Waikura

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

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

 

Date:                                    Wednesday 20 March 2019

Time:                                    10am

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sally Buck

Jake McLellan

Alexandra Davids

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Brenda Lowe-Johnson

Deon Swiggs

Sara Templeton

 

 

15 March 2019

 

 

 

 

 

Arohanui Grace

Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

941 6663

arohanui.grace@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 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

C         7.        Correspondence.................................................................. 11

Staff Reports

C         8.        Hereford Street at Arts Centre- Proposed Parking and Stopping Restrictions........................................................................ 17

C         9.        22 Cholmondeley Avenue - Risingholme Community Centre - Deed of Lease...................................................................... 25

C         10.     9 Rolleston Avenue - Grant of Right to Convey Electricity Easement to Orion............................................................... 37

AC      11.     140 Main Road, Redcliffs - Name and Landscape Plan for New Park................................................................................... 43

 

B         12.     Elected Members’ Information Exchange....................................... 61

C         13.     Resolution to Exclude the Public........................................... 62  

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 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 Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Monday, 4 March 2019  be confirmed (refer page 5).

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.

5.   Deputations by Appointment

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

5.1

140 Main Road, Redcliffs – Name and Landscape Plan for New Park

David Miller, will speak on behalf of Sumner Cricket Club, regarding the club’s submission on the name and landscape plan for the new park at the former Redcliffs School.

 

 

 

6.   Presentation of Petitions

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


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

 

Waikura

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                    Monday 4 March 2019

Time:                                    3pm

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sally Buck

Jake McLellan

Alexandra Davids

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Deon Swiggs

Sara Templeton

 

 

4 March 2019

 

 

 

 

 

Arohanui Grace

Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

941 6663

arohanui.grace@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Part A          Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B          Reports for Information

Part C          Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2019/00038

Community Board Decision

That an apology for absence from Brenda Lowe-Johnson be accepted.

Yani Johanson/Jake McLellan                                                                                               Carried

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2019/00039

Community Board Decision

That the minutes of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Wednesday, 20 February 2019 be confirmed with the following amendment:

Clause 15. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Heathcote Expressway Cycleway the paragraph is to read:

The Board highlighted their concern regarding a report for an amendment to the Heathcote Expressway Cycleway Route to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee.  The proposed amendment was not forwarded to the Board for their consideration prior to the Committee’s consideration of the matter and the Board Chairperson was not invited to attend the relevant committee meeting as per the Council’s resolution of 9 March 2017 in relation to the Committee’s delegations.

Darrell Latham/Tim Lindley                                                                                                    Carried

 


 

4.   Public Forum

Part B

4.1      Stepping Stone for Nature

Part B

Valerie Campbell, local resident, addressed the Board and requested support for a proposal of a community planting effort to turn 5 Clarendon Terrace, (which was recently purchased by Council as part of the Land Drainage Programme), into an indigenous eco-hub that becomes part of the stepping stones to facilitate the movement of small biota across the city.

Following questions the Chairperson on behalf of the Board, thanked Ms Campbell for her attendance.

The Board requested that Ms Campbell’s presentation be forwarded to staff to be considered when the future of the properties purchased by Council under the Land Drainage Programme report is being prepared.

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

6.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

7.   Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board's 2018/19 Discretionary Response Fund - 2018/19 Youth Development Fund

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2019/00040 Original Staff Recommendation accepted without change.

Part C

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

1.         Approve a grant of $3,000 from the Linwood-Central-Heathcote 2018/19 Discretionary Response Fund to the Linwood-Central-Heathcote 2018/19 Youth Development Fund.

Yani Johanson/Jake McLellan                                                                                                 Carried

 

8.   Application to Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board 2018/19 Youth Development Fund - Various

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2019/00041 Original Staff Recommendations accepted without change.

Part C

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

1.        Approve a grant of $500 from its 2018/19 Youth Development Fund to Thomas Georg Pirker towards attending the Five Schools Educational and Cultural Exchange in Japan from 13 -17 April 2019.

2.        Approve a grant of $1,000 from its 2018/19 Youth Development Fund to Mileena Mackenzie-Jane Allan-Griffiths towards attending the Youth America Grand Prix (YAGP) Ballet competition in New York from 10 - 22 April 2019, and the American Ballet Theatre (ABT) Summer Intensive workshop in New York from 24 June - 26 July 2019.

Darrell Latham/Tim Lindley                                                                                                     Carried

 

9.   Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - March 2019

 

Staff Recommendations 

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

1.        Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for March 2019.

2.        Consider items for inclusion for the Board Report to the Council’s 11 April 2019 meeting.

3.        Consider items for inclusion in the Board April 2019 Newsletter.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2019/00042

Part B

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

1.         Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for March 2019.

2.         Requested progress updates on the following :

a.       Woodhill, Ferrymead Site – when the next part of the consultation will be carried out and reported to the Board.

b.    Te Oranga Waikura - how community concerns regarding design and landscaping defects are being mitigated and updating the neighbours of Te Oranga Waikura on proposed works.

c.        Purchas/Madras Street Intersection  -the progress of the installation of the no stopping restrictions.

3.        Approve Sally Buck and Yani Johanson to be the speakers at Linwood Youth Festival Experience (LYFE) on behalf of the Board.

4.        Request the following items be included in the Board April 2019 Newsletter:

a.    Te Oranga Waikura Nature Play Workshop that is to be held on 6 April 2019.

b.    Linwood Youth Festival Experience (LYFE)

c.    Richardson Terrace Pump Station Opening including information on the stormwater filter system that has been installed in Woolston Park.

d.    Alcohol Regulatory & Licensing Authority (ARLA) Upcoming Hearing on the Sale of Alcohol Application Appeal by Riccarton Liquorland, 375 Ferry Road.

3.        Agrees to hold a workshop to formulate the Board’s submission on the Council’s Draft 2019-2020 Annual Plan and delegates the Community Board Chairperson and/or Deputy Chairperson to authorise the Board’s 2019-2020 Annual Plan submission to be submitted.

Deon Swiggs/Alexandra Davids                                                                                               Carried

 

 

10. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Part B

The Elected Members shared the following information:

·    The Board was advised that the Charleston Residents’ Association have voiced their concern about the possibly removal of a the street seat on Barbour Street

·    The Board was updated on the works planned for the Stanmore Road Pedestrian  Crossing by Avalon Street, Richmond.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 4.15pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 4th DAY OF March 2019.

 

Sally Buck

Chairperson

   


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

7.     Correspondence

Reference:

19/228248

Presenter(s):

Liz Beaven, Community Board Advisor

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

Correspondence has been received from:

Name

Subject

Marie Kyle-Stevenson

Request Removal of Wooden Fence in Muritai Terrace, Mt Pleasant.

 

2.   Staff Recommendation

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.        Receive the information in the correspondence report dated 20 March 2019

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Correspondence - Request to remove Wooden Fence in Muritai Terrace.

12

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

8.     Hereford Street at Arts Centre- Proposed Parking and Stopping Restrictions

Reference:

19/197541

Presenter(s):

Michael Thomson, Transport Engineer – Traffic Operations

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1      The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve a new five minute parking area, relocated Mobility park, and reconfirm existing Parking and Stopping restrictions on the north side of Hereford Street between Rolleston Avenue and Montreal Street.

2.   Staff Recommendations

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

1.        Revoke any previous resolutions pertaining to any parking and stopping restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this report.

2.        Approves that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the north side of Hereford Street commencing at its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of nine metres.

3.        Approves that the parking of vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of 120 minutes and controlled by Parking Meters, (including Pay and Display machines or any approved means of payment) on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point nine metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 45 metres. This restriction is to apply Monday to Sunday, from 9am to 6pm.

4.        Approves that the parking of vehicles be reserved for vehicles with an approved mobility person’s parking permit, prominently displayed in the vehicle, in accordance with section 6.4 of the Land Transport-Road User Rule: 2004, on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 54 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres. This restriction is to apply at any time.

5.        Approves that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the north side of Hereford Street commencing at a point 60 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of six metres.

6.        Approves that the parking of vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of five minutes on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 66 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 33 metres. This restriction is to apply at any time.

7.        Approves that the parking of vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of 120 minutes and controlled by Parking Meters, (including Pay and Display machines or any approved means of payment) on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 99 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 50 metres. This restriction is to apply Monday to Sunday, from 9am to 6pm.

8.        Approves that a Loading Zone (Goods Vehicles only) be created and be restricted to a maximum period of five minutes, on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 149 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 17 metres.

9.        Approves that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the north side of Hereford Street commencing at a point 166 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction to its intersection with Montreal Street.

10.      Approves that these resolutions take effect when parking signage and/or road marking that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place (or removed in the case of revocations).

3.   Key Points

3.1      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)

3.2      The following feasible options have been considered:

·      Option 1 - Install new and reconfirmed parking and stopping restrictions (preferred option)

·      Option 2 - Do nothing

3.3      Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

3.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·      Meets the parking /servicing needs of the redeveloping Arts Centre. 

3.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·      Less paid P120 parking available for general use and less associated revenue. 

 

4.   Context/Background

Issue

4.1      As part of the repaired and redeveloped Arts Centre, a new tourist hotel is establishing, as detailed on Attachment A.

4.2      In 2017, this Board approved a new loading zone adjacent to the proposed five minute parking area.  Following discussions with the hotel developer’s consultants, it is desirable to create a five minute parking area, directly outside the new hotel frontage.

4.3      This short term parking area will prove for tour buses arriving /leaving the hotel, guests arriving to check in and be allocated a long term park, taxis picking up /dropping off hotel guests, and goods vehicles servicing the hotel. This parking management has been used at other central city hotels and works well.

4.4      The mobility park will be relocated a few metres west, on the other side of the driveway. The existing kerb cut down will retain the accessibility of this park. The existing P5 loading zone will be replaced by this larger P5 parking area.

Strategic Alignment

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

Decision Making Authority

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

4.7      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.

4.8      The installation of any signs and/or markings associated with parking and stopping restrictions must comply with the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004.

Assessment of Significance and Engagement

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

4.10    The level of significance was determined by the low level of impact and low number of people affected by the recommended decision

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

5.   Options Analysis

Options Considered

5.1      The following reasonably practicable options were considered and are assessed in this report:

·   Option 1 - Install Parking and No Stopping Restrictions (preferred option)

·   Option 2 - Do Nothing

5.2      No other options were considered.

Options Descriptions

5.1      Option One: Preferred Option:  Install Parking and No Stopping Restrictions.

5.1.1   Option Description: Install Parking and No Stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A

5.1.2   Option Advantages

·      Meets the needs of the repaired and redeveloped Arts Centre.

5.1.3   Option Disadvantages

·      Less paid P120 parking available for general use and less associated revenue. 

5.2      Option Two: Do Nothing 

5.2.1   Option Description:  Existing parking and stopping restrictions remain.

5.2.2   Option Advantages

·      Increased parking revenue. 

5.2.3   Option Disadvantages

·      Does not meet the needs of the repaired and redeveloped Arts Centre.

6.   Community Views and Preferences

6.1      The Arts Centre Committee has requested this change. The YMCA has no objections, and they spoke on behalf of tenants with the site.

6.2      The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports the preferred option.

7.   Legal Implications

7.1      This specific report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit however the report has been written using a general approach previously approved of by the Legal Services Unit, and the recommendations are consistent with the policy and legislative framework.

8.   Next Steps

8.1      Approval is required by the Linwood- Central –Heathcote Community Board.

8.2      If approved, the recommendations will be implemented approximately four weeks after the contractor receives the request.


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

9.   Options Matrix

Issue Specific Criteria

Criteria

Option 1 - Install No Stopping Restrictions

Option 2 – Do Nothing

Financial Implications

Cost to Implement

$300 for the installation of parking restrictions, plus $750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

$750 for consultation and the preparation of this report

Maintenance/Ongoing

Covered under the area maintenance contract and effect will be minimal to the overall asset.

$0

Funding Source

Traffic Operations Budget.

Existing staff budgets

Impact on Rates

No impact

No impact

Environmental Impacts

No impact

No impact

Social & Community Impacts

No impact

No impact

Accessibility Impacts

No impact

No impact

 

Statutory Criteria

Criteria

Option 1 - <enter text>

Option 2 - <enter text>

Impact on Manua Whenua

No impact

No Impact

Alignment to Council Plans & Policies

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

This option is inconsistent with Council’s Infrastructure Design Standard.


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Hereford Street at Art Centre - Proposed Parking and Stopping Restrictions

24

 

 

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

Michael Thomson - Transport Engineer

Approved By

Ryan Rolston - Team Leader Traffic Operations

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

9.       22 Cholmondeley Avenue - Risingholme Community Centre - Deed of Lease

Reference:

19/24956

Presenter(s):

Kathy Jarden, Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1      The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve the granting of a lease to Risingholme Community Centre Incorporated Society of the Risingholme Community Centre at 22 Cholmondeley Avenue.

Origin of Report

1.2      This report is staff generated as part of the process in managing activation of Council’s community facilities and heritage assets.  With repairs near completion it is timely that a lease agreement is finalised with Risingholme Community Centre Trust Incorporated.

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 of a number of factors:

·      Level of Impact – no disruption or reduction of service and brings increased activity to promote heritage and community participation.

·      Possible environment, social and cultural impacts – brings a positive impact on heritage preservation and an opportunity for Council to achieve its outcomes.

·      Ownership or function of a strategic asset is affected – in granting a lease there is no transfer of ownership of the asset

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

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

1.        Note that public advertising of the intention to grant a lease to Risingholme Community Centre Trust Incorporated has been carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act.

2.        Approve the granting of a lease to Risingholme Community Centre Trust Incorporated over those buildings referred to as Risingholme Community Centre located at Risingholme Park at 22 Cholmondeley Avenue as shown in the plan in Attachment A to this report for a period up to 20 years (less one day) on terms and conditions as generally set out in this report.

3.        Authorise the Property Consultancy Manager to manage and conclude all issues and processes associated with the above resolution.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Community Development and Facilities

·      Level of Service: 2.0.7.0 Support community management and activation of facilities through a Council and Community partnership model - At least 80% of community facilities are activated and managed in partnership with the community.

4.2      The following feasible options have been considered:

·      Option 1 – Grant Lease (preferred option)

·      Option 2 – Run RFP process

4.3      Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·      Enabling active citizenship and connected communities

·      Heritage buildings are promoted through the Society.

·      The Society is able to generate income to promote educational and recreational activities on the park.

·      Utilisation of the buildings is one of the best ways to protect heritage fabric.

·      The use of the building is consistent with the purpose for which the land is held.

·      No alterations are required to enable the use as a public facility.

·      The Society would have better visibility over the site by its active presence and is in a better position to quickly report any signs of vandalism or damage to the Council. 

·      The Society can promote open days for heritage events.

·      The current activity is in keeping with the Conservation Plan

·      Complies with the Council’s “Lease Policy for the Creation of New Leases and Extension Requests Prior to Expiry – Property”

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·      In granting a lease, the Council relinquishes the day-to-day control of the activities and bookings within the building.

·      Dealing unilaterally with the Society may be seen as limiting the uses for the property and prevents any other interested parties from having an opportunity to enter into a lease with the Council.

 

5.   Context/Background

The Land and Buildings

5.1      The Risingholme Community Centre is located on Risingholme Park at 22 Cholmondeley Avenue, Opawa.  The land is held in certificate of title CB 7D/524, which is fee simple land held for the purpose of health, amusement and instruction of the public.  Refer to Attachment A for the overall site plan.

5.2      Risingholme Park is a park in accordance with section 138(2) of the Local Government Act 2002.

5.3      The buildings and their setting are listed as “Highly Significant” in the Christchurch City Council District Plan Schedule of Significant Historic Heritage.

5.4      The Risingholme Community Centre is registered under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 and has a listing as Historic Place Category 2.

5.5      The land and buildings were gifted to the Council in 1943.  Residents requested that the Council use the house as a community centre for Ōpāwa and surrounding area.

5.6      The Risingholme Community Centre Incorporated Society (the Society) was formed in 1944.

5.7      The location has provided a place for adult and community education classes ever since.

5.8      In the aftermath of the earthquake events of 2010/2011 and a fire, a programme of repair was undertaken to repair the buildings.   The buildings are expected to be completed in the next two months with an official reopening scheduled for early June 2019.

Proposed Agreement

5.9      There is no current lease agreement between the Council and Risingholme Community Centre Incorporated. 

5.10    The annual rental will be a nominal $1 per annum with rent review provisions three-yearly in accordance with any policy that the Council, as landlord, sets for the lease of heritage buildings and community facilities.

5.11    The lease agreement will set out the responsibilities of the Society and the Council and bring into place current legislation including health and safety requirements.

5.12    The Society will be responsible for promoting the use of Risingholme, take bookings for classes and functions, encourage and promote programmes and activities for use of the facilities, and collecting any hire fees for use of the same.

5.13    The Society will be responsible for expenses such as electricity, promotional costs, security, interior maintenance, rubbish removal, minor maintenance not affecting the heritage fabric of the building, public liability insurance and contents insurance for the Society’s chattels.

5.14    The Council will be responsible for carrying out scheduled maintenance work through its scheduled maintenance plan (SMP) contracts in place, including but not limited to annual inspections of heritage fabric and building wash downs, spouting and gutter cleaning, maintenance of the historic reserve.

5.15    The Council will pay any building insurances, rates or levies payable, fire service charges and maintenance of fire detecting and firefighting equipment, costs incurred in supplying a building warrant of fitness, and those obligations to keep the property in good order and repair.

Community Board Delegations

5.16    The Council has granted Community Boards the delegated authority to grant leases of non-reserve land for a maximum term of 20 years (less one day) to voluntary organisations over parks for the erection of pavilions and other buildings and structures associated with and necessary for the use of the land for outdoor sports games and other recreational activities.  The educational classes fall within this purpose.

Public Advertising

5.17    The intention to grant a lease to the Society has been advertised in the local newspaper for a period of one month in accordance with the Local Government Act. 

5.18    At the time of writing no submissions had been received.  Should any submissions be received between the time of writing and the Community Board’s consideration of the report, these will tabled at the Board’s meeting together with recommended responses.

Considerations - Dealing Unilaterally

5.19    Where there is only one logical lessee for a property, the Council may deal unilaterally with that Lessee.  This includes facilities linked to leases to not for profit organisations, community buildings and buildings on parks and reserves. 

5.20    There are a number of matters that need to be considered when contemplating a unilateral dealing.  (Refer to Attachment B)

5.21    The granting of a lease to the Society is a continuation of services that have been offered by the Society and supports the purpose for which the land is held.

5.22    This proposal does not depart from the considerations as outlined in the attachment to this report and officers believe that it would be appropriate for the Board to approve the lease to the Risingholme Community Centre Incorporated Society.


 

6.   Option 1 – Grant a Lease (preferred)

Option Description

6.1      Grant a lease to Risingholme Community Centre Incorporated to allow the Society to continue to promote and provide educational and recreational opportunities in the facilities located on Risingholme Park.

Significance

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

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

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 local community, individuals seeking further educational and recreational opportunities and the Society are specifically affected by this option.  Their views are supportive of the intention to grant a lease.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.7      Cost of Implementation – Preparation of lease documents to be covered through operational budgets.

6.8      Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – minor maintenance is the responsibility of the Society.  Capital costs for renewals and replacements are covered by the Council’s annual budgets for community facilities.

6.9      Funding source – Maintenance and ongoing costs not the responsibility of the Society are provided for in the annual plan for Community Facilities assets. 

Legal Implications

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

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

6.12    The legal consideration is the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s Leasing Council Property policy.  The preparation of the Deed of Lease is a routine matter on which the legal situation is well known and settled.

Risks and Mitigations  

6.13    There is an environmental risk that there may be damage to the heritage fabric of the buildings when undertaking any repairs.

6.13.1 Residual risk rating: The residual rating of the risk after the below treatment(s) is implemented will be low.

6.13.2 Planned or current treatment(s) include consultation with the Facilities Maintenance team for Community Facilities prior to carrying out any repairs in consultation with the heritage conservation plan for the built structures.

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies – Community Board resolution

6.15    Implementation timeframe – 1 month

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Enabling active citizenship and connected communities

·   Heritage buildings are promoted through the Society.

·   The Society is able to generate income to promote educational and recreational activities on the park.

·   Utilisation of the buildings is one of the best ways to protect heritage fabric.

·   The use of the building is consistent with the purpose for which the land is held.

·   No alterations are required to enable the use as a public facility.

·   The Society would have better visibility over the site by its active presence and is in a better position to quickly report any signs of vandalism or damage to the Council. 

·   The Society can promote open days for heritage events.

·   The current activity is in keeping with the Conservation Plan

·   Complies with the Council’s “Lease Policy for the Creation of New Leases and Extension Requests Prior to Expiry – Property”

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   In granting a lease, the Council relinquishes the day-to-day control of the activities and bookings within the building.

·   Dealing unilaterally with the Trust may be seen as limiting the uses for the property and prevents any other interested parties from having an opportunity to enter into a lease with the Council.

7.   Option 2 - Run a Request for Proposals process to determine the Lessee of the historic community centre buildings.

Option Description

7.1      Council officers would be required to carry out a Request for Proposals (RFP) process to determine future use of the building through an open tender process.

Significance

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

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

Impact on Mana Whenua

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

Community Views and Preferences

7.5      The local community, individuals seeking further educational and recreational opportunities and the Society are specifically affected by this option.  Their views would be determined through the response to an RFP process.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.7      Cost of Implementation – staff time and advertising to run RFP process.  Advertising costs of approximately $700, lease preparation costs $250.

7.8      Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – annual operating costs and capital costs for renewals and replacements are covered by the Council’s annual budgets for heritage buildings.

7.9      Funding source – Maintenance and ongoing costs are provided for in the annual plan for Community Facilities assets.  Any revenue returns would offset maintenance and ongoing costs. 

Legal Implications

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

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

7.12    The legal consideration is the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s Leasing Council Property policy and procurement guidelines.  The preparation of the Deed of Lease is a routine matter on which the legal situation is well known and settled.

Risks and Mitigations  

7.13    There is a risk of some reputational damage or negative impact on Council’s image in not granting a lease to a group whose work is well known in the community.    This may result in a minor disengagement with the community.

7.13.1 Residual risk rating: The residual rating of the risk after the below treatment(s) is implemented will be low.

7.13.2 Planned treatment(s) include a positive media campaign to counter potential negative press.

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies – successful RFP process, report to Community Board, possible Reserves Hearing Panel and Council decision

7.15    Implementation timeframe – 6-9 months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   Complies with lease policy – where there is a broader market and public interest the Council would seek tenants through an open transparent and public process.

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Risingholme Community Centre Incorporated Society may become disengaged and end their relationship with the Council and community.

·   The community centre buildings are not utilised until such time as a use is determined.

·   Risk to heritage fabric of building due to inactivity.

·   Requirement for resource consent if any activity does not meet current use of the buildings.

·   Building consent requirements resulting in any change of use may require material alterations to the buildings, e.g. accessibility ramps, toilet facilities.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Risingholme Community Centre - Aerial Map

33

b

Risingholme Community Centre Lease - Factors to Consider When Dealing Unilaterally

34

 

 

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

Kathy Jarden - Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Bruce Rendall - Head of Facilities, Property & Planning

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizen and Community

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

10.    9 Rolleston Avenue - Grant of Right to Convey Electricity Easement to Orion

Reference:

19/172859

Presenter(s):

Justin Sims, Property Consultant

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1      The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve the grant of an easement for the right to convey electricity to Orion over part of 9 Rolleston Avenue, being the Robert McDougall Art Gallery.  This is held by Council under the Christchurch City Council (Robert McDougall Gallery) Land Act 2003 which requires the Council to hold the land as a Local Purpose Reserve administered under the Reserve Act 1977.

Origin of Report

1.2      This report is staff generated following Orion’s request for an easement to protect new infrastructure they wish to install.

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 utilising the significance and engagement assessment worksheet, taking into consideration (amongst other things) the number of people affected and/or with an interest, the level of community interest already apparent for the issue, possible environmental, social and cultural impacts, possible costs/risks to the Council, ratepayers and wider community of carrying out the decision, and whether the impact of the decision can be reversed.  

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

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board, acting in the capacity of the administering body, resolve to:

1.        Recommend that the Chief Executive, acting as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate, consents to the granting of the easement to Christchurch City Council for the right to convey electricity as outlined in this report.

2.        Subject to the consent of the Minister of Conservation, approve the grant of the easement pursuant to Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 to:

a.        Orion - for the right to convey electricity over part of the Robert McDougall Art Gallery, 9 Rolleston Ave (Record of Title reference CB2A/544) shown on the plan at 5.7 below, or such other area if this is only a minor amendment.

3.        Authorise the Property Consultancy Manager, should the easement be granted with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, to finalise documentation to implement the easement.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1      This report does not support the Council's Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028).

4.2      Orion is upgrading its existing electrical infrastructure located on part of the Robert McDougall Art Gallery land.  The upgrading of this existing infrastructure (that is protected by the Electricity Act 1992) means they must acquire an easement to complete this work.

4.3      The Reserves Act 1977 does not provide Council with the ability to allow such infrastructure on reserves other than covered by an easement and therefore Council has no option, if it is to comply with the Reserves Act, than to grant an easement.

4.4      Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

4.4.1   The advantages of this option include:

·      The easement will protect the infrastructure in perpetuity.

·      The easement will identify the existence of the electrical equipment on the Title.

·      The easement is required to fulfil the Reserve Act.

4.4.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·      The property will be encumbered with an easement.

 

5.   Context/Background

Background

5.1      Orion is upgrading its existing electrical infrastructure located on part of the Robert McDougall Art Gallery, Christchurch Museum and Christs College.

5.2      The existing infrastructure does not require a no easement to protect it as this is effectively provided by the Electricity Act 1992 which gives Orion rights for the infrastructure on private land together with access and maintenance.

5.3      The Electricity Act does not however allow for upgrading and therefore Orion need an easement to install and protect their new infrastructure.

Easement

5.4      Section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 (“the Act”) provides that the administering body (Council), with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, may grant easements for an electrical installation or work.

5.5      Under section 48(2) of the Act, it is necessary for the Council to publicly notify its intention to grant an easement except where the reserve is unlikely to be materially altered or permanently damaged, and the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are unlikely to be permanently affected (section 48(3) of the Act). 

5.6      As the electrical infrastructure is predominantly below ground and in the location of Orion’s existing infrastructure, the rights of the public will not be materially or permanently affected and therefore no public notification is required.

5.7      The easement location is outlined in blue on the plan below.

5.8      For easements, the Council has delegated the role of administering body to Community Boards.

Consent of the Minister of Conservation

5.9      By way of the Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities the Minister of Conservation has delegated the Minister’s consent powers to Council. 

5.10    The delegation from the Minister includes an expectation that the role of administering body will be kept separate from the role as Minister’s delegate.  Council has addressed this through making community boards the administering body and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) the Minister’s delegate.

5.11    The Minister’s delegate responsibilities have not been sub-delegated to staff and remain with the Chief Executive.

5.12    In exercising the consent of the Minister of Conservation, the Council should be satisfied that due process has been followed and in this respect it is confirmed that the following matters have been considered:

·   The land is held by the Council as a local purpose reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

·   The easement being applied for, falls within the purposes specified in Section 48(1) of the Act.

·   There are sufficient grounds to waive the public notification requirements of Section 48(2) of the Reserves Act as the works comply with Section 48(3).

·   Iwi have not been consulted as this site is not a site of significance to tangata whenua in the City Plan.

6.   Option – Grant of right to convey electricity easement to Orion (preferred)

Option Description

6.1      That the Council grants an easement for the right to convey electricity to Orion under the Reserves Act 1977.   

Significance

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

6.3      The level of significance was determined by considering the number of properties involved, the effect on the public on the use of the reserve and the precedent effect and potential implications for the Council.

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      Not applicable.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.7      Cost of Implementation – Orion is paying for all costs associated with the grant of the easement. No compensation is payable as the easement is formalising an existing situation.

6.8      Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – N/A.

6.9      Funding source – N/A.

Legal Implications

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

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

6.12    The legal consideration is that the grant of an easement under section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 is required to allow for, and protect, Orion’s infrastructure on the title.

Risks and Mitigations  

6.13    There are no risks to Council.

Implementation

6.14    Implementation dependencies - none.

6.15    Implementation timeframe – imminent.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   The easement will protect the infrastructure in perpetuity.

·   The easement will identify the existence of the electrical equipment on the Title.

·   The easement is required to fulfil the Reserve Act.

6.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   The property will be encumbered with an easement.

 

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

Justin Sims - Property Consultant

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Bruce Rendall - Head of Facilities, Property & Planning

Anne Columbus - General Manager Corporate Services

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

11.    140 Main Road, Redcliffs - Name and Landscape Plan for New Park

Reference:

19/67542

Presenter(s):

Kelly Hansen, Team Leader Parks and Recreation Planning

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1      The purpose of this report is for the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to approve the name and landscape plan for the new park in Redcliffs that has arisen from the land swap with Redcliffs School, and to instruct staff to initiate an Expression of Interest (EOI) process for use of the community building in the park.

Origin of Report

1.2      This report is staff generated.

2.   Significance

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

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by the limited scope of the project and potential impacts on the local community.

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

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

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

1.        Recommend to the Council the adoption of the name Te Papa Kura Redcliffs Park for the new park on the site of the former Redcliffs School.

2.        Approve the amended landscape plan (Attachment A) for the new park on the site of the former Redcliffs School.

3.        With regards to the existing building located in the southern corner of the new park, instruct staff to progress an open Expressions of Interest process, followed by a closed Request for Proposals process, with results and final lease recommendation reported back to the Community Board for decision in due course.

 

4.   Key Points

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

4.1.1   Activity: Parks & Foreshore

·      Level of Service: 6.8.1.1 Parks are provided managed and maintained in a clean, tidy, safe, functional and equitable manner- (Provision) - Community Parks:5.9 ha/1000 people

4.2      The following feasible options have been considered:

·      Option 1 – approve the proposed name for recommendation to the Council to adopt, approve the amended draft landscape plan for the new park in Redcliffs, and instruct staff to progress an Expressions of Interest (EOI) process for use of the community building (preferred option).

·      Option 2 – recommend an alternative park name to the Council, approve an alternative landscape plan for the new park in Redcliffs, and do not progress and Expressions of Interest (EOI) process for use of the community building.

4.3      Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·      Cultural values and the former park are recognised in the name of new park.

·      Levels of service from former Redcliffs Park are replaced.

·      Retains assets identified by the Community Board.

·      Is responsive to community feedback.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·      None identified.

 

5.   Context/Background

Redcliffs School – Redcliffs Park ‘Land Swap’

5.1      On 7 September 2017, following a public consultation and hearing process, the Council resolved to proceed with a series of property transactions, giving effect to a ‘swap’ of land between the Council and the Ministry of Education. Redcliffs School is being rebuilt on the former Redcliffs Park site and a new park is to be developed on the former School site.

5.2      At its meeting on 14 February 2018, the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved:

5.2.1   In response to the Ministry of Education’s offer, recommend to the Council’s Chief Executive, the following assets on the current Redcliffs School site be retained for use within the new Redcliffs Park:

a.        The building located in the southern corner of the site, known as ‘Blocks 20, 21 & 22’

b.        The car park.

c.         The children’s playground, sand pit, shade sails and decking.

d.        Garden adjacent to the car park and trees.

e.        In-built furniture.

f.         Sealed path to playground.

g.        Boundary fencing.

h.        Services.

5.2.2   Instruct staff to investigate ‘Heritage Option 3’, outlined within Section 5.22, being interpretation signage and/or artwork for the school buildings which hold heritage significance.

5.3      These recommendations were subsequently approved by the Chief Executive.

5.4      At its meeting on 3 August 2018, the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board resolved to request staff to initiate a process to determine the use for the former Redcliffs School buildings that are going to be retained on site.

New Park Name

5.5      A name for the new park is required.

5.6      Raekura/Redcliffs, along with Te Ihutai (Avon-Heathcote Estuary), is a significant Māori cultural landscape. This area is of immense cultural and historical importance to manawhenua Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga and wider Ngāi Tahu Whanui being a place of significant settlement and food gathering by Waitaha, Ngāti Māmoe and Ngāi Tahu for over 650 years. The area’s numerous caves and rock shelters formed by overhanging coastal cliffs were utilised by Māori for shelter. The area offered the bounty of the estuary and provided access to the fishing grounds of Te Tai o Mahaanui (Pegasus Bay) via the estuary mouth. The Raekura/ Redcliffs area is among the most nationally significant archaeological areas (2017: Cultural Values Report: Raekura/Redcliffs School site and Redcliffs Park, Mahaanui Kurataio Ltd.)

5.7      The Māori name of Te Papa Kura School Park was gifted to the Council by Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Upoko Te Maire Tau. In English, papa means park. Kura means school and is also another word for red.

5.8      At a seminar on 13 August 2018, the Community Board indicated a willingness to accept the Māori component of the name but requested community consultation on the English component of the name.

5.9      The Ngāi Tūāhuriri Kaitiaki Portfolio Committee requested the addition of the word Rēhia (rēhia means recreation) to make the park name Te Papa Kura Rēhia and this was included as an option for consultation.

5.10    Five name options were consulted on, including an option for people to provide their own suggestion. Te Papa Kura Redcliffs Park was supported by almost half of the submitters as the preferred name.

Landscape Plan

5.11    A draft landscape plan for the new park, incorporating the assets to be retained, replacement sports fields and toilets, a new perimeter path, and future recreation spaces was presented to the Community Board at a seminar on 13 August 2018.

5.12    The draft landscape plan (Attachment B) was circulated in the community in November 2018.

5.13    In response to community feedback (Attachment C and D), the draft landscape plan has been amended (Attachment A) as follows:

·   Relocate seat in north west corner away from neighbours

·   Planting added behind goal of intermediate field to prevent balls rolling down driveway to road.

·   Recreation area near Main Road earmarked for interpretation/ history boards consistent with the Community Board’s previous resolution, with implementation subject to funding availability.

·   Recreation area near community building earmarked for picnic and BBQ area with some toddler play equipment  and petanque, with implementation subject to funding availability.

·   Seating by playground to be two directional for watching both play and sport.

·   Cycle stands added near car park and community building.

·   Perimeter planting to be mostly native consistent with community feedback and the cultural values report.

·   Trees added near playground for shade.

Community Building

5.14    The building located in the southern corner of the park has been retained as a potential community space. The building is modern, largely undamaged and includes functioning spaces and toilets.

5.15    The building has minor cosmetic damage and work required to the piles of the structure. The future use of this building is yet to be determined.

5.16    A network plan for the Council’s community facilities is currently under preparation, due for completion in September this year. There is no known need for a community facility in this area. Council-lead community research undertaken for the Redcliffs Community Facility identified a number of churches, organisations and clubs that own venues that can be hired by individuals and groups in the community. Five facilities were described. Some concern was expressed by research participants about potential oversaturation of facilities in such a small community, especially since none of the existing facilities are currently used to capacity.

5.17    Ferrymead Bays Football Club are the main sports users of Redcliffs Park and are likely to continue to be the main users of the new sports fields. They are not seeking clubrooms on the site and it is beyond the Council’s Level of Service to provide changing rooms for junior fields.

5.18    Use of the building needs to be consistent with the Reserves Act classification of the park which is currently a recreation reserve. This means it should be used for recreation and sporting activities, particularly outdoor recreation in the park. Any other use of the building may require a change of reserve classification.

5.19    Submitters to the landscape plan were able to indicate their interest for use of the community building on the park and responses are listed in Attachment C.

5.20    Some feedback from submitters was received on the need for vehicle access and car parking for the community building. Formal vehicle access across the park has not been included as it would conflict with the trees, sports fields, or playground. The building is less than 100m from Main Road.

5.21    Red zoned land to the rear of the building at 30 Raekura Place was suggested by some submitters for vehicle access and car parking. This land is within that part of the Port Hills/ Southshore/ Brooklands red zoned land agreed in 2017 to be transferred from the Crown to the Council. At this stage it is not known when that land will be transferred to the Council. It is not available as a car park as the Council has approved it for sale (CNCL/ 2017/00001) to fund the project costs associated with the Port Hills/ Southshore/ Brooklands red zone land.

5.22    It is proposed to initiate an open process inviting Expressions of Interest (EOI) to use the building followed by a closed and more detailed Request for Proposals (RFP) with selected groups. Ideally, the building would be leased to a combination of collaborating groups, with one overarching governing body as the key tenant who take responsibility for the ongoing management of the facility, including making it available for community use. These parameters can be included in the EOI process.


 

6.   Option 1 - Approve the proposed name and amended draft landscape plan for the new park in Redcliffs and progress an EOI for the building (preferred)

Option Description

6.1      Approve and recommend to the Council adoption of the name ‘Te Papa Kura Redcliffs Park’

6.2      Approve the amended landscape plan for the park (Attachment A).

6.3      Instruct staff to progress an Expressions of Interest (EOI) process for use of the community building

Significance

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

6.5      Engagement requirements for this level of significance is consultation with local and interested residents and groups.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.6      This option does involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions. The Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Kaitiaki Portfolio Committee raised no concerns in regards to the draft landscape plan.

Community Views and Preferences

6.7      Consultation ran from 19 November 2018 to 17 December 2018 and we received 53 submissions on ‘Have Your Say’ and via consultation leaflets, which provided feedback on additional items for the park, items not wanted in the park and the park name.

6.8      Leaflets were delivered to residents living adjacent to the park, absentee owners and local libraries and service centres.

6.9      Local stakeholders and submitters on the Redcliffs Park / Redcliffs School land swap, were emailed directly.

6.10    The opportunity to provide feedback was promoted on social media.

6.11    A combined drop in session on 27 November for both this and the school transport project was attended by 15 local residents.

6.12    Submitters most commonly asked for:

·   Play equipment for pre-schoolers.

·   A BBQ.

·   Vehicle access to the community building.

For a full list of requests see Attachment C.

6.13    Submitters most commonly asked for a skate park not to be included (6 mentions)

6.14    Those who provided feedback on the park name (51) preferred the name Te Papa Kura Redcliffs Park (24, 47%). Other names were as follows:

·   An English name (8, 16%)

·   Te Papa Kura Park (5, 10%)

·   Te Papa Kura School Park (5, 10%)

·   Te Papa Kura (2, 4%)

·   Te Papa Kura – Other (7, 14%, see Attachment C for a list of suggested names)

6.15    Submitters were also able to indicate their interest for use of the community building on the park and responses are listed in Attachment C.

6.16    Full submissions are available in Attachment D.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

6.18    Cost of Implementation – The cost of implementing the plan will be determined once detailed design is complete.

6.19    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Estimated $12,000 maintenance costs per annum

6.20    Funding source – $1.2million is available for development of the new park from the sale of the former Redcliffs Park and a contribution by the Ministry of Education. Maintenance costs will be transferred from former Redcliffs Park operational budget.

Legal Implications

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

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

Risks and Mitigations

6.23    There is a risk that archaeological investigations may uncover artefacts and items of interest. This may result in a need for extensive and expensive excavations or require design changes.

6.23.1 Residual risk rating: The residual rating of the risk after the below treatment is implemented will be medium.

6.23.2 Planned treatment includes filling rather than excavating the site to create level playing fields and minimising digging.

Implementation

6.24    Implementation dependencies - plan approval.

6.25    Implementation timeframe – 18 months.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.26    The advantages of this option include:

·   Cultural values and the former park are recognised in the name of new park.

·   Levels of service from former Redcliffs Park are replaced.

·   Retains assets identified by the Community Board.

·   Is responsive to community feedback.

6.27    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   None identified.

7.   Option 2 - Approve an alternative park name and an alternative landscape plan for the new park in Redcliffs and do not progress an EOI for the building

Option Description

7.1      Approve an alternative park name to ‘Te Papa Kura Redcliffs Park’ for the new park in Redcliffs.

7.2      Approve an alternative landscape plan for the new park in Redcliffs.

7.3      Do not progress an Expressions of Interest (EOI) process for the existing community building.

Significance

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

7.5      Engagement requirements for this level of significance is consultation with local and interested residents and groups.

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.6      This option does involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

7.7      As in Option 1. If the plan was to be altered significantly, further consultation may be required.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

7.9      Cost of Implementation – Costs would depend on the approved plan.

7.10    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – Costs would depend on the approved plan.

7.11    Funding source – As in Option 1.

Legal Implications

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

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

Risks and Mitigations

7.14    There is a risk that archaeological investigations may uncover artefacts and items of interest. This may result in a need for extensive and expensive excavations or require design changes.

7.14.1 Residual risk rating: The residual rating of the risk after the below treatment is implemented will be medium.

7.14.2 Planned treatment includes filling rather than excavating the site to create level playing fields and minimising digging.

Implementation

7.15    Implementation dependencies - dependent on an alternative plan being approved.

7.16    Implementation timeframe – once an amended plan is approved.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.17    The advantages of this option include:

·   None identified.

7.18    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Potential community dissatisfaction and delays.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Amended Landscape Plan for New Park in Redcliffs

51

b

Draft Landscape Plan for New Park in Redcliffs

52

c

Summary list of requests for New Park in Redcliffs

53

d

Submissions table on Landscape Plan for New Park in Redcliffs

54

 

 

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

Kelly Hansen - Team Leader Recreation & Planning

Approved By

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizen and Community

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

12.   Elected Members’ Information Exchange

 

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

 

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

13.   Resolution to Exclude the Public

Section 48, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

 

I move that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely items listed overleaf.

 

Reason for passing this resolution: good reason to withhold exists under section 7.

Specific grounds under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution: Section 48(1)(a)

 

Note

 

Section 48(4) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 provides as follows:

 

“(4)     Every resolution to exclude the public shall be put at a time when the meeting is open to the public, and the text of that resolution (or copies thereof):

 

            (a)       Shall be available to any member of the public who is present; and

            (b)       Shall form part of the minutes of the local authority.”

 

This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as follows:


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

20 March 2019

 

 

 

ITEM NO.

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED

SECTION

SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT

PLAIN ENGLISH REASON

WHEN REPORTS CAN BE RELEASED

14

Public Excluded Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 20 February 2019

 

 

Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.