practicable, including:

         i. the community is asked if they support a targeted rate;

         ii. options of a four year and ten year rating period;

   iii. the community is asked what level of support should be required for the       targeted rate to be implemented;          

b.      the Community Board formally approves the Consultation Document;

c.      meets the requirements of section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002;

d.     is focused on the communities directly affected by the proposal but be open to all Christchurch residents;

2.         The Council agrees that a Hearings Panel be convened and hearings held, including in Akaroa, at the completion of the consultation period to receive and hear submissions on the proposal, deliberate on those submissions, and to report back recommendations to the Council.

3.         The grant be reduced if the Trust receives further funding from other sources – the Grants Targeted Rate will be the funder of last resort.

Andrew Turner/John McLister                                                                                                                              Carried

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

Felix Dawson left the meeting at 11:56 a.m.

Felix Dawson returned to the meeting at 12:01 p.m.

7.   Reserve Management Committee Meeting Minutes

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the minutes of the following Reserve Management Committee Meetings:

·    Robinsons Bay Reserve Management Committee – 5 November 2018

·    Lyttelton Reserves Management Committee – 18 November 2018

·    Cass Bay Reserves Management Committee – 6 December 2018

2.         Approve the appointment of Jeremy Webb and David Taylor to the Cass Bay Reserve Management Committee.

3.         Note that the Steadfast land in Cass Bay will be included in the Port Hills Management Plan, which is under development.

4.         Request that staff investigate options for the Cass Bay community to have limited access to the Steadfast land while the Port Hills Management Plan is under development.

 

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00142

Part B

That the Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the minutes of the following Reserve Management Committee Meetings:

·    Robinsons Bay Reserve Management Committee – 5 November 2018

·    Lyttelton Reserves Management Committee – 18 November 2018

·    Cass Bay Reserves Management Committee – 6 December 2018

2.         Approve the appointment of Jeremy Webb and David Taylor to the Cass Bay Reserve Management Committee.

3.         Note that the Steadfast land in Cass Bay will be included in the Port Hills Management Plan, which is under development.

4.         Request that staff investigate options for the Cass Bay community to have limited access to the Steadfast land while the Port Hills Management Plan is under development.

5.       Request a discussion with staff regarding a track linking the Summit Road to the Cass Bay / Governors Bay area.

6.         Request a discussion with staff regarding options for what can be done about people developing pirate tracks in Council reserves.

John McLister/Tyrone Fields                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

8.   Akaroa Museum Advisory Committee 28 November 2018 Minutes

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the minutes from the meeting of the Akaroa Museum Advisory Committee held on 28 November 2018.

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00143

Part B

That the Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the minutes from the meeting of the Akaroa Museum Advisory Committee held on 28 November 2018.

2.         Note that the Committee supports the Board’s Visitor Planning Project and that staff at the Museum collect visitor data.

Janis Haley/Tori Peden                                                                                                                                             Carried

 

9.   Head to Head Walkway Working Party Notes - 19 November 2018

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00144

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part B

That the Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the Head to Head Walkway Working Party meeting held on 19 November 2018.

Jed O'Donoghue/John McLister                                                                                                                            Carried

 

11. Onuku Road Proposed Speed Humps

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00145

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part C

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Approve that two speed humps be installed on Onuku Road in the vicinity of Onuku Marae, as indicated in the drawing attached to the agenda; TG133470 Issue 1, dated 6/11/2018.

Tori Peden/Andrew Turner                                                                                                                                    Carried

 

 

12. Rapaki- Proposed No Stopping Restrictions & Give Way Controls

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00146

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part C

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board approve:

1.         Under clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the parts of Rapaki Drive, Omaru Road, Kororā Tahi Road and Kina Road, as indicated in the drawing attached to the agenda; TG133422 Issue 1, dated 3/12/2018.

2.         Under the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004 that a Give Way control be placed against Kina Road at its intersection with Rapaki Drive, as indicated in the drawing attached to the agenda; TG133422 Issue 1, dated 3/12/2018.

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

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

John McLister/Tyrone Fields                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

 

13. Banks Peninsula Community Board 2018-19 Discretionary Response Applications - Governors Bay Community Association Fete and Music Festival

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00147

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part C

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $2,648 from its 2018-19 Discretionary Response Fund to Governors Bay Community Association (Inc) towards hire of portable toilet facilities and sound and lighting equipment for the Governors Bay Fete and Music Festival.

John McLister/Andrew Turner                                                                                                                              Carried

 

 

 

14. Banks Peninsula Community Board - Meeting Schedule 2019

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00148

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part C

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Adopts the following meeting schedule from 4 February to 16 September 2019:

Monday 4 February                       10am              Lyttelton       (followed by a seminar)  

Monday 18 February                     10am              Little River    (followed by a seminar)
Monday 4 March                             10am              Lyttelton        (followed by a seminar)  
Monday 18 March                          10am              Akaroa            (followed by a seminar)
Monday 1 April                                10am              Lyttelton        (followed by a seminar)
Monday 15 April                              10am              Little River     (followed by a seminar)
Monday 6 May                                 10am              Lyttelton       (followed by a seminar)
Monday 20 May                              10am              Akaroa           (followed by a seminar)
Monday 10 June                              10am              Lyttelton       (followed by a seminar)
Monday 24 June                              10am              Little River    (followed by a seminar)
Monday 8 July                                  10am              Lyttelton       (followed by a seminar)
Monday 22 July                                10am              Akaroa           (followed by a seminar)
Monday 5 August                           10am              Lyttelton       (followed by a seminar)
Monday 19 August                         10am              Little River    (followed by a seminar)
Monday 2 September                   10am              Lyttelton       (followed by a seminar)
Monday 16 September                10am              Akaroa           (followed by a seminar)

2.         Agrees that every meeting will host a Public Forum.

3.         Notes that seminars will be scheduled as required.

Andrew Turner/Jed O'Donoghue                                                                                                                         Carried

 

 

15. Banks Peninsula Community Board Recess Committee - 2018/2019

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00149

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part C

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Appoint a Recess Committee comprising the Board Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson (or their nominees from amongst the remaining Board members) plus a minimum of any other two Board members, to be authorised to exercise the delegated powers of the Banks Peninsula Community Board for the period following its ordinary meeting on 17 December 2018 up until the Board resumes normal business on 4 February 2019.

2.         Requires that the application of any such delegation be reported back to the Board for record purposes.

3.         Notes that any meeting of the Recess Committee will be publicised and details forwarded to all Board members.

Andrew Turner/Tyrone Fields                                                                                                                               Carried

 

 

16. Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - December 2018

 

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2018/00150

[Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.]

Part B

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report for December 2018.

2.         Approve the Board submission made to the Whakaraupō Mātaitai community engagement process.

3.         Approve the appointment of Darin Rainbird as the Akaroa District Promotions representative on the Akaroa Issues Working Party.

4.         Ask staff to review a previous decision regarding a shower at the Akaroa Beach, in light of the increase to water quantity in Akaroa and an offer from the Lions Club to fund the project.

5.         Request that staff arrange for the long grass in all unmown public areas of Akaroa to urgently be cut, including the picnic area in Childrens Bay, the grounds of Yew Cottage and the track on L’Aube Hill up to the French Cemetery.

6.         Seek reassurance from staff that both the temporary toilets, and the sanitary bins in all toilets in Akaroa, will be fully operational over the upcoming holiday period.

Pam Richardson/Jed O'Donoghue                                                                                                                       Carried

 

 

17. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Part B

17.1    Public Places Recycling Scheme

The Board requested that staff provide advice regarding the Council’s obligation under the Public Places Recycling Scheme.

 

17.2    BP Meats Site - Petition

At the Board meeting on 13 August 2018 the Board received a petition and subsequently requested that staff provide advice regarding using the BP Meats site in Akaroa as a car park.  The Board had expected that advice prior to the holiday season.  The Board noted its disappointment that the advice has not yet been provided.

 

17.3    Banks Peninsula Land Drainage and Pest Control Rates

The Board requested that staff provide a briefing on land drainage and pest control rates on Banks Peninsula.   

 

17.4    Maritime New Zealand's Proposed Maritime Levy

The Board decided to make a submission opposing the increase that Maritime New Zealand was proposing to the Maritime Levy.  As the submission was due before the Board would meet again in the new year, authority was delegated to Pam Richardson and John McLister to approve the submission.

 

17.5    Parks and Road Maintenance Contract

The Board noted that it had recently been given an undertaking that Community Boards would be involved in the review of the Parks Maintenance Contract and the Road Maintenance Contract, and members requested that staff liaise with the Board at an early stage in those processes.

 

17.6    Akaroa Lighthouse Slip

The Board requested an update on the slip below the Akaroa Lighthouse, which it was reported was still moving.

 

17.7    Akaroa Cemeteries Group

 The Board heard that the Akaroa Cemeteries Group which had recently been successfully established and operating, had received a number of instructions from staff, and was seeking answers from Board members on issues relating to working in the cemeteries, future planning, a public survey and interpretation panels.

The Board requested that the list of questions from the Group be passed to staff for response back to the Board and the Akaroa Cemeteries Group.

 

Karakia Whakamutunga: John McLister. 

Meeting concluded at 1.15pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 4th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019

Pam Richardson

Chairperson

   


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

7.        Reserve Management Committee Meeting Minutes

Reference:

19/47429

Presenter(s):

Liz Carter – Community Board Adviser

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Correspondence has been received from:

Committee

Meeting Date

Robinsons Bay Reserve Management Committee

15 January 2019

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the minutes of the following Reserve Management Committee Meetings:

·    Robinsons Bay Reserve Management Committee – 15 January 2019

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Minutes - Robinsons Bay Reserve Management Committee

20

 

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

8.        Briefing - Orion New Zealand Ltd - Proposed Electricity Upgrade - Lyttelton Tunnel

Reference:

19/58421

Presenter(s):

Liz Carter

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

The Board will be briefed on the following:

Subject

Presenter(s)

Unit/Organisation

Proposed Electricity Cable Upgrade – Lyttelton Tunnel

Linda McGregor

Communications & Engagement Manager, Orion New Zealand Ltd

 

Steve Macdonald

General Manager, Infrastructure, Orion New Zealand Ltd

 

Phil Bunnage

Project Manager, Orion New Zealand Ltd

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Notes the information supplied during the Briefings.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

9.        Lyttelton Seafarers Welfare

Reference:

19/18458

Presenter(s):

Joan Blatchford – Community Governance Manager, Banks Peninsula

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū / Banks Peninsula Community Board to recommend to the Council that it seek staff advice on whether Council can include a provision in the Letter of Expectation and Statement of Intent for Christchurch City Holdings and the Lyttelton Port Company (LPC) that LPC assist with funding for the Lyttelton Seafarers Centre.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated to progress a request of the Banks Peninsula Community Board from its 10 September 2018 meeting, where the Board had noted its concern, and community expectations, about seafarers’ welfare in Lyttelton.  The Board had asked for advice from staff by the end of the year on how those concerns can be taken into account in the Letter of Expectation and Statement of Intent processes for Christchurch City Holdings Ltd and Lyttelton Port Company, and how the Board could influence those processes.

1.3       At the 10 September Board meeting the Board had heard from John McLister who spoke on behalf of the Lyttelton Seafarers Trust.  He told the Board he believed there needs to be a plan in place for seamen visiting Lyttelton, along with appropriate funding to implement the plan. Reverend McLister said the Lyttelton Seafarers Trust wanted to partner with the Council in providing a service for seafarers, and he asked that the Board advocate to the Council to source funding through a levy on ships visiting Lyttelton Port.  It was noted that the Lyttelton community had indicated its support for a fully functioning seafarers centre in Lyttelton at a recent public meeting.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision 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 assessment against the criteria in the Significance and Engagement Policy.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendation

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board recommend to the Council that it:

1.         Ask staff to investigate whether Council can include a provision in the Letter of Expectation and Statement of Intent for Christchurch City Holdings Limited (CCHL) and the Lyttelton Port Company (LPC) or other mechanisms which provide for the Council, CCHL or LPC to assist with meeting the desired outcomes for the Lyttelton Seafarers’ Centre in line with the recommendations from the February 2018 Council meeting.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       The Banks Peninsula Community Board has advocated for a long time for the welfare of seafarers visiting Lyttelton.  In particular the Board has sought funding for the Lyttelton Seafarers Centre through a levy on visiting ships.

4.2       The Board strongly supports the Maritime Labour Convention, of which New Zealand has become a member state.  The Board specifically supports provisions relating to access to shore based welfare facilities.  The Board is aware that the Convention suggests that one method to secure funding for shore-based seafarers welfare centres is through a levy on shipping (MLC B4.4.4).

4.3       The Board has resolved to support the introduction of a levy on ships in Lyttelton to support seafarer’s welfare, and to advocate for this to appropriate authorities.

4.4       Board members believe that New Zealand has an opportunity to be a world leader in seafarer welfare.  The Board also believes that it is the responsibility of New Zealand and New Zealanders to demonstrate Manaakitanga to guests from overseas, and the provision of high quality facilities for seafarers is a simple way to achieve this.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       At its meeting on 1 February 2018, the Council received a report from the Banks Peninsula Community Board which asked the Council to consider if it has “a moral obligation to voluntarily uphold the Maritime Labour Convention”.

5.2       In response the Council resolved that it:

1.   Receive the report and attached legal advice, noting the provisions of the Maritime Labour Convention regarding seafarers' welfare centres.

2.   Supports the provision of access to shore based welfare facilities as set out in the Maritime Labour Convention.

3.   Note the challenges facing the Seafarer’s Centre regarding the resources required to provide these services and the constraints they face due to a short-fall in funding.

4.   Note the provisions of the Maritime Labour Convention which suggest methods of funding, which include a levy on ships.

5.   Note that staff are continuing to discuss with the Seafarers Centre the options that may be available to them for seeking funding and grants.

6.   Request the Deputy Mayor and staff to meet with the Seafarers' Centre and Lyttelton Port Company to explore a range of initiatives, including the possibility of a levy on shipping, that could support the Seafarers' Centre and report back to the Community Board within two months.

5.3       As per Clause 6 of the resolution, the Deputy Mayor and staff have met with the Seafarers Centre and Lyttelton Port Company (LPC) to discuss options to support the Centre, including a possible levy on shipping.  LPC do not believe that a levy on shipping is the most appropriate mechanism to support seafarer welfare.

5.4       At the 10 September 2018 meeting of the Board, it was resolved to seek staff advice on how the continuing concerns of the Board and the Lyttelton community, about seafarer welfare, could be included in the considerations for the Letter of Expectation (LOE) and Statement of Intent (SOI) processes for Christchurch City Holdings Ltd (CCHL) and LPC.

5.5       Legal Services staff advised that as the Board is not the decision maker in regard to the LOE and SOI for CCHL and LPC, the Board should recommend to the Council that Council ask staff to investigate whether it can include something in the LOE/SOI.  The Council can then consider whether or not this is a matter it wishes staff to investigate/include in the LOE and SOI, in the context of Council’s knowledge of other matters to be set out in the LOE and SOI for CCHL and LPC, and other recent decisions affecting CCOs, including the living wage resolutions.

 

 

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

Liz Carter - Community Board Advisor

Approved By

Joan Blatchford - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Lyttelton

Judith Cheyne - Associate General Counsel

Len Van Hout - Manager External Reporting & Governance

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

  


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

10.    Pedestrian Improvements - Godley Quay/Voelas Road, Lyttelton

Reference:

18/752699

Presenter(s):

Andy Cameron and Andrew Hensley

 

 

1.  Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to advise the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board on the outcome of community consultation and ask that it approve the proposed pedestrian improvements at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road, and safety improvements on Godley Quay.

1.2       The report is also to provide the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board with responses to questions raised at the Board meeting of the 15th October 2018 pertaining to proposed Pedestrian Improvements - Godley Quay/Voelas Road, Lyttelton.

Origin of Report

1.2  This report is staff generated following community consultation. 

1.3  The pedestrian improvements at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road were initiated to satisfy the requirements of Section 5.3 of the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan. To provide safe convenient public access to Dampier Bay.  Details were presented to the Board on 25th June 2018 prior to consultation. 

1.4  The changes to road markings on Godley Quay were initiated in response to known safety concerns, and were also presented to the Board on 25th June 2018.

1.5  At its meeting on 15 October 2018, the Board considered a report on the proposed pedestrian improvements for Godley Quay/Voelas Road, and resolved:

                      That the report be left to lie on the table and staff be asked to provide further information on:

·    Questions supplied by Board members

·    A copy of the un-redacted submissions

·    Advice from Council staff on the legal challenge received

·    Advice on when the ongoing pipeline work on Godley Quay would be completed

1.6  The additional information requested, and answers to the Board’s questions, is addressed in the memorandum attached to this report as Attachment E.

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 Council's Significance and Engagement Policy.  The low significance reflects the low numbers of people affected and the level of impact caused to those people.

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

§      

 

3.  Staff Recommendations 

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Approve that all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north east side of Voelas Road, commencing at intersection with Godley Quay and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 25 metres be revoked.

2.         Approve that all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the south west side of Voelas Road, commencing at intersection with Godley Quay and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 15 metres be revoked.

3.         Approve that all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north west side of Godley Quay, between its intersections with Voelas Road and Simeon Quay be revoked. 

4.         Approve that all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north west side of Godley Quay, commencing at intersection with Voelas Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 420 metres be revoked.

5.         Approve that all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the south east side of Godley Quay, between its intersections with Simeon Quay and Cyrus Williams Quay be revoked.

6.         Approve that all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north side of Cyrus Williams Quay, commencing at intersection with Godley Quay and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 20 metres be revoked.

7.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the north east side of Voelas Road, commencing at intersection with Godley Quay and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 25 metres.

8.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the south west side of Voelas Road, commencing at intersection with Godley Quay and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 15 metres.

9.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the north west side of Godley Quay, commencing at intersection with Simeon Quay and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 40 metres.

10.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the north west side of Godley Quay, commencing at intersection with Voelas Road and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres.

11.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the north west side of Godley Quay, commencing at intersection with Voelas Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 420 metres.

12.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the south east side of Godley Quay, commencing at intersection with Simeon Quay and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 370 metres.

13.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the south east side of Godley Quay, commencing at intersection with Cyrus Williams Quay and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 65 metres.

14.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the south east side of Godley Quay, commencing at point 99 metres north of its intersection with Cyrus Williams Quay and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 65 metres.

15.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the north side of Cyrus Williams Quay, commencing at intersection with Godley Quay and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 20 metres.

16.       Approve the lane marking changes, kerb alignment changes, traffic island and road surface changes at the intersection of Godley Quay with Voelas Road as detailed in Attachment A.

17.       Approve that resolutions 1-16 take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place, including any revocations.

 

4.  Key Points

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

·  Activity: Active Travel

·                Level of Service: 10.5.1.0 Reduce the number of  reported cycling and pedestrian crashes on the network - Less than 45

·  4.2 The following feasible options have been considered:

·    Option 1 – Provide a safe pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road and improvements to Godley Quay line marking including ‘No Stopping‘ (preferred option)

·    Option 2 – Provide a safe pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road

·  4.3 Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1      The advantages of this option include:

·    Provides a safe crossing option on Godley Quay and Voelas Road at the pedestrian access point to the marina development.

·    Provides clear delineation between pedestrians and motor vehicles on Godley Quay.

·    Clearly defines where vehicles can safely park on Godley Quay.

·    Reduces the likelihood of crashes on Godley Quay.

·    Provides an improved environment to accommodate the expected growth in traffic and pedestrian volumes.

·    Council meets its implementation obligations of the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan

§    4.3.2 The disadvantages of this option include:

·    The loss of 14 potential parking spaces to provide pedestrian improvements at Godley Quay / Voelas Quay intersection.

·    The perception of the loss of parking spaces along Godley Quay. Some of this parking is currently on the footpath or causes a hazard in the road way.

 

5.  Context/Background

Back Ground

·  5.1       Pedestrian improvements at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road

·                The Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan was approved in November 2015 and includes design guidelines for Dampier Bay which detail the requirement to provide pedestrian access onto Godley Quay at the intersection of Voelas Road.  The Lyttelton Port Company as part of the marina development at Dampier Bay has provided new steps to link to this location.  Council has agreed through the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan to provide for safe pedestrian crossing facilities at Godley Quay.  The steps have been installed by the Lyttelton Port Company as part of the marina development. They are currently behind security fencing until a safe crossing facility is constructed.  The replacement twin pressure sewer main connecting Naval Point to Norwich Quay is now being constructed along this section of Godley Quay.  The completion of these works is required prior to the construction of this project and completion is currently anticipated by the end of September.

·  5.2       Godley Quay line marking and ‘No Stopping ‘

·                                             Discussions with user groups in the area have raised safety concerns regarding access to Navel Point and the playing fields and the large vehicles mainly from oil companies operating out of the Port. 

·                This part of the project looks to address the following issues on Godley Quay:

·   This section of road has poorly defined edges with sharp changes in vertical and horizontal alignment.

·   The road caters for a high percentage of heavy vehicles and towing vehicles.

·   A small number of vehicles are regularly illegally parked on the pavement resulting in pedestrians having to use the road space at a place where there is poor visibility along the road and also resulting in vehicles needing to cross the centreline when forward visibility is poor. This is particularly an issue with the high number of heavy vehicles.

·   The space available for pedestrians to walk when there is no formal path clearly defined.

·   Safe parking opportunities are not clearly defined.

The initiation of this part of the project was designed to coincide with the change in road alignment that would occur as a result of the pedestrian upgrade at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road, and provide for future increases to pedestrian and vehicular traffic volumes.

   Community Feedback

·                Community engagement and consultation for this project was undertaken from 10 July 2018 to 30 July 2018.  Affected property owners and residents were advised of the recommended option by a leaflet drop. The consultation leaflets were hand delivered to 25 properties. The leaflet was also sent to 13 absentee landowners, and key stakeholders.

·                During the course of the engagement, the Council received 17 submissions.  Attachment C.

·                Godley Quay/Voelas Road pedestrian improvements:

·                Three submissions were in support, six were not in support, and eight were in support but had some concerns.

· 

·  Of the six submissions that did not support three were due to the restricted access into Voelas Road for large vehicles.  Subsequently the project team has worked with the oil companies to provide a design that accommodates access from Godley Quay in to Voelas Road should Godley Quay become closed. The remaining three “do not support” submitters were generally opposed to the location of the pedestrian improvements. This is covered in more detail in Section 6.6.1 of this report.

·  Godley Quay line marking changes:

·  Six were in support, four were not in support, six were in support but had some concerns and one did not specify. Concerns raised were mainly around parking and is covered in detail in Section 6.6.2 of this report.

· 

·                A letter has been sent to all submitters advising of the outcome of the consultation, including details of the Community Board meeting, and how they can speak to their submission if they wish.  Also included in this letter is a link to the feedback received and the Community Board report (when published).

 

6.  Option 1 – Provide a safe pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road and improvements to Godley Quay line marking including ‘No Stopping’ (preferred)

Option Description

6.1.  Install a landing, buildout, and traffic island at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road with associated ‘No stopping’.  On Godley Quay provide edge lines, ‘No Stopping’ and changes to centre line, as detailed in Attachement A and B. 

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 consistent with those carried out by the project which included consultation with those immediately affected and key stakeholders.

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 following are directly affected by this option:

·    Local residents.

·    Lyttelton Port Company.

·    Local businesses including fuel companies.

·    Those utilising all day parking in the area.

6.6.  Team responses to the common themes raised through consultation are as follows:

6.6.1. Pedestrian improvements at the intersection Godley Quay and Voelas Road

·       Voelas Road will become inaccessible to large vehicles in emergencies if Godley Quay becomes blocked.

o     Project Team response – After discussions with the fuel company’s representative it has been agreed to lower the pedestrian refuge island to allow large vehicles to drive over it in emergency scenarios once signs have been removed.

·       Location of crossing unsafe for pedestrians.

o    Project team response – This location provides the greatest sight line distances for pedestrians crossing Godley Quay in this vicinity and meets current design guidelines. Pedestrians currently transiting along Godley Quay crossing Voelas Road are exposed to turning vehicles.  The construction of a pedestrian refuge island and a raised apron to slow turning vehicles will allow for adequate sight lines for pedestrians.  This location is one of the pedestrian connection points to the Dampier Bay development which has been designed in line with the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan.

·       Voelas Road / Simeon Quay intersection and Godley Quay / Simeon Quay intersection need improvements.

o     Project team response – This feedback has been noted, however changes beyond the project area are outside of scope.

·    There is no forward notification to traffic of pedestrians crossing.

o     Project team response – Pedestrians crossing signs will be installed as part of the project.

·    Right turning out of Voelas should be stopped as it is dangerous.

Project team response – Enforcing the banning of a right turn through the introduction of a physical barrier is not an option due to constraints imposed by the layout of the intersection.

6.6.2. Godley Quay line marking and ‘No Stopping ‘

·    Parking will be removed from 32 & 22 Godley Quay adversely affecting the resident’s life.

Project team response – Parking is currently occurring on the footpath in this location which is prohibited. This presents a significant risk to both motorists; including large fuel trucks; and pedestrians. Council has an obligation to address safety concerns on the road network. Property No. 32 has a garage and property 22 has parking options within 40m.

·           • Area for parking proposed between 1 and 18 Godley Quay may be too small (one submitter).

Project team response – 11 on street parking spaces will remain between No.1 and No.18 Godley Quay, with a further 23 spaces available in Voelas Road. The current observed daytime demand for these parking spaces is low.

·    Will resident permits be issued to people on Voelas Road?

Project team response – No. The criteria for resident’s permits are not met in this location. For details of criteria see Attachment D.

·    The restriction of car parking through narrow sections of Godley Quay will minimise the need for Fuel tankers to cross the centreline.

Project team response – Agree.

·                

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.7.  This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies as it addresses known safety concerns, reducing the likelihood of pedestrian and vehicle accidents.

Financial Implications

6.8.  Cost of Implementation –

·                6.8.1      Pedestrian improvements at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road has an expected cost of $60,000.

·  6.8.2   Godley Quay line marking and ‘No Stopping‘ has an expected cost of $2,000.

6.9.  Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - This is covered under the area maintenance contract and has been accounted for in forward planning.

6.10.        Funding source – 2018-28 Long Term Plan, Godley Quay/Voelas Road pedestrian improvements (ID# 50181).

Legal Implications

6.11.        There is not a legal context relevant to this decision

Risks and Mitigations

6.12.        Not Applicable

Implementation

6.13.        Implementation dependencies – Completion of the pressure sewer project.

6.14.        Implementation timeframe - Construction to be completed within this financial year

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

 

6.15.        The advantages of this option include:

·    Provides a safe crossing option on Godley Quay and Voelas Road at the pedestrian access point to the marina development.

·    Provides clear delineation between pedestrians and motor vehicles on Godley Quay.

·    Clearly defines where vehicles can safely park on Godley Quay.

·    Reduces the likelihood of crashes on Godley Quay.

·    Provides an improved environment to accommodate the expected growth in traffic and pedestrian volumes.

·    Council meets its implementation obligations of the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan

6.16.        The disadvantages of this option include:

·    The loss of 14 potential parking spaces to provide pedestrian improvements at Godley Quay / Voelas Quay intersection.

·    The perception of the loss of parking spaces along Godley Quay. Some of this parking is currently on the footpath or causes a hazard in the road way.

Note: The current Road User Rules bring many of these spaces in to question due to the road environment. For related road user rules see Attachment D

7.  Option 2 - Provide a safe pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road

Option Description

7.1.    Install a landing, buildout, and traffic island at the intersection of Godley Quay and Voelas Road with associated ‘No stopping’.

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 consistent with those carried out by the project which included consultation with those immediately affected and key stakeholders.

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.  This is detailed in 6.5 and 6.6.1.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

7.7.  Inconsistency – It does not address known safety concerns raised by the public.

Financial Implications

7.8.  Cost of Implementation - This project is being carried out as part of the inner harbour improvements programme and has estimated construction costs of $60,000

7.9.    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - This is covered under the area maintenance contract and has been accounted for in forward planning.

7.10.        Funding source – 2019 CAPEX Inner Harbour Road Improvement (ID#50181)

Legal Implications

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

Risks and Mitigations

7.12.        Known safety concerns are not being addressed.

Implementation

7.13.        Implementation dependencies - Completion of the pressure sewer replacement.

7.14.        Implementation timeframe – To be constructed this financial year.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.15.        The advantages of this option include:

·    Provides a safe crossing option on Godley Quay and Voelas Road at the pedestrian access point to the marina development.

·    Provides an improved environment to accommodate expected growth in pedestrian volumes.

·    Council meets its implementation obligations for the Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan.

7.16.        The disadvantages of this option include:

·    Availability of safe parking options will not be clearly defined along Godley Quay.

·    Clear delineation for pedestrians and vehicles will not be achieved along Godley Quay.

·    The loss of 14 potential parking spaces to provide pedestrian improvements at Godley Quay / Voelas Quay intersection.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Plan - Godley Quay/Voelas Road Pedestrian Improvements

37

b

Plan - Godley Quay Line Marking

38

c

Godley Quay consultation feedback

39

d

Road User Rules

45

e

Pedestrian improvements - Godley Quay/Voelas Road, Lytteleton, further information requested by the Te Pataka o Rakaihautu/Banks Peninsula Community Board - 15 October 2018

46

 

 

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

Andy Cameron - Junior Project Manager

Approved By

Lynette Ellis - Manager Planning and Delivery Transport

  


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

11.    London Street Lyttelton, Parking Controls

Reference:

18/1037578

Presenter(s):

Peter Rodgers, Graduate Transport Engineer

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board to consider parking controls on London Street in accordance with Attachment A.

1.2       The report is also to provide the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board with responses to questions raised at the Board meeting on 13 August 2018 when it was first considered by the Community Board.

Origin of Report

1.3       This report is staff generated in response to requests from businesses for parking restrictions as their customers are finding it difficult to find a park on this section of London Street.

1.4       At its meeting on 13 August 2018, the Board considered this report and resolved that it:

·    Leave this report to lie on the table and request that staff carry out further investigation on Residents’ Only Parking and angle parking for the portion of London Street between Canterbury Street and Dublin Street, so that the Board can consider these as realistic options for parking.

·    That further consultation be carried out with the residents in this area as part of this proposal.

·    That staff report back on this to the first Banks Peninsula Community Board meeting in November.

1.5       The additional information provided in response to the Board’s requests above, is included under Section 5 of this report, Clauses 5.15 – 5.20.

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 Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board approve Option 1:

Option 1

1.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time in the parts of London Street and Canterbury Street referred to as ‘Area A ’, ‘Area C’, ‘Area H’, ‘Area I’ and ‘Area J’ as indicated on Attachment A, drawing TG133026 Issue 2, dated 27/07/2018, attached to the agenda for this meeting.

2.         Approve that the installation of a ‘keep clear’ zone, in the parts of London Street referred to as ‘Area E ’, ‘Area F’, and ‘Area G’ as indicated on Attachment A, drawing TG133026 Issue 2, dated 27/07/2018, attached to the agenda for this meeting.

3.         Under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of London Street referred to as ‘Area B’ as indicated on Attachment A, drawing TG133026 Issue 2, dated 27/07/2018, 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 5 minutes between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm Monday to Sunday.

4.         Under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of London Street referred to as ‘Area D’ and ‘Area K’ as indicated on Attachment A, drawing TG133026 Issue 2, dated 27/07/2018, is reserved as a parking place for any vehicles, subject to the following restriction: the maximum time for parking of any vehicle is 60 minutes between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm Monday to Sunday.

5.         Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to vehicles displaying residents permits only at any time outside 66 London Street as shown on Attachment C, this being on the northern side of London Street commencing at a distance of 48 metres east of its intersection with Dublin Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

6.         Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to vehicles displaying residents permits only at any time outside 64 London Street as shown on Attachment C, this being on the northern side of London Street commencing at a distance of 54 metres east of its intersection with Dublin Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

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

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

That should the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board decline to approve Option 1, that the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board approve Option 2:

Option 2

9.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time in the parts of London Street and Canterbury Street referred to as ‘Area A ’, ‘Area C’, ‘Area H’, ‘Area I’ and ‘Area J’ as indicated on Attachment B, drawing TG133026 Issue 1, dated 27/07/2018, attached to the agenda for this meeting.

10.       Approve that the installation of a ‘keep clear’ zone, in the parts of London Street referred to as ‘Area E ’, ‘Area F’, and ‘Area G’ as indicated on Attachment B, drawing TG133026 Issue 1, dated 27/07/2018, attached to the agenda for this meeting.

11.       Under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of London Street referred to as ‘Area B’ as indicated on Attachment B, drawing TG133026 Issue 1, dated 27/07/2018, 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 5 minutes between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm Monday to Sunday.

12.       Under clause 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the part of London Street referred to as ‘Area D’, ‘Area K’, ‘Area L’, ‘Area M’, and ‘Area N’ as indicated on Attachment B, drawing TG133026 Issue 1, dated 27/07/2018, is reserved as a parking place for any vehicles, subject to the following restriction: the maximum time for parking of any vehicle is 60 minutes between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm Monday to Sunday.

13.       Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to vehicles displaying residents permits only at any time outside 66 London Street as shown on Attachment C, this being on the northern side of London Street commencing at a distance of 48 metres east of its intersection with Dublin Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

14.       Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to vehicles displaying residents permits only at any time outside 64 London Street as shown on Attachment C, this being on the northern side of London Street commencing at a distance of 54 metres east of its intersection with Dublin Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

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

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

That should the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board decline to approve Option 1 or Option 2, that the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board approve Option 3:

Option 3

17.       Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time in the parts of London Street and Canterbury Street referred to as ‘Area A ’, ‘Area C’, ‘Area H’, ‘Area I’ and ‘Area J’ as indicated on Attachment D, drawing TG133026 Issue 3, dated 27/07/2018, attached to the agenda for this meeting.

18.       Approve that the installation of a ‘keep clear’ zone, in the parts of London Street referred to as ‘Area E ’, ‘Area F’, and ‘Area G’ as indicated on Attachment D, drawing TG133026 Issue 3, dated 27/07/2018, attached to the agenda for this meeting.

19.       Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to vehicles displaying residents permits only at any time outside 66 London Street as shown on Attachment C, this being on the northern side of London Street commencing at a distance of 48 metres east of its intersection with Dublin Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

20.       Approve that the parking of vehicles be restricted to vehicles displaying residents permits only at any time outside 64 London Street as shown on Attachment C, this being on the northern side of London Street commencing at a distance of 54 metres east of its intersection with Dublin Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

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

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

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       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 parking restrictions on the north side of London Street, No Stopping restrictions, and crosshatching (preferred option)

·     Option 2 – Install parking restrictions on both sides of London Street, No Stopping restrictions, and crosshatching

·     Option 3 – Do minimum, install crosshatching and No Stopping restrictions

·     Option 4 – Receive information regarding angle parking

·     Option 5 – Do nothing, do not make any changes

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     Provides four additional 60 minute and one 5 minute parking space, to provide turnover outside the immediately adjacent businesses on the north side of London Street.

·     Provides clear road markings to keep emergency service vehicle entrances clear.

·     Rationalises redundant restrictions associated with the old fire station layout.

·     Helps to maintain property access to residential properties.

·     Provides Residents Only parking spaces for properties which qualify for the Residents Only Parking Policy.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Reallocates parking spaces which are presently available for all-day parking.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       Staff have received requests for parking restrictions from businesses on London Street, to provide parking turnover for customers, as some parking spaces are being parked in for long periods of time.

5.2       The parking restrictions and line markings along London Street are inconsistent with the current usage and inconsistent with other parts of Lyttelton and the wider Christchurch City. Changes to parking restrictions have been requested by several businesses in the area.

Emergency Service Vehicle Access

5.3       The rebuilding and relocation of the Lyttelton Fire Station also requires review of the emergency services access road markings and removal of the now redundant markings. These are proposed to be replaced with crosshatching consistent with other similar markings around Christchurch City. The markings outside St Johns Ambulance opposite the Lyttelton Fire Station will also be updated.

Vehicle Entrances

5.4       There have also been some issues with non-residents parking over vehicle crossings, some of which are not clearly vehicle crossings. It is proposed to mark ‘no stopping’ over these driveways to clarify to drivers that they are not permitted to park there. The vehicle crossing for 54A London Street already has this treatment and the proposal will treat other properties along this stretch of London Street consistently.

5.5       The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 prohibits a driver of a vehicle parking over a vehicle crossing. Operational policy is not to install ‘no stopping’ restrictions over a vehicle crossing, as this is already prohibited by the Road User Rule. In this case exceptions have been made because this is a high parking demand area, particularly on Saturdays, the vehicle entrances are not clearly vehicle entrances from the street (particularly when gates are closed).

5.6       The service vehicle entrance to Albion Square, on Canterbury Street, is also proposed to be treated this way. Maintenance contractors working in Albion Square report that their vehicles are often trapped in by vehicles parking over the entrance.

Proposed time restricted parking changes

5.7       A parking restriction of 60 minutes (P60) was initially proposed for both north and south sides of the western part of London Street, between Canterbury Street and the new fire station, with a P5 parking space directly outside the ATM at 56 London Street. Currently most of this parking is unrestricted, with only two existing P60 spaces outside Albion Square, in accordance with Attachment B.

Consultation Feedback - Angle Parking

5.8       Angle parking was requested on this block of London Street (the western block) by several submitters. London Street between Canterbury Street and Oxford Street (the eastern block of London Street) has angle parking along the southern side.

5.9       Angle parking accommodates more vehicles in the same length of road, and the parking manoeuvre is easier for angle parking than parallel parking. However, disadvantages to angle parking include:

5.9.1   All angle parking presents a greater hazard to road users than parallel parking, because parking at an angle always requires reversing which creates a bottleneck in the moving traffic and may lead to collisions directly involving the reversing vehicle.

5.9.2   There can be sight/visibility issues and increased conflict with pedestrians crossing midblock

5.10    The western block also needs to cater to larger vehicles than the eastern block, due to the fire station, ambulance station, and industrial properties. Reducing the lane width to accommodate angle parking will lead to issues with heavy vehicle and emergency service vehicle access.

5.11    The eastern block has the advantage over the western block in that there are very few vehicle entrances along both the north and south sides. This allows for a longer length of unbroken angle parking to be installed, and so a larger number of angle parking spaces and fewer conflicts with vehicles entering and exiting driveways and vehicles reversing out of angle parks.

5.12    The locations of vehicle entrances on the western block, and the potential need for traffic calming measures to mitigate the risks of angle parking, means that few parking spaces can be gained, at the cost of safety and impact on emergency service vehicle and heavy vehicle access.

Changes resulting from Consultation

5.13    Due to the feedback received during consultation, it was proposed to only install 60 minute parking restrictions on the northern side of London Street, and leave the southern side unrestricted, including the parking spaces outside the fire station which will be created by removal of the redundant crosshatching. This would have resulted in an additional five unrestricted parking spaces, all directly outside businesses, becoming restricted.

5.14    No changes to the proposed crosshatching or ‘no stopping’ over vehicle entrances was proposed, and no opposition to these aspects of the proposal was received during consultation.

5.15    At its meeting on 13th August 2018, the Banks Peninsula Community Board requested staff to:

·    Carry out further investigation on Residents’ Only Parking and angle parking for the portion of London Street between Canterbury Street and Dublin Street, so that the Board can consider these as realistic options for parking.

·    Carry out further consultation with the residents in this area as part of this proposal.

5.16    Staff have now discussed further with residents affected and have consulted the standards for on-street angle parking in order to assess the feasibility of angle parking for this section of London Street.  Information on angle parking is contained within Option 4 of this report.

5.17    As a result, two Residents Only parking spaces are proposed. The Residents Only parking policy is an opt-in policy which provides a dedicated parking space for properties which meet the criteria.  Both 64 and 66 meet the criteria, and the residents have requested Residents Only parking spaces. Residents Only parking spaces have been included in Options 1, 2 and 3 of this report.

5.18    Residents Only parking is a tool that can be used to reinforce the allocation of kerbside parking in accordance with the Parking Strategy (2003). In residential areas, this strategy prioritises parking for residents over parking for commuters. However, in commercial areas, parking for customers is prioritised over parking for residents, as a result it is not appropriate to install Residents Only parking in a commercial area. For this reason, Residents Only parking is only proposed outside properties which are zoned residential, and not outside properties which are zoned industrial or commercial.

5.19    It is likely that introducing parking restrictions outside businesses will displace the demand for all day parking to outside residential properties, for example if this parking is being used by business owners or workers parking all day. Some residential properties qualify for the Council's Resident Only Parking policy, and Residents Only parking spaces are proposed for these properties, but many others do not. For properties which do not qualify for Residents Only parking, parking could be managed by introducing time restrictions, however this has not been proposed, as these are likely to only incur inconveniences on both commuters and on residents by requiring them to move their cars a short distance a few times a day to avoid parking infringements. As such they are unlikely to be effective, and consultation feedback indicates that if it were proposed, are unlikely to be supported by the residents of the street.

5.20    The impact of displaced all-day parking can be mitigated by limiting the number of additional time restricted parking spaces introduced.

5.20.1 Option 1 (an amended plan after considering consultation feedback) proposes time restrictions on five additional parking spaces,

5.20.2 Option 2 (the plan which originally went to consultation) proposes time restrictions on eleven additional parking spaces, and

5.20.3 Option 3 proposes no additional time restrictions

6.   Option 1 - Install Parking Restrictions on the North side of London Street (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Install parking time restrictions on the north side of London Street between Canterbury Street and Dublin Street in accordance with Attachment A.

6.2       This option will convert four currently unrestricted parking spaces to 60 minute parking, outside #48, #50 and #54, and will convert one unrestricted parking space to 5 minute parking outside #56 and the ATM.

6.3       Two parking spaces outside Albion Square and the Shroom Room, and one parking space opposite, are pre-existing 60 minute parking spaces, operating 8am to 5pm.

6.4       This option includes two Residents Only Parking spaces outside 64 London Street and 66 London Street, outside properties which are zoned residential, which have no off-street parking and no capacity to create off-street parking.

Significance

6.5       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

6.6       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

6.7       Community engagement and consultation for this project was undertaken from 19 June 2018 to 9 July 2018.

6.8       Affected property owners and residents were advised of the recommended option by face to face conversations with the businesses and a leaflet drop.

6.9       The consultation leaflets were hand delivered to 60 properties and businesses. The leaflet was also sent to 37 absentee landowners.

6.10    During the course of the engagement, the Council received 26 submissions with eight respondents in general support, 12 respondents supporting the plan but with some concerns and six respondents did not generally support the proposal. The feedback received is attached in Attachment E.

6.11    Following the Community Board meeting on 13th August 2018, the residents of properties which qualify for the Residents Only Parking Policy, 64 and 66 London Street, were contacted to ask if they wish to opt into the Residents Only Parking scheme.

6.12    Both indicated that they did wish to opt in to the scheme at this stage.

6.13    As a result, it is recommended to install two Residents Only parking spaces, one outside 64 and one outside 66 London Street as per Attachment C. Staff will coordinate installation of these parking spaces with the issuing of permits.

6.14    Residents living on the southeast side of London Street, where P60 restrictions were originally proposed, expressed concern about the loss of all day parking outside these properties. As a result, parking restrictions are no longer proposed outside these properties in Option 1. Staff contacted these submitters to see if they had any further comment or concerns, and whether they were satisfied with Option 1 or would prefer no time restrictions at all. One submitter responded, stating that they would prefer no time restrictions and that they believed that people would not only ignore any time limits installed.

6.15    The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports this option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.17    Cost of Implementation - $2,000 for the installation of traffic controls, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

6.18    Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

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

Legal Implications

6.20    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.

6.21    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.

6.22    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

6.23    Not applicable

Implementation

6.24    Implementation dependencies - Community Board approval.

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

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.26    The advantages of this option include:

·   Provides four additional 60 minute and one 5 minute parking space, to provide turnover outside the immediately adjacent businesses on the north side of London Street. 

·   Provides clear road markings to keep emergency service vehicle entrances clear. 

·   Rationalises redundant restrictions associated with the old fire station layout. 

·   Helps to maintain property access to residential properties. 

·   Provides Residents Only parking spaces for properties which qualify for the Residents Only Parking Policy. 

6.27    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Reallocates five unrestricted parking spaces to time restricted parking

·   Not supported by some who submitted during consultation


 

7.   Option 2 - Install Parking time restrictions on the both sides of London Street

Option Description

7.1       Install parking restrictions on the both sides of London Street in accordance with Attachment B.

7.2       This option will convert four currently unrestricted parking spaces to 60 minute parking, outside #48, #50 and #54, and will convert one unrestricted parking space to five minute parking outside #56 and the ATM.

7.3       Two parking spaces outside Albion Square and the Shroom Room are pre-existing 60 minute parking spaces.

7.4       This option will also convert seven parking spaces on the south side of London Street to 60 minute parking, outside #47, #53, #55 and the Lyttelton Fire Station.

7.5       This option includes two Residents Only Parking spaces outside 64 London Street and 66 London Street, outside properties which are zoned residential, which have no off-street parking and no capacity to create off-street parking.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.7       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

7.8       See section 6.7-6.14. This option is inconsistent with consultation feedback which request that parking restrictions not be installed on the south side of London Street, and some submitters opposed any additional parking restrictions. In total, six out of 26 submitters do not support this option, and a further 12 indicated support but have some concerns, primarily about the introduction of time restrictions:

·   Six submitters oppose the proposal (although none specifically oppose the crosshatching and no stopping),

·   Eight submitters support the proposal, and

·   12 submitters support the plan in general but with some concerns.

7.9       See section 6.7 – 6.14 for further details.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.11    Cost of Implementation - $2,000 for the installation of traffic controls, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

7.12    Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

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

Legal Implications

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

Risks and Mitigations

7.15    Not applicable.

Implementation

7.16    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

7.17    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.18    The advantages of this option include:

·   Provides eleven additional 60 minute and one five minute parking space, to provide turnover near businesses on London Street.

·   Provides clear road markings to keep emergency service vehicle entrances clear.

·   Rationalises redundant restrictions associated with the old fire station layout.

·   Helps to maintain property access to residential properties.

·   Provides Residents Only parking spaces for properties which qualify for the Residents Only Parking Policy. 

7.19    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Reallocates eleven unrestricted parking spaces to time restricted parking.

·   Not supported by some who submitted during consultation.


 

8.   Option 3 - Do Minimum, install crosshatching and No Stopping Restrictions

Option Description

8.1       Do minimum – do not change any time restrictions, install only the No Stopping restrictions and crosshatching, and remove the redundant crosshatching outside the old fire station entrance.

8.2       This will improve access to properties and for emergency services, and will make minimal changes to the on-street parking when the redundant crosshatching is removed. Staff note that this crosshatching is regularly used for parking at present.

8.3       This option includes two Residents Only Parking spaces outside 64 London Street and 66 London Street, outside properties which are zoned residential, which have no off-street parking and no capacity to create off-street parking.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

8.5       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

8.6       This option is inconsistent with community requests for parking restrictions from businesses along London Street, and inconsistent with the feedback received during consultation. In total, 20 out of 26 submitters do not support this option.

·   Six submitters oppose the proposal (although none specifically oppose the crosshatching and no stopping),

·   Eight submitters support time restrictions, and

·   12 submitters support the plan in general but with some concerns.

8.7       See section 6.7 to 6.14 for further details.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

8.9       Cost of Implementation - $1,000 for the installation of traffic controls, plus $1500 for consultation and the preparation of this report and the previous report

8.10    Funding source - Traffic Operations Budget.

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

Legal Implications

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

Risks and Mitigations

8.13    Not applicable.

Implementation

8.14    Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

8.15    Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Maintains the status quo; has minimal impact on current parking

·   No submissions during consultation expressed concern with this aspect of the proposal

·   Provides clear road markings to keep emergency service vehicle entrances clear

·   Rationalises redundant restrictions associated with the old fire station layout

·   Helps to maintain access to properties along London Street

·   Provides Residents Only parking spaces for properties which qualify for the Residents Only Parking Policy. 

8.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not provides an area for vehicle turnover outside the immediately adjacent businesses

9.   Option 4 – Angle Parking

Option Description

9.1       The Community Board requested that staff provide additional information on the possibility of introducing angle parking to the section of London Street between Dublin Street and Canterbury Street.  Staff have considered various configurations for angle parking for compliance with the relevant standard, impact on the overall number of parking spaces, and safety implications. 

Number of Parking Spaces

9.2       New Zealand Standards (AS 2890.5-1993), adopted by Council, contain provisions for on-street angle parking.

9.3       To meet the requirements of the Standard within London Street’s 13.7m carriageway it is not feasible to retain parking on both sides of the road. 

9.4       Having to remove parking on one side of the road to facilitate angle parking negates the anticipated parking space gains. The following table outlines angle parking options and the impact on parking space numbers. 

Angle of parking

Road Width Required (NB no parking provided opposite angle parking)

Gain (+) or Loss (-) of Parking Spaces

30 degrees

12.1 m

-7

45 degrees

13.7 m

-3

60 degrees

14.8 m

Insufficient width to meet standard

90 degrees

15.3 m

Insufficient width to meet standard

Table 1: Summary of Angle Parking Options

9.5       As indicated above all compliant options for angle parking involve a reduction in the number of spaces compared to the current layout. 

9.6       Whilst it is recognised that the section of London Street between Oxford Street and Canterbury Street has angle parking and retains parallel parking on the opposite side of the road, this configuration does not meet the present standard.  Because of this and the crash record (refer paragraph 9.5 below), this particular configuration is not supportable for the Dublin Street to Canterbury Street section of London Street. 

Crash Analysis

9.7       Staff reviewed the crash record of London Street for the past 10 years (2008 – 2018).  There has been one recorded crash between Canterbury and Dublin Streets, being the street block to which the recommendations of this report relate to. This compares to five reported crashes between Canterbury and Oxford Streets, where there is presently angle parking. Of these five crashes, three involved vehicles reversing out of the existing angle parking into oncoming traffic.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

9.9       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

9.10    This option has been specifically requested by the community board and by eleven submitters during consultation.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

9.12    Cost of Implementation - $1,500 for consultation and the preparation of this report.

9.13    Funding source – Not applicable

9.14    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Not applicable

Legal Implications

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

Risks and Mitigations

9.16    None identified.

Implementation

9.17    Implementation dependencies – Not applicable.

9.18    Implementation timeframe - Not known.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

9.19    The advantages of this option include:

·   Community support (although based on an assumption that the option will increase parking).

9.20    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Loss of parking.

·   Increased crashes.

10. Option 5 - Do Nothing

Option Description

10.1    Do not make any changes to existing parking restrictions.

Significance

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

10.3    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

10.4    This option is inconsistent with community requests and feedback received during consultation. In total 20 out of 26 submitters do not support this option.  Refer to paragraphs 6.7 – 6.15 for further details.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

10.6    Cost of Implementation - $1,500 for consultation and the preparation of this report

10.7    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs - $0

10.8    Funding source – Existing staff budgets.

Legal Implications

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

Risks and Mitigations

10.10  Not applicable.

Implementation

10.11  Implementation dependencies - Not applicable.

10.12  Implementation timeframe - Not applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

10.13  The advantages of this option include:

·   Has no impact on current parking. 

10.14  The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not provide an area for vehicle turnover outside the immediately adjacent businesses.

·   It does not provide clear road markings to keep emergency service vehicle entrances clear.

·   It does not rationalises redundant restrictions associated with the old fire station layout.

·   It does not help to maintain access to properties along London Street.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Option 1: Parking Restrictions on the North Side of London Street Only

66

b

Option 2: Parking Restrictions on Both Sides of London Street

67

c

Resident's Only Parking Spaces on London Street

68

d

Option 3: Crosshatching and No Stopping Restrictions

69

e

Consultation Feedback

70

 

 

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

Peter Rodgers - Passenger Transport Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

12.    Oxford/Winchester Street Pedestrian Improvements. Additional Parking Space

Reference:

19/16841

Presenter(s):

Andy Cameron. Junior Project Manager

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to request that the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board approve changes to no stopping resolutions; previously approved in resolution BKCB/2018/00166 at the meeting of 12th February 2018; to create an additional parking space on Oxford Street. The original plan with an additional parking space marked can be seen in Attachment A.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated after the detailed design process for Oxford/Winchester Street pedestrian improvements highlighted opportunities for an additional parking space to be added to the scheme approved by Banks Peninsula Community Board resolution BKCB/2018/00166.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision 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 comparing factors relating to this decision against the criteria set out in Council's Significance and Engagement Policy.  

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Note that for the purposes of the following resolutions: (1) an intersection is defined by the position of kerbs on each intersecting roadway; and (2) The resolution is to take effect from the commencement of physical road works associated with the project as detailed in resolution BKCB/2018/00166.

2.         Revoke all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the east side of Oxford Street, commencing at a point 95 metres north of its intersection with London Street and continuing in a northerly direction for a distance of 18 metres.

3.         Approve that the Stopping of vehicles be prohibited on the east side of Oxford Street, commencing at a point 95 metres north of its intersection with London Street and continuing in a northerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       Due to changes that have been made to the scheme design; as presented to the Board on 27th August 2018; it has been possible to increase parking on Oxford Street by one space.

 

 

 

 

 

5.   Context/Background

Back ground

5.1       Time line to date

·   Oxford Street/ Winchester Street pedestrian upgrades approved by Board on 12th February 2018.

·   The project intent to retain and match existing buildouts was found to be cost prohibitive during the detailed design process.

·   An alternative solution was discussed with the Board at its seminar on 27 August 2018

·   The decision to not retain the existing buildouts has allowed for the buildouts to be constructed further into the carriageway affording greater pedestrian sight line distances, and the addition of one parking space.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Scheme plan with additional space marked

75

 

 

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

Andy Cameron - Junior Project Manager

Clarrie Pearce - Senior Project Manager

Approved By

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

  


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

13.    Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - February 2019

Reference:

19/17907

Presenter(s):

Joan Blatchford - Community Governance Manager
Penelope Goldstone - Community Governance Manager

 

 

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 Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1.         Receive the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report for February 2019.

2.         Decide whether to make a submission to the Ministry of Transport on New Zealand’s potential accession to the International Maritime Organisation Treaty – Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973.

3.         Consider member attendance to the Community Boards Conference 2019 being held in New Plymouth, and for an entry for the Best Practice Excellence Awards being held as part of the conference.

3.   Community Board Activities and Forward Planning

3.1       Memos/Information/Advice to the Board

3.1.1      Traffic Management in Akaroa – At its 17 December 2018 meeting Mike Norris spoke to the Board regarding the untidy state of Akaroa, its lack of appropriate public toilets and the state of the traffic management signage associated with the cruise ship visits. Mr Norris asked why the traffic management signage cannot reflect the nature of Akaroa as a tourist town. Staff provided the following advice.

                The temporary traffic management signage in Akaroa must be of a standard format under the Code of Practice – Temporary Traffic Management.

                Mr Norris asked the following additional questions, which staff are investigating.

·     Why can the Council not find a more suitable location for the temporary toilets?

·     Can the traffic cones that are stored inside a fence at the temporary information site be stored out of sight?

3.1.2      Akaroa Lighthouse Slip – At its 17 December 2018 meeting the Board requested an update on the slip below the Akaroa Lighthouse, which was reported to still be moving. Staff provided the following advice.

   In late-2018 a geotechnical engineer reviewed the previous and most recent survey results, which did not indicate that any significant movement had taken place. In early-January 2019 a new survey was undertaken, with no significant change from the previous results. In early-2019 development of remediation options into a preferred design will begin.

3.2       Lyttelton Design Review Panel

3.2.1      The Lyttelton Design Review Panel, an advisory body of the Banks Peninsula Community Board, provides free, local and independent design advice for developers, property owners and the Council to promote and assist quality design outcomes that embody and contribute to Lyttelton’s built character.

3.2.2      In the last year the Panel has provided design advice on two commercial, two residential, two mixed use and one public development, the Lyttelton Museum.

3.2.3      Please visit the website below for more information about the Panel.

https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/plans-strategies-policies-and-bylaws/urbandesign/lyttelton-design-review-panel/

3.3       Board area Consultations/Engagement/Submission opportunities

3.3.1      Maritime New Zealand’s Proposed Maritime Levy and Fees – The Board made a submission to this proposal (attached as Attachment A).

3.3.2      Prevention of Pollution from Ships – The Ministry of Transport is consulting on whether New Zealand should sign up to an international treaty for the prevention of air emissions from ships.

The International Maritime Organisation treaty, Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, regulates emissions that are harmful to public health in port and harbour communities, deplete the ozone layer and contribute to climate change.

Consultation closes on Monday 11 February 2019. For more details please visit: https://www.transport.govt.nz/multi-modal/currentlyconsultingon/consultation-on-marpol-annex-vi-treaty-to-reduce-air-pollution-in-ports-and-harbours/

3.4       Annual Plan and Long Term Plan matters

3.4.1      Board members have provided feedback and were invited to a workshop with the Council on 4 December 2018 to discuss the Annual Plan.

3.5       Community Board Conference 2019

3.5.1      The 2019, bi-annual, Community Boards Conference, run by the New Zealand Community Boards Executive Committee as part of Local Government New Zealand, will take place from 11 – 13 April 2019 in New Plymouth.

3.5.2      The theme of the Conference is “Community Boards in a time of change.”

3.5.3      The Board has operational funding to draw upon for attendance and a formal report will be prepared seeking approval for those who are interested in attending.

3.5.4      In the meantime, members are asked to note the dates and the attached (Attachment B) draft programme, and to indicate any interest in attending.

3.6       Community Board Best Practice Awards 2019

3.6.1      As part of the Community Boards Conference 2019, noted above, Boards are able to submit Best Practice Excellence Awards applications that demonstrate what Boards have achieved over the last two-year period.

3.6.2      Entries must be lodged by 5.00pm Friday 8 March 2019.

3.6.3      There are three categories for submitting an entry:

·      Community Leadership

·      Enhancing Communities

·      Engaging Communities

3.6.4      Subject to members indicating interest in attending, the Board is invited to consider if there is a suitable project that could be submitted for an award.

3.7       Board Reporting

Board members are asked to highlight topics for inclusion in Newsline, the Board Newsletter and/or the Report to Council.

4.   Community Board Plan – Update against Outcomes

4.1       The Board received an update on the Community Board Plan in the September Area Report. The next update will be compiled as at 31 December 2018 and presented to the Board next month.

5.   Significant Council Projects in the Board Area

5.1       Strengthening Community Fund Projects

Nothing to report.

5.2       Infrastructure Projects Underway (This is a new reporting format from the Capital Delivery, Community Facilities Team)

5.2.1      Garden and Heritage Renewal of Building – Little River Railway Station

·     Project Phase: Execute / Detailed Design

·     A project is underway to complete exterior work to the Little River Craft Centre (Railway Station). Work includes replacing rotten timber, replicating the damaged skylight that was removed, painting the exterior, and improving accessibility. Staff are currently working through the detailed design for the repairs.

·     Physical works are likely to start in March 2019. The project is currently tracking to programme and budget.

5.2.2      Marine Seawall Renewals

·     Project Phase: Plan / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     This project is to renew seawalls around Banks Peninsula and coastal areas. Some walls will require input from other Council Units and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

·     For this financial year work is on Little Akaloa seawall (under construction), Akaroa township seawall repairs between the main wharf and fire station (investigating consent requirements), and Akaroa boat park seawall repairs.

5.2.3      Marine Structures Renewals

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This programme of work is for the renewal of marine structures around Banks Peninsula, including wharves (excluding Akaroa wharf), jetties, slipways and boat ramps.

·     This financial year this programme is working on 25 sites with 70% either completed or in contract.

5.2.4      Marine Structures in Outer bays, Lyttelton Harbour and Akaroa Harbour Renewals

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     Construction is progressing well for FY17 structures. This financial year’s budget is for wharf repairs to Robinsons Bay re-piling, which is in the construction phase.

5.2.5      Monuments and Artworks Renewals

·     Project Phase: Execute / Detailed Design

·     A delivery package is underway to conserve three monuments and artworks including the Britomart Canon in Akaroa. The project is currently on budget and tracking to programme.

5.2.6      Head to Head Walkway

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This project is to provide/construct a walkway around Lyttelton Harbour from Godley Head to Adderley Head.

·     Staff are preparing material for consultation on the route between Orton Bradley Park and Charteris Bay. Staff are also working on sections of track upgrades, signage and route options for the rest of the Head to Head route.

·     This will be reported to the Head to Head Walkway Working Party at its next meeting in March 2019 and to the Community Board.

5.2.7      Head to Head Governors Bay to Allandale Seawall Renewal

·     Project Phase: Plan / Programme Planning (concept)

·     Staff are currently investigating options and working on designs for various sections of the sea wall between Allandale and Governors Bay. Works will be staged over three financial years where budget has been allocated.

·     This will be reported to the Community Board to determine the appropriate next steps.

5.2.8      Naval Point Development Plan

·     Project Phase: Plan / Programme Planning (concept)

·     The Naval Point Development Plan is being developed to create a future vision for the area. The project team has been meeting with recreation and user groups to determine the future use of the site. A set of options are currently being developed for public consultation, which is planned for early-2019.

·     Maintenance work is now complete on the site in advance of the main 2018 / 2019 boating season.

5.2.9      Former Council Stables – Donald Street

·     Project Phase: On Hold

·     This project is currently on hold until the future use is determined.

5.2.10    Signal Box - Norwich Quay

·     Project Phase: On Hold / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     This project is currently on hold due the proximity of a heritage boat preventing the works from commencing.

5.2.11    Lyttelton Playground and Skate Park Retaining Wall

·     Project Phase: Close / Defects Liability

·     Repairs of earthquake damage to the retaining walls surrounding the Lyttelton Playground and Skate Park were completed in April 2018 with the installation of murals and landscape plantings.

5.2.12    Cressy Terrace Tennis Courts

·     Project Phase: Plan / Detailed Design

·     This project is to repair the earthquake damaged tennis court. The work will be undertaken following the repair of the adjacent Cressy Terrace retaining wall. The project is currently in the detailed design phase prior to tendering in early-2019.

5.2.13    Cass Bay Playground Toilet Renewal

·     Project Phase: Plan / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     A project has commenced to renew the Cass Bay toilet block. Staff have held initial discussions with the Cass Bay Residents Association and Reserve Management Committee to gain a better understanding of requirements for the area.

·     Design and consultation will occur this financial year with construction programmed to commence Spring 2019.

5.2.14    Governors Bay Community Centre and Pool Reserve - Play and Recreation

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This project is to provide an upgrade of the park for the community with play and recreational equipment, landscaping and furniture.

·     The following components of the project are complete: junior play area, pool fencing, paved path to provide better connection between the roadside, pool and Community Centre and planting around the Community Centre and pool.

·     The current phase of the project is tendering for construction of the skate bowl and pump track. Construction is expected to start in autumn 2019 and take approximately two months (subject to weather and site conditions).

5.2.15    Allandale Domain Renewal

·     Project Phase: Plan / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     Staff are currently collating information and carrying out investigations. This will be reported to the Reserve Management Committee and the Community Board to determine appropriate next steps.

5.2.16    Diamond Harbour Track and Signage Renewal

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     Physical works were completed in November 2018 with some minor planting and signage to be completed by the end of June 2019.

5.2.17    Diamond Harbour Cemetery Drainage Works

·     Project Phase: Execute / Project Handover

·     This project is to develop a revised plan for traditional, ashes and green burials at Diamond Harbour Cemetery. All current works completed.

5.2.18    Port Levy Toilet Block Renewal

·     Project Phase: Execute / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     Site investigations are underway to support the design for the new toilet block.

5.2.19    Little River Coronation Library

·     Project Phase: On Hold / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     This project is currently on hold as part of the Heritage Expression of interest process.

5.2.20    Little River Railway Goods Shed

·     Project Phase: Execute / Tender for Construction

·     This project is to undertake earthquake repairs and maintenance works, including replacement of the foundation, replacement of deteriorated materials and strengthening, painting and relocation of electrical services.

·     The project scope and drawings have been compiled. The tender has recently closed and is currently being evaluated. Construction is due to start in early-2019, with the opening planned for late-2019.

5.2.21    Awa-iti Domain Tennis Courts Renewal

·     Project Phase: Initiate / Investigation and Scheme Design

·     This project is in the early stages of investigation and design.

5.2.22    Kukupa Hostel

·     Project Phase: On Hold

·     This project is currently on hold until future use is determined.

5.2.23    Gaiety Hall Renewals and Replacements

·     Project Phase: Execute / Tender for Construction

·     Contractors have been appointed and are due to commence works to minimise the impact on the local community's use of the Theatre for events.

5.2.24    Stanley Park Renewal

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This project is an ongoing project that involves the completion of works detailed in the Management Plan. This year focusses on replanting, track upgrades and new stone steps at the main entranceway.

5.2.25    Robinsons Bay Reserve Renewals

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This project is for the development of Robinsons Bay Reserve and repairs on the wharf. This year focusses on re-piling of the wharf, which is in construction phase. Work is due to be completed early-2019.

5.2.26    Garden of Tane Renewals

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This project is for capital works to be undertaken in line with the Management Plan and through consultation with the Reserve Management Committee. For this financial year work is planned on tracks, drainage, trees and signage. All aspects are either in consenting or underway and on track for completion this financial year.

5.2.27   Okains Bay Renewal

·     Project Phase: Execute / Construction

·     This project is for renewal of playground safety surfacing, landscaping and furniture replacement. This financial year sees the installation of an outside barbeque for the picnic area and planting works throughout the reserve.

6.   Significant Community Issues, Events and Projects in the Board Area

6.1       Little River Big ideas

6.1.1      Little River Drainage

                                      Staff facilitated a meeting with Trust representatives with relevant Drainage staff Tim Ayers and Paul Dickson.  At the meeting it was confirmed that $825,000 capital projects funding is in the LTP and a project manager for the Little River drainage project has been appointed.  In the interim, during November and December, City Care carried out its normal 'routine' maintenance cutting, clearing and generally tidying up of the Land Drainage Operation's drains around the Little River area.  Community Governance team will facilitate community input into the Renewals Project as the project proceeds further.

 

6.1.2      Little River Playground

                                   Staff facilitated the drafting of a letter on behalf of Kate Russell, Parks Community Partnerships Manager, confirming that LTP Funding has been allocated for the Playground Project and that it is scheduled to proceed 2019/2020. The letter was requested so that Little River Wairewa Community Trust (LRWCT) can use the confirmation of funding to explore additional resources from external funders to enhance what is envisioned.

6.1.3      Little River Tennis Court

Will Rowe has been appointed as the Tennis Court Capital Projects Manager. Staff facilitated a meeting between the new Project Manager and all the relevant community stakeholders including Chair of Little River Wairewa Trust; Chair of the Awa-iti Reserve Management Committee (RMC) as well as Little River School Headmaster; Playcentre Committee members and the Wairewa elected member.  A Project Initiation meeting was held on 5 December 2018. Will Rowe will come with initial costings to the next RMC meeting in February.

 

6.1.4      Little River Welcome Signage Erection within Heritage Park at Little River

Image may contain: 2 people, people standing, tree, grass, sky, outdoor and nature                                   Staff facilitated a meeting between Little River Wairewa Community Trust Project Manager Dean Harvey, the Wairewa elected member and Parks staff to progress the re-erection of the Welcome to Little River Sign gifted from the Wairewa Rūnanga to the Trust. The Trust consulted with Rūnanga and it has been agreed that the sign will be best placed within the Heritage Park.  The matter has been referred to the NZTA as the signage placement falls within its jurisdiction.

 

6.1.5      Little River Awa-iti Domain Long Term Plan Request for Exercise Equipment

https://scontent.fakl5-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/50129050_553905741743217_4338797334176464896_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent.fakl5-1.fna&oh=f597737d0a7d39d1a25e439a0bf16c16&oe=5CD625A8The Wairewa elected member and staff consulted with Little River community members regarding the location of domain exercise equipment following confirmation that $15,000 of Parks RMC funding has been allocated to the domain. Bootcamp attendees, RMC Committee and A&P Show Committee members confirmed the area adjacent to tennis court as preferred location and Staff have linked CCC staff to ensure liaison between Parks projects.

6.2       Okains Bay Maori and Colonial Museum

6.2.1      Staff have had a series of meetings with Museum Director Ian Day and a fundraising timeline has been drawn up. Staff facilitated a meeting with DIA Lottery Fund Advisor, subsequent to which Ian has submitted a Lottery Community application for operational costs as well as a Lottery TUIA250 application for $250000+.  An application to the Ministry of Arts and Culture and Heritage Waitangi Day Fund was made and $2000 awarded for the event.   Ian Day has also met with RATA regarding support. Creative Communities funding will be sought if Lottery TUIA 250 application is unsuccessful.

6.3       Okains Bay Enhancement Society

6.3.1      Since the Mayor and Councillors visited Okains Bay in August significant progress has taken place. The Steering Group elected to proceed with the existing Okains Bay Enhancement Society and the Staff have facilitated a series of monthly meetings with the group in September, October and November 2018 as well as the group holding additional meetings to progress identified priority projects.  Staff facilitated a meeting with DIA Lottery Fund Advisor subsequent to which the Committee has successfully submitted an application to Lottery Community Fund for a variety of Community Enhancement initiatives as well as operational, staffing costs. Staff have also requested and followed up service requests to Parks, Roading, Drainage and Traffic Management to address concerns raised in community meetings.

6.4       Okains Bay Reserve Management Committee

6.4.1      Community Governance staff attended the Okains Bay Reserve Management Committee in December to provide an update with regard to the RMC Review and the planned Feasibility Study scheduled for January 2019. They addressed questions regarding community governance and advised the RMC to be proactive in playing an active role during the Reserve Management Plan process. The Committee was further advised that Parks staff have sought third party legal advice with regard to compliance with Reserves Act as applied to Okains Bay given that some of the reserve land is iwi owned. They explained that this advice will impact and inform whether or not a letter to the Department of Conservation is required. 

6.5       Ataahua Reserve Management Committee

6.5.1      Completion of the Kaituna Hall Upgrade: On the 5th of November 2018, the Wairewa Elected Member and staff met with the Ataahua Reserve Management Committee to inspect the completed upgrade. The Committee was thrilled with the outcome and the beautiful work done on the flooring. The Hall was reopened at the community’s December Christmas Party.

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.6          Lyttelton Community Visioning

Over the last year, members of local Lyttelton groups and organisations have been meeting to discuss a community vision for the town.

On 14th January a group, somewhat depleted by holiday absences, met to discuss what is being called a “narrative statement” which is the culmination of the discussions. Those present agreed that it captured the multi-faceted themes of Lyttelton and then moved to discuss actions.  The Port Company representative agreed to host the next meeting.

 

Lyttelton’s Narrative Statement

Lyttelton: the Heart of the Harbour

Where you can explore from the Port to the peaks

Where you can be inspired by the sights and the sounds of artists and makers

Where you can uncover a unique heritage and learn from the past

Where you can feel the pulse of the Port, and the drift and grit of the sea and the shore

Where you can connect with the earth and connect with the people

Where you can plant a seed of hope and grow a future

Where you can find a welcome home

 

7.   Parks, Sports and Recreation Update (bi-monthly)

7.1       The next Parks, Sport and Recreation update will be provided in March 2019.

8.   Community Board Funding Update

8.1       The Banks Peninsula Discretionary Response Fund 2018/19 allocations are attached – Attachment C.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Board Submission - Maritime New Zealand’s Proposed Maritime Levy and Fees

87

b

Programme - Community Boards Conference 2019

89

c

Banks Peninsula Discretionary Response Fund Balance

93

 

 

Signatories

Authors

Liz Carter - Community Board Advisor

Philipa Hay - Community Development Advisor

Joan Blatchford - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Lyttelton

Penelope Goldstone - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Akaroa

Helen Hayes - Community Development Advisor

Andrea Wild - Community Development Advisor

Amy Hart - Support Officer

Fiona Smith - Support Officer

Approved By

Joan Blatchford - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Lyttelton

Penelope Goldstone - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula/Akaroa

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

  


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

PDF Creator 


Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board

04 February 2019

 

 

14.  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.