Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                                    Thursday 27 February 2020

Time:                                   9.30am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Sara Templeton

Councillor Melanie Coker

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Catherine Chu

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor James Daniels

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor James Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Aaron Keown

Councillor Sam MacDonald

Councillor Phil Mauger

Councillor Jake McLellan

Councillor Tim Scandrett

 

 

21 February 2020

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Mary Richardson

General Manager Citizens & Community

Tel: 941 8999

 

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@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/

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

SUSTAINABILITY AND COMMUNITY RESILIENCE committee of the Whole - Terms of Reference / Ngā Ārahina Mahinga

 

 

Chair

Councillor Templeton

Deputy Chair

Councillor Coker

Membership

The Mayor and All Councillors

Quorum

Half of the members if the number of members (including vacancies) is even, or a majority of members if the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.

Meeting Cycle

Monthly

Reports To

Council

 

Delegations

The Council delegates to the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee authority to oversee and make decisions on:

·                Enabling active citizenship, community engagement and participation

·                Implementing the Council’s climate change initiatives and strategies

·                Arts  and culture including the Art Gallery

·                Heritage

·                Housing across the continuum of social, affordable and market housing, including innovative housing solutions that will increase the supply of affordable housing

·                Overseeing the Council’s housing asset management including the lease to the Otautahi Community Housing Trust

·                Libraries (including community volunteer libraries)

·                Museums

·                Sports, recreation and leisure services and facilities

·                Parks (sports, local, metropolitan and regional), gardens, cemeteries, open spaces and the public realm

·                Hagley Park, including the Hagley Park Reference Group

·                Community facilities and assets

·                Suburban Master Plans and other local community plans

·                Implementing public health initiatives

·                Community safety and crime prevention, including family violence

·                Civil defence including disaster planning and local community resilience plans

·                Community events, programmes and activities

·                Community development and support, including grants and sponsorships

·                The Smart Cities Programme

·                Council’s consent under the terms of a Heritage Conservation Covenant

·                Council’s consent to the removal of a Heritage Conservation Covenant from a vacant section.

Bylaws

The Council delegates to the Committee authority to:

·                Oversee the development of new bylaws within the Committee’s terms of reference, up to and including adopting draft bylaws for consultation.

·                Oversee the review of the following bylaws, up to and including adopting draft bylaws for consultation.

o      Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018

o      Brothels Bylaw 2013

o      Cemeteries Bylaw 2013

o      Dog Control Policy and Bylaw 2016

o      Freedom Camping Bylaw 2015

o      General Bylaw 2008

o      Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2018

o      Public Places Bylaw 2018

Community Funding

The Council delegates to the Committee authority to make decisions on the following funds, where the decision is not already delegated to staff:

·                Heritage Incentive Grant Applications

·                Extensions of up to two years for the uptake of Heritage Incentive Grants

·                Applications to the Events and Festivals Fund

·                Applications to the Capital Endowment Fund

·                Applications to the Enliven Places Projects Fund

·                Applications to the Innovation and Sustainability Fund

·                Applications to the Metropolitan Strengthening Communities Fund [The Funding Committee will make recommendations on applications to this fund and report back to this Committee]

Limitations

·                This Committee does not have the authority to set project budgets, identify preferred suppliers or award contracts. These powers remain with the Finance and Performance Committee.

·                The general delegations to this Committee exclude any specific decision-making powers that are delegated to a Community Board, another Committee of Council or Joint Committee. Delegations to staff are set out in the delegations register.

·                The Council retains the authority to adopt policies, strategies and bylaws.


 

Chairperson may refer urgent matters to the Council

As may be necessary from time to time, the Committee Chairperson is authorised to refer urgent matters to the Council for decision, where this Committee would ordinarily have considered the matter. In order to exercise this authority:

·                The Committee Advisor must inform the Chairperson in writing the reasons why the referral is necessary

·                The Chairperson must then respond to the Committee Advisor in writing with their decision.

·                If the Chairperson agrees to refer the report to the Council, the Council may then assume decision-making authority for that specific report.

 

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

Part A           Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B           Reports for Information

Part C           Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Karakia Timatanga................................................................................................... 7 

C          1.        Apologies / Ngā Whakapāha........................................................................ 7

B         2.        Declarations of Interest / Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga......................................... 7

C          3.        Confirmation of Previous Minutes / Te Whakaāe o te hui o mua........................ 7

B         4.        Public Forum / Te Huinga Whānui................................................................ 7

B         5.        Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga............................... 7

B         6.        Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga.................................................. 7

Staff Reports

C          7.        Update on the implementation of the Council's Healthy Food Action Plan 2017 15

C          8.        Safer Christchurch Strategy 2016-21 Annual Report..................................... 23

C          9.        Draft Submission on the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections....................................... 25

C          10.      Citizens & Community Internship Programme Update.................................. 37

C          11.      The Spire Sculpture - Request to Extend Installation Occupation at Latimer Square............................................................................................................. 39

C          12.      Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Approval for the former Wellington Woollen Mills Building, 96 Lichfield Street............................................................... 47

C          13.      Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Approval for the former State Insurance Building, 116 Worcester Street.................................................................. 63

C          14.      Approval of an Extension of Time for a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant for McLean's Mansion, 387 Manchester Steet.................................................... 79

C          15.      2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund..................................... 83

C          16.      Capital Endowment Fund Applications: 2019/20 Round 2.............................. 89

C          17.      Community Resilience Partnership Fund................................................... 183

C          18.      Resolution to Exclude the Public.............................................................. 194

Karakia Whakamutunga

 

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

Karakia Timatanga 

1.   Apologies / Ngā Whakapāha  

An apology was received from Councillor Chu.

2.   Declarations of Interest / Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

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 / Te Whakaāe o te hui o mua

That the minutes of the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee meeting held on Thursday, 28 November 2019  be confirmed (refer page 8).

4.   Public Forum / Te Huinga Whānui

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

 

4.1

Stephen McPaike

Stephen McPaike will speak regarding alcohol related harm in the community.

 

4.2

New Zealand Opera

Anna Hoetjes will speak on behalf of New Zealand Opera.

 

4.3

Gap Filler

Ryan Reynolds will speak on behalf of Gap Filler.

 

4.4

The Green Lab

Khye Hithcock will speak on behalf of The Green Lab.

 

4.5

Life in Vacant Spaces

High Nicholson and Rachel Welfare will speak on behalf of Life in Vacant Spaces.

 

4.6

Kelpn Limited

Abel Goremusandu and Jaclyn Phillott will speak on behalf of Kelpn Limited regarding sustainable packaging.

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

5.1

Community and Public Health

Bek Parry will speak on behalf of Community and Public Health regarding the Update on the Implementation of the Council’s Healthy Food Action Plan 2017.

 

6.   Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga  

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


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

Unconfirmed

 

 

Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                    Thursday 28 November 2019

Time:                                   9.33am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Sara Templeton

Councillor Melanie Coker

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Catherine Chu

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor James Daniels

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor James Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Aaron Keown

Councillor Sam MacDonald

Councillor Phil Mauger

Councillor Jake McLellan

Councillor Tim Scandrett

 

 

28 November 2019

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Mary Richardson

General Manager Citizens & Community

Tel: 941 8999

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Part A           Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B           Reports for Information

Part C           Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

Karakia Timatanga: Delivered by Councillor Coker 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies / Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

Committee Resolved SACRC/2019/00001

That the apology from the Mayor for lateness be accepted.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Cotter                                                                                                        Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest / Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Public Forum / Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

3.1         Sue Harrison, Martin Evans and Kerry Beveridge addressed the Committee on behalf of the Canterbury Property Investors Association regarding proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act.

 

4.   Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

4.1

Ōtautahi Urban Guild

James Stewart and Jason Twill spoke on behalf of the Ōtautahi Urban Guild regarding item 6 – Community Organisation Loan Scheme.

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.


 

The Mayor joined the meeting at 10.33am during consideration of item 6.

6.   Community Organisation Loan Scheme - Ōtautahi Urban Guild

 

Committee Comment

The Committee did not accept the staff recommendations and approved option two as set out in the staff report. Option two is to approve the loan, subject to the conditions set out in the resolution below.

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Receive the information in this report and the attached Community Loans Scheme decision matrix.

2.         Decline the loan application of Ōtautahi Urban Guild Ltd to fund the design and other pre-consent processes involved in building a proposed housing development on Madras Square.

3.         Ask staff to meet with the Ōtautahi Urban Guild Ltd, explain the rationale behind the Council’s decision and explore any other ways the two organisations can work together expedite residential development in the City Centre.

 

Committee Resolved SACRC/2019/00002

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Assist an innovative initiative that aligns with Council and city strategic priorities, by approving the community loan application of Ōtautahi Urban Guild Ltd of $450,000 for five years at an interest rate of 4.5%. The Loan is to be used for the design and other pre-consent costs toward building a housing development on Madras Square subject to the following:

a.         The applicant make the requisite changes to their constitution to reflect a clear not-for-profit purpose and is not for the pecuniary profit of its directors; to the satisfaction of the General Manager Citizen and Community.

b.         The payment is made in four instalments each dependent on the applicant demonstrating to Council’s Head of Community Support, Governance & Partnerships that current and future instalments can be repaid. Instalments are:

·    Instalment 1:                  $27,000 on signing.

·    Instalment 2:                  $67,500 on completion of stages 1 and 2.

·    Instalment 3                   $85,500 on completion of stage 3.

·    Instalment 4:                  $270,000 on completion of stage 5.

c.         That the Council community loan contribution is not used for brand development or marketing.

2.         Request staff to provide appropriate advice to Ōtautahi Urban Guild Ltd to help facilitate the project.

Councillor Gough/Councillor Davidson                                                                                                           Carried

Councillors Daniels, Galloway and Keown requested their votes against the resolutions be recorded.

The Mayor abstained from voting on this item.

 

Councillor Gough left the meeting at 10.41am and returned at 10.44am during consideration of item 7.

 

Councillor MacDonald left the meeting at 10.51am and returned at 10.53am during consideration of item 7.

 

Councillor Cotter left the meeting at 10.56am and returned at 11.01am during consideration of item 7.

 

7.   Assisted Housing Programme Annual Report for the period 1 July 2018 - 30 June 2019

 

Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Receive the information supplied in the Assisted Housing Annual Report for the period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019.

 

Committee Resolved SACRC/2019/00003

Part B

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Receive the information supplied in the Assisted Housing Annual Report for the period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019.

2.         Note that the Social Housing Working Group’s report will be considered by the Council in December 2019.

3.         Note that reports on Growing Social Housing and the Social Housing Strategy will be coming to the Committee in the new year.

Councillor Chen/Councillor Coker                                                                                                                     Carried

 

 

The meeting adjourned at 11.16am and reconvened at 11.26am.

8.   Heritage Incentive Grant Approval for 9 Bruce Terrace, Akaroa

 

Committee Resolved SACRC/2019/00004

Original Staff Recommendation Accepted Without Change

Part C

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approve a Heritage Incentive Grant of up to $3,600 for conservation and maintenance work to the property at 9 Bruce Terrace, Akaroa.

Councillor Keown/Deputy Mayor                                                                                                                        Carried

 


 

9.   Proposed Amendments to Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018

 

Committee Resolved SACRC/2019/00005

Original Staff Recommendation Accepted Without Change

Part C

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Resolves that:

a.         with respect to the areas to which the proposed permanent alcohol ban will apply, there has been a high level of crime or disorder that has been caused or made worse by alcohol consumption; and

b.         the alcohol ban area is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence.

2.         Determines that the proposed amendment to Christchurch City Council Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018 fulfils the requirements of sections 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, in that the proposed amendment is (subject to changes made as a result of consultation):

a.         the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem;

b.         the most appropriate form of bylaw amendment; and

c.         justified as a reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms and is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 Act.

3.         Resolves that the proposed bylaw amendment (Attachment A), which would create permanent alcohol ban areas for rugby league playing fields and related spaces – is adopted for consultation;

4.         Notes that a hearings panel will be appointed to hear submissions on the proposed bylaw amendment, deliberate on those submissions and report to the Council on the final form of the amendment to the Bylaw in March 2020.

Councillor Scandrett/Mayor                                                                                                                                 Carried

 

 

10. Governance Matters

 

Committee Comment

At the meeting the Committee added clauses 5c. and 5d. to the motion, regarding amendments to the Health, Safety and Wellbeing Committee and the Multicultural Committee.

 

Committee Resolved SACRC/2019/00006

Part C

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approve the following appointments, as recommended by the Mayor and Deputy Mayor:

a.         Deputy Mayor Turner to the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee.

b.         Councillor Galloway to the Selwyn-Waihora Management Zone Committee.

c.         Councillor Daniels to the Christchurch-West Melton Zone Committee.

d.         Councillor Cotter to the Regional Water Management Committee.

e.         Councillors Galloway and Daniels to the Water Management Committee Selection Working Group.

f.          Councillor Cotter to Te Waihora Co-Governance Group.

g.         Councillor Cotter and Deputy Mayor Turner to the Central Plains Water Joint Committee.

h.         Councillors MacDonald, Mauger and Chen to the Canterbury Regional Landfill Joint Committee.

i.          Councillors MacDonald, Mauger and Chen to the Canterbury Waste Joint Committee.

j.          Deputy Mayor Turner to the Whakaraupo Partners Governance group.

k.         Councillor Scandrett to the Summit Road Protection Authority.

l.          Councillor Scandrett to the Summit Road Protection Authority Advisory Committee.

2.         Approves that the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū/Banks Peninsula Community Board’s appointee to the Summit Road Protection Authority be the Council’s second nominee to the Summit Road Protection Authority Advisory Committee.

3.         Approves the recommendations of the Council Organisation Appointments Panel to appoint:

a.         Councillor Galloway (as Chair) and Councillor Johanson to the Mayors Welfare Fund Committee.

b.         Councillors Cotter and Davidson to Christchurch Agency for Energy Trust.

c.         Councillor Daniels to the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutahi Trust

d.         Deputy Mayor Turner to the Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust

e.         Councillor Mauger to the Nga Hau e Wha National Marae Charitable Trust.

f.          Councillor Chen to the Riccarton House and Bush Trust (Noting that the Council’s Policy for the Appointment and Remuneration of Directors to Council Organisations provides that appointments to Council-controlled Organisations are generally for no more than three terms).

g.         Councillors Galloway and Councillor Cotter to the Creative Communities Assessment Committee.

h.         Deputy Mayor Turner to the Banks Peninsula Predator Free Governance Group.

4.         Nominates Councillor Chen for appointment to the Royal New Zealand Air Force Museum Trust Board.

5.         Approves, further to the decision of Council 31st October 2019 confirming the council committee structure and membership, the membership of the following:

a.         City Momentum Committee: Mayor Dalziel and Councillor Gough (Co-chairs), Deputy Mayor Turner, Councillors Chen, Chu, Mauger, Daniels and Templeton.

b.         Central City Momentum Working Group: Councillor Gough (Chair), Councillor McLellan (Deputy Chair) Mayor Dalziel, Deputy Mayor Turner, Councillor MacDonald.

c.         Health, Safety and Wellbeing Committee: the addition of Councillors MacDonald and Mauger to the existing membership.

d.         Multicultural Committee: the addition of Councillor Galloway to the existing membership and amending the Terms of Reference in relation to “working in partnership with the existing mandated community networks” as follows:

·        Adds Canterbury Interfaith Society and other peak groups that represent the interests of many.

·        Deletes Ethnic Leaders Forum as this is now captured by the above.

6.         Notes the Mayor’s appointment, under delegation, of Councillor Galloway to the Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust Working Party.

7.         Notes that the Council’s appointments to the Canterbury Museum Trust Board will be deferred to a later meeting of Council (noting that the Canterbury Museum Trust Board Act 1993 requires the Council to make appointments within three months of the local body elections).

Mayor/Councillor Galloway                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

 

 

 

Karakia Whakamutunga: Delivered by Councillor Davidson 

 

Meeting concluded at 11.44am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019

 

Councillor Sara Templeton

Chairperson

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

7.     Update on the implementation of the Council's Healthy Food Action Plan 2017

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

19/1423069

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Tony Moore, Principal Advisor Sustainability

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       To provide an update on the actions undertaken within the Healthy Food Action Plan 2017. 

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       In June 2017 the Council approved its Healthy Food Action Plan and most of the tasks proposed have now been completed, with some actions ongoing.

2.2       An overview of the actions completed is provided in Attachment A.  Highlights include:

2.2.1   Healthy Food and Drink Policy approved that encourages healthier options in all Council facilities and events;

2.2.2   Allocation of 1,300 edible trees over 3 years to schools, early child care centres and community groups;

2.2.3   Smart View map showing the location of 6800 fruit and nut trees planted in public places throughout the city;

2.2.4   Continued support of the Food Resilience Network to deliver a wide range of projects for the community including the Edible School Hui educating teachers about growing and eating healthy food; and

2.2.5   FESTA 2018 a public festival of architecture, design and food. The theme celebrating local produce, local food and beverage artisans and community food projects. 

2.3       Most actions have been partially or fully completed and staff propose that further initiatives are considered as part of the development of climate action plans later in 2020.

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Note the update on the Healthy Food Action Plan and that further actions will be considered in the context of the climate action planning work later in 2020.

4.   Context / Background / Te Horopaki

Previous decisions related to healthy food in Christchurch

4.1       On 29 August 2019, while making decisions on Metropolitan Strengthening Communities Funding, the Council requested staff to provide a report on the implementation of the Healthy Food Action Plan (CNCL/2019/00194).

4.2       The Healthy Food Action Plan was approved by the Council on 22 June 2017. This Plan was partly to respond to community concerns at the time around the number and proximity of fast food outlets to schools and in low income communities, and provide healthy alternative choices.

4.3       The Council’s Healthy Food and Drink Policy was approved on 13 December 2018 to encourage healthier options in Council facilities and events.

4.4       The Council has received other advice on planning options for managing fast food outlets (and their associated signage) including reports on 17 November 2016, 11 August 2016 and 22 September 2016.

4.5       In 2016 the Greater Christchurch Partnership established a health and wellbeing group led by the CDHB to progress wider health and food-related policies and projects.

4.6       The Council had previously developed a Food Resilience Policy which was adopted in November 2014 and contains specific actions for the Council, including collaborating with the Food Resilience Network to support local projects. 

4.7       The Council and three Community Boards have signed the Edible Canterbury Charter, developed by the Food Resilience Network, which asks signatories to support local and healthy food activities.  The Council’s Healthy Food and Drink Policy and Healthy Food Action Plan are good examples of the Council’s contribution. 

Why responding to this issue is important

4.8       A healthy and thriving local food system is vital for our social, cultural, economic and environmental wellbeing.

4.9       Healthy food and water are essential for life.  They are a basic human need and fundamental human right.  Food shapes our sense of family, our community and culture. The food system (production, distribution, consumption and disposal) also provides many jobs and is fundamental to our local economy.

4.10    However, our food system is currently failing many people (e.g. food insecurity, obesity, diabetes, tooth decay and cancer) and harming many of the earth’s life supporting systems (e.g. biodiversity, water, waste, soil loss and greenhouse gases).  This can significantly undermine our community’s current and future wellbeing.

4.11    Effective responses require collaborative approaches in order to improve the community’s access to sustainably produced, affordable and healthy food.  Council has a role to play, as does the health and education system, business sector, communities and individuals. 

4.12    By taking action and working with our communities, businesses and government agencies, Councils can help address inequality, support community wellbeing, strengthen and build resilience in our local food economy and proactively respond to waste, water quality, species loss and climate change. 

4.13    Importantly, food can unite people. Through food policy and projects we can foster a more caring and inclusive community, celebrate our diverse food cultures, embrace our garden city identity and enjoy healthy, locally produced food.

Implementation of the Healthy Food Action Plan

4.14    The Healthy Food Action Plan contains seventeen actions (Attachment A). The actions can be grouped into the following themes:

a)    improving the availability of healthy food options;

b)    increasing edible planting in the city;

c)    reducing food waste;

d)    improving access to drinking water; and

e)    better understanding the food system.

4.15    Most actions have been partially or fully completed, with only one not progressing.  Eleven actions are ongoing and could continue over time, subject to additional resourcing.  The Council has not previously provided any specific funding for these activities.  

4.16    The Council has an established joint work programme with the Canterbury District Health Board (under the Healthy Christchurch Charter - Waka Toa Ora Charter). The healthy food topic aligns well with this programme and the Council’s Climate Change Programme. 

4.17    It is proposed that further initiatives will be considered as part of the development of climate action plans later in 2020. Appropriate support and resourcing can be considered and identified at this time.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Implementation summary of the Healthy Food Action Plan

20

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Tony Moore - Principal Advisor Sustainability

Approved By

Ceciel DelaRue - Team Leader Urban Design

Carolyn Ingles - Head of Urban Regeneration, Design and Heritage

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

8.     Safer Christchurch Strategy 2016-21 Annual Report

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

19/1364808

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Nick Adams, Policy and Project Adviser

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide a response to answers posed by the Communities, Housing and Economic Development Committee during the presentation of the Safer Christchurch Strategy 2016-21 Annual Report on 31 July 2019.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       This report presents further information requested in July 2019 pertaining to the Safer Christchurch Strategy 2016-21 Annual Report for 2018-19. The response to this request was delayed due to local government elections and the change of committee structure.

2.2       Re-instatement of a Road Safety Committee is not recommended as the responsibilities have been superseded and included within the mandate of the Urban Development and Transport Committee.

2.3       Priorities for placement of crime prevention cameras is led by NZ Police from a single Council fund. As this fund includes maintenance and replacement for existing cameras, there are limitations on the installation of new crime prevention cameras.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Note the information provided in response to requests by the Social, Community Development and Housing Committee.

4.   Context / Background / Te Horopaki

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       During the presentation of the Safer Christchurch Strategy 2016-21 Annual Report on 31 July 2019 Committee members queried whether the Road Safety Committee would be re-instated, and any information on how crime prevention cameras are funded and locations prioritised.

4.2       The responsibilities and reporting that could have been appropriate for a Road Safety Committee will be covered under the Urban Development and Transport Committee. As such, there is no direct need to re-instate the Road Safety Committee. Regular reporting to the Urban Development and Transport Committee will inform the future Safer Christchurch Strategy 2016-21 Annual Reports.

4.3       Crime prevention cameras are currently funded by Council through a budget managed by the Transport Unit. The budget is broken into three components; repair and maintenance, replacement of cameras, and installation of new cameras. Funding for the installation of new cameras is limited, and is dependent on levels of maintenance and replacements required.

4.4       NZ Police have the lead in determining the priorities for camera locations. Their assessments are driven by crime statistics and forecasting, but are bounded by installation cost factors, such as existing infrastructure. For example, camera placement in locations without existing power or with communications limitations will likely incur additional installation costs.

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Nick Adams - Policy & Project Advisor

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

9.     Draft Submission on the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/81092

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Jo Daly, Council Secretary and Electoral Officer

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Council to adopt its draft submission to the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       Public submissions are being called for the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections.

2.2       Following each triennial election the Justice Committee reviews the law and administration procedures surrounding the conduct of elections conducted under the Local Electoral Act 2001 (the Act) and the Local Electoral Regulations 2001 (the Regulations).

2.3       As part of this inquiry, the Justice Committee is also consulting on recommendations from its report on the 2016 local elections; which were incorporated into a report on the 2017 General Election and 2016 Local Elections.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approve the draft Council submission on the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections.

2.         Agree that the Council would like to be represented at any hearing of submissions by the Committee.

4.   Context / Background / Te Horopaki

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       As detailed in paragraph 2.2, following each triennial election the Justice Committee holds an inquiry into the conduct of the elections. The closing date for submissions on the inquiry is Saturday 29 February 2020.

4.2       Terms of reference for the inquiry are:

1)            Examine the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of the 2019 local elections, with particular reference to:

a)         low voter turnout at local elections

b)         liquor licensing trusts

c)         the role of council staff during election periods around decisions to release or not release information or any public statements that may be construed to affect the election outcome

d)         the issue of disclosure in respect of candidates or elected members with serious criminal convictions

e)         any irregularities or problems that could have compromised the fairness of elections.

2)         The inquiry will not be investigating allegations of any specific illegal behaviour by any person but is focussed on the issues of general law and administrative procedures.

3)         Consult stakeholders and the wider public about the recommendations in the Justice Committee’s report on the 2016 local elections, with particular reference to:

a)         the recommendation that the Government consider giving responsibility for running all aspects of local elections to the Electoral Commission

b)         the recommendation that the Government consider encouraging or requiring the same voting system to be used in all local elections

c)         feedback on the committee’s recommendations on foreign interference.

4)            Examine the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of elections for energy trusts held since 2016.

4.3       The inquiry was notified on 20 December 2019. Information about the inquiry is available on the New Zealand Parliament website at: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/52SCJU_SCF_INQ_93630/inquiry-into-the-2019-local-elections-and-liquor-licensing

4.4       The inquiry is also consulting stakeholders and the wider public about the recommendations in the Justice Committee’s report on the 2016 local elections.

4.5       The inquiry on the 2016 Local Elections was held in conjunction with the Inquiry into the 2017 General Election. The report of the Justice Committee: Inquiry into the 2017 General Election and 2016 Local Elections was released in December 2019. The report is at: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/reports/document/SCR_93429/inquiry-into-the-2017-general-election-and-2016-local-elections

4.6       The Council’s submission on the 2016 Local Elections was submitted in August 2017. The draft submission considered by the Council is included in the supplementary agenda for the Council meeting held on 10 August 2017: https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2017/08/CNCL_20170810_AGN_1295_AT_SUP.PDF Note that the final submission included an additional point recommending the removal of the ratepayer elector entitlement from the legislation.

Decision Making Authority / Te Mana Whakatau

4.7       The Council has delegated to its Committees of the Whole the ability to approve submissions on behalf of the Council where the timing of a consultation does not allow for consideration of a draft submission by the Council.

Draft submission

4.8       A draft submission has been prepared by staff for discussion with Councillors based on the aspects relating to the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of the elections, the terms of reference for the inquiry and recommendations within the report into the 2016 local elections. Consideration has been given to some of the matters included in the Council’s submission into the inquiry into the 2016 elections. 

4.9       The draft submission acknowledges the Council’s Strategic Priority:  Enabling active and connected communities to own their future.

4.10    The terms of reference for the inquiry state that the inquiry will not be investigating allegations of any specific illegal behaviour by any person but is focussed on the issues of general law and administrative procedures.

4.11    The Council will have the opportunity to present an oral submission to the Justice Committee. It is recommended that the Council resolve to take this opportunity.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft submision on Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections

30

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Jo Daly - Council Secretary

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

10.   Citizens & Community Internship Programme Update

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/38699

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Astella Philpott, Team Leader Trainee Development

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       To update on the progress of the Citizens & Community Internship Programme.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       Prior to the official launch of the Internship Programme and since the establishment of the Team Leader Trainee Development role in March 2019; the programme has placed 23 students and four job-shadows across the Citizens & Community Group with some candidates being secondary students.

2.2       One of the Masters students placed will be completing her internship January 2020 and thereafter, immediately moving into a fixed term role as a Programme Coordinator, Coastal Hazards within the Coastal Hazards Adaptation Planning and Programme team.

2.3       The C&CG Internship programme commenced the recruitment process for the first group of interns for 2020. The programme launched a public webpage in December advertising all available internship projects and has received over 30 applications to date. Applications close in January 19 and the coordinator will work with project mentors to select the most suitable candidates. A total of 12 interns will have the opportunity to work across a variety of projects within the C&CG commencing March 2020.

2.4       Early feedback from both the partner institutions (University of Canterbury and Lincoln University) has been universally positive. Council Units participating in the programme have provided excellent feedback and report that many of the chosen projects for the internship programme are for pieces of research work that may not have otherwise been possible.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Receive this report for their information.

4.   Context / Background / Te Horopaki

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       To create a formal, integrated and consistent internship programme within Council to provide a work experience programme to the city’s tertiary institutions and assist with Council workforce and succession planning.

Decision Making Authority / Te Mana Whakatau

4.2       General Manager, Citizens and Community

Background

4.3       In 2017 an elected member requested additional funding be allocated to the Citizens and Community Group, with the intent to create an integrated and proactive internship programme. This funding was allocated to the budget for the Programmes and Partnerships team within the Parks Unit.

4.4       In mid-2018, once the Programmes and Partnerships team was formed and a Manager appointed (mandated through the approved November 2017 Parks Change Proposal) a secondment was offered to a Parks employee, to progress the programme for a period of six months whilst permanent systems and a position description for the Team Leader Trainee Development position were established.

4.5       Astella Philpott commenced work in the above position in January 2020 in a role which also encompasses responsibility for the Parks staff training and apprenticeship programme and the development of a work experience programme in partnership with the Ministry of Social Development.

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Astella Philpott - Team Leader Trainee Development

Approved By

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

11.   The Spire Sculpture - Request to Extend Installation Occupation at Latimer Square

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

19/1164341

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Kathy Jarden, Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       To enter into a further Licence to Occupy with Neil Dawson, artist and creator of the “Spire” sculpture currently installed at Latimer Square.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       The “Spire” sculpture (see Attachment A) created by Neil Dawson has been suspended in the air across Latimer Square since 2013 with the purpose of improving the experience, amenity and urban environment of the Central City.

2.2       Parks staff are investigating the possibility of the Spire sculpture staying in place for a further period to allow an application to the Long Term Plan to consider funding and purchasing of the sculpture and relocation to another site yet to be determined.

2.3       The current Licence to Occupy expired 1 December 2019.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee resolves to:

1.         Grant a new temporary Licence to Occupy part of Latimer Square for the continued occupation of the sculpture the “Spire” currently owned and created by artist Neil Dawson.  The Licence will have an expiry date of 31 December 2021 plus a right of renewal up to a further 12 months  if the permanent siting of the sculpture has not been resolved by 31 December 2021.

 

4.   Context/Background / Te Horopaki

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       To continue the temporary Licence to Occupy for the hanging of the Spire sculpture in Latimer Square until a permanent location is determined.

Strategic Alignment / Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

4.2       There is provision in the annual plan to manage and maintain public monuments, sculptures, and artworks. However, the Annual Plan does not currently provide for the purchase of the Spire sculpture by the Christchurch City Council.

4.3       This project is not currently included in the Council's Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028).

Decision Making Authority / Te Mana Whakatau

4.4       Community Boards have the delegated authority to grant licences of reserves under section 61 of the Reserves Act 1977.  However, the power to grant licences within the central city area has been reserved to the Council.  Council staff have no delegated authority to grant leases or licences on land held as local park or reserves.

Previous Decisions / Ngā Whakatau o mua

4.5       A report to the Social, Community Development and Housing Committee on 3 October 2018 recommended that the Council:

“Approve the granting of a Temporary Licence to Occupy part of Latimer Square, approximately 144 square meters as shown in the attached plan for the continued occupation of the sculpture the “Spire” created by artist Neil Dawson with an expiry date of 31 December 2019.”

4.6       The resolution was adopted by Council without change on 25 October 2018.  The full report is  found as Item 11, page 69 https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2018/10/CNCL_20181025_AGN_2381_AT_WEB.htm

Assessment of Significance and Engagement / Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

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

4.8       The level of significance was determined through earlier consultation with the Central City Recovery Plan and Share an Idea consultations.  The community sought a number of initiatives to make the city a more exciting, green and safe environment.

4.9       Community engagement and consultation outlined in the report adopted 25 October 2018 reflects the assessment.

 

Land Occupation

4.10    Latimer Square is vested in the Council pursuant to the Christchurch City (Reserves) Empowering Act 1972, for the purposes of lawns, ornamental gardens and ornamental buildings.  Section 12 provides that all reserves subject to the Act area to be held and administered subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

4.11    As a reserve held for “lawns, ornamental gardens, and ornamental buildings” it is considered for Reserve Act 1977 purposes, to be held by the Council as local purpose reserve.

4.12    The Reserves Act, Section 61 empowers the Council to lease or licence local purposes reserves for activities consistent with its classification.  Section 61(2) leases or licences of local purpose reserves may be granted for terms of less than five years without there being a requirement to publicly notify such arrangements.

4.13    When the original licence was entered into, it was the view of Legal Services that an artwork or sculpture on Latimer Square will comply with the Empowering Act provisions.  Artwork and sculptures form an integral part of ornamental gardens and such an object may be considered to be an ornamental building.

Heritage Concerns/Perspective

4.14    The Heritage Team Leader, Strategy and Transformation, has indicated that there are no real issues with the sculpture remaining in the current location.  A further timeframe will not adversely impact the long-term heritage values of the space and the extra timeframe should allow for a suitable permanent home to be found for the sculpture and for funding to be secured to locate it there via the Annual Plan process.

 

5.   Options Analysis / Ngā Kōwhiringa Tātari

Options Considered / Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

·   Grant a further temporary licence (preferred)

·   Decline licence

 

5.2       The following options were considered but ruled out:

·   Removal of the sculpture – not considered, as an application will be made to the next Annual Plan rounds for the purchase of the sculpture and the locating of a permanent site in which to hang the Spire sculpture.

 

Options Descriptions

5.3       Preferred Option: Grant a further temporary licence

5.3.1   Option Description: Grant a licence

5.3.2   Option Advantages

·     Council’s continued support of the art installation.

·     Provides a point of attraction to citizens and visitors.

·     Formalises the occupation agreement that expired 31 December 2019.

5.3.3   Option Disadvantages

·     Continued occupation of Latimer Square until a new home is found for the sculpture.

 

5.4       Option Description: Decline Licence

5.4.1   Option Advantages

·     The sculpture is removed from Latimer Square.

5.4.2   Option Disadvantages

·     There are no disadvantages as the intention has been for the sculpture to be a temporary artwork.

Analysis Criteria

5.5       Consideration has been given to the following:

·   Financial implications – the cost to Council is neutral under either option.  The annual rent is $1 and Neil Dawson would continue to be responsible for ensuring any maintenance and compliance with health and safety regulations.

·   Compliance with lease terms and conditions – this is neutral under either option.

·   Legislative compliance – met under either option.

Options Considerations

5.6       The granting of a new licence continues to support the Central City recovery plan and allows time for a bid to the Long Term Plan to purchase and relocate the sculpture that has become a point of interest with residents and visitors coming to Christchurch.

6.   Community Views and Preferences / Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

6.1       Views and preferences have not been sought, as this has already been undertaken as outlined in the previous report to the Council on 25 October 2018.

7.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

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

7.3       The legal consideration is the Reserves Act 1977 and granting of a temporary Licence to Occupy deed agreement which is a routine matter on which the legal situation is well known and settled.

8.   Risks / Ngā tūraru

8.1       There is a risk that the Council will not obtain the necessary funding to purchase the sculpture and relocate it to a suitable location.  This could result in a request to extend the licence agreement until funding is obtained or alternatively the artwork would be removed at the end of the 24 month period.

8.2       The residual rating of the risk will be low, as the new temporary licence will include provisions for a further term of renewal for up to 12 months resulting in a maximum licence of up to 36 months after which time it would be removed.

9.   Next Steps / Ngā mahinga ā-muri

9.1       Approval of temporary Licence to Occupy Part of Latimer Square entered into with Neil Dawson. (Facilities, Property & Planning team)

9.2       Actions required to make an application to Annual Plan for funding to purchase sculpture. (Parks Unit)

9.3       Identification of location for permanent installation of sculpture. (Parks Unit Asset Team/Recreation & Sports Unit Community Arts Team).

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

10. Options Matrix

Issue Specific Criteria

Criteria

Option 1 – Grant Licence

Option 2 - Decline

Option 3 -

Financial Implications

Cost to Implement

Nominal – preparation of licence document covered by operational budgets

No cost

 

Maintenance/Ongoing

Nil

No cost to Council

 

Funding Source

Operational Budgets

Not applicable

 

Impact on Rates

Nil

Not applicable

 

Compliance with licence terms and conditions, Reserves Act 1977

Yes

Not applicable

 

Accessibility Impacts

No change or impact to current access to Latimer Square

Not applicable

 

Health & Safety Impacts

Licensee responsibility under licence agreement

Not applicable

 

Defensible decision

Yes

Yes

 

 

Statutory Criteria

Criteria

Option 1 – Grant Licence

Option 2 - Decline

Option 3 - <enter text>

Impact on Mana Whenua

Not applicable

Not applicable

 

Alignment to Council Plans & Policies

Aligns with Leasing Policy

Not applicable

 

 

Reserves Act 1977

Complies with provisions of section 61 of the Reserves Act

Not applicable

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Spire Sculpture Licence Area Plan

48

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Kathy Jarden - Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Wolfgang Bopp - Director Botanic Gardens & Garden Parks

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

12.   Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Approval for the former Wellington Woollen Mills Building, 96 Lichfield Street

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

19/1374268

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Brendan Smyth, Heritage Team leader

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee to approve a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant for the heritage building at 96 Lichfield Street, Christchurch, more commonly known as the former Wellington Woollen Mills Building.

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to dialogue with the owner of the building who wishes to see the building repaired, seismically upgraded and renovated internally and externally.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       This report proposes approval for a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant to assist with works to the former Wellington Woollen Mills Building at 96 Lichfield Street, Christchurch.

2.2       The building’s Lichfield Street façade in particular has high historical, architectural and landmark value and retention and repair is worthy of support.

2.3       The staff recommendation is for a grant of up to $900,000 for this building. This preferred option would be a grant comparable and consistent with previously approved Council grants for other Central City Landmark Heritage buildings. This grant would support and enable the positive heritage outcomes that the works would achieve, including the retention of original architectural fabric and heritage values.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approve a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $900,000 for the former Wellington Woollen Mills Building, 96 Lichfield Street, Christchurch.

2.         Note that payment of this grant is subject to the applicants entering a full conservation covenant with the signed covenant having the Council seal affixed prior to registration against the property title.

 

4.   Context/Background / Te Horopaki

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       The entire building at 96 Lichfield Street is scheduled as a ‘Highly Significant' building in the Christchurch District Plan. The building is also registered Category I by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (HNZPT) registration number 1899. Refer to Attachment ‘A’ the ‘Statement of Significance’ for further information.

4.2       The current owner of the building at 96 Lichfield Street and contact for the grant is ‘Wool House Investments Limited’.

Photographs of Lichfield Street façade prior to the earthquakes (the façade is currently fully hidden behind scaffolding and mesh).

4.3       The building was designed in a stripped classical style by W.H Gummer while he was in partnership with two other architects, Hoggard and Prouse. The building was completed in 1920 as the Christchurch premises for the Wellington Woollen Manufacturing Company.  The building’s main features were a reinforced concrete frame which allowed an early use of largely glazed curtain wall cladding; a distinct saw tooth roof form; and a prominent Nelson New Zealand marble façade to Lichfield Street.

4.4       The building was being shared by a number of textile and hosiery manufacturers when it was severely damaged by fire in 1932. However the building was able to be repaired and served as a base for the Wellington Woollen Manufacturing Company until its merger with the Kaiapoi Woollen Manufacturing Company in 1963. The building had a number of different owners in the following years including other garment manufacturers.

4.5       Following alterations in 1958, 1969 and 1987 the building was extensively modified in the early 2000’s into student accommodation and ground floor retail units and was renamed ‘The Mill’. The modifications included the removal of the original roof with the saw-tooth form and the addition of a two storey extension. The southern and eastern facades were covered with modern cladding and the interior was altered to reinstate an earlier light-well that had been previously filled in. The building was being used for this purpose at the time of the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010/2011.

4.6       The building was impacted by the earthquakes and subsequent legal disputes and ownership issues but has been able to be retained and can now be repaired and upgraded as necessary for re-use. The building’s Lichfield Street façade is currently fully scaffolded and hidden behind protective mesh. The building is also being cleared of interior fittings and selective linings to allow for a full structural and architectural assessment. Once this is completed seismic strengthening and architectural repair works can begin.

The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Funding Scheme

4.7       The series of earthquakes occurring in the Christchurch region since September 2010 has resulted in the most significant loss of Central City heritage and character buildings in the history of Christchurch. This loss of heritage heightens the importance of opportunities to retain, repair and strengthen those remaining buildings having a significant connection to the past. The Council’s “Draft Central City Recovery Plan, December 2011”, signalled the need for increased heritage funding of $27.7 million to retain ‘landmark’ buildings. The intention was (and is) to enable a pro-active approach with owners to achieve the retention of key Central City landmark heritage buildings – including listed buildings and facades.  Funding has been allocated in subsequent Long Term Plans; the annual grant funding available has reduced over time to the current annual funding of $1.5m.  The tables set out in the ‘Options Analysis’ section below summarize the grants programme so far along with current funding.

Strategic Alignment / Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

4.8       The recommendations of this report align with, amongst others, the relevant strategies, plans and policies as listed below:

4.8.1   Our Heritage, Our Taonga Heritage Strategy 2019-2029;

4.8.2   Heritage Conservation Policy;

4.8.3   International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) New Zealand Charter 2010.

4.9       The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Scheme is aligned to the Community Outcomes: “Strong Communities” – ‘celebration of our identity through arts, culture, heritage and sport’; and “Liveable City” – ‘21st century garden city we are proud to live in’. Heritage grants contribute towards the number of protected heritage buildings, sites and objects, which is a measure for the outcome ‘The city’s heritage and taonga are conserved for future generations’.

4.10    The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Scheme supports delivery of the overarching strategic principle of wellbeing and resilience, as heritage contributes to our personal and community sense of identity and belonging, and enhances high levels of social connectedness and cohesion.

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

4.11.1             Activity: Strategic Planning and Policy

·     Level of Service: 1.4.2 Support the conservation and enhancement of the city’s heritage places.  - 100% of approved grant applications are allocated in accordance with the policy.

Decision Making Authority / Te Mana Whakatau

4.12    The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant budget is an annual fund provided for in the 2018 -28 Long Term Plan. This established funding source requires staff to present applications to the relevant Committee for their approval. The delegated authority for these decisions has been confirmed to be with this committee.

Previous Decisions / Ngā Whakatau o mua

4.13    Previously similar grants have been supported by the Council for repair and upgrade works for various types of buildings. A summary is included in the table below (Section 5). From this it can be seen that this proposal is in line with other grants awarded through this process.

Assessment of Significance and Engagement / Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

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

4.15    The level of significance was determined by the heritage classification of the building and the amount of funding relative to that already approved by Council for allocation in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

4.1       It is noted that Tūāhuriri Rūnanga are the Tangata Whenua in this location.

4.2       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 Māori, their culture and traditions.

 

5.   Options Analysis / Ngā Kōwhiringa Tātari

Options Considered / Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

·   Preferred Option, a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $900,000;

·   Option 2, a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $600,000;

5.2       The following options were considered but ruled out:

·   Option 3 – no grant.  This option was discounted as the proposed works involve a building which has always been on the list of landmark buildings for which the scheme was intended to target and help to save; the heritage outcome for the property will be positive if the work is undertaken; and the proposed grant will be in line with other grants that have been awarded previously. There are sufficient funds remaining in the fund to cover this grant.

Options Descriptions / Ngā Kōwhiringa

5.3       Preferred Option: Central City Landmark Heritage Funding of up to $900,000.

Option Description

5.4       This report proposes funding of $900,000 from the Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Fund. It is envisaged that this grant funding would not cover all of the required seismic upgrade and facade refurbishment works but it is not yet clear what percentage of the total spend required for the project that this grant would represent. The new owners estimate the total cost of the works will be in the region of $4,500,000 to $5,500,000. However, the scale of the building and hence the amount of repair is such that the grant would be well below the normal maximum limit for a landmark grant of fifty percent of the total cost of the works. There is no insurance payment related to this building to assist with the repair, refurbishment and seismic upgrade works.

5.5       The proposed use of the building is to be the same as before the earthquakes with a mixture of retail, commercial and living space. However, the scope of work is likely to include the required upgrades to the structure to achieve somewhere in the region of sixty-seven per cent New Build Standard (NBS); installation of new complying fire egress and fire protection systems, as well as enhanced disabled access.  Along with a building consent process these works will require a resource consent as they will have an impact on the Lichfield Street façade. The stone of the façade requires repairs and stronger fixing methods and the curtain wall glazing will also require repairs and refurbishment which are likely to involve new materials.  The two sets of timber panel doors on Lichfield Street are in good condition but require new ironmongery, minor repairs and repainting and the plan is for them to be reused.

5.6       Central City Landmark Heritage Grant support to other projects to date is summarised in the table below. The level of grant support proposed for the former Wellington Woollen Mills Building is similar in scale to a number of other grants for similar scaled buildings. A number of these projects have now been completed and illustrate the positive outcomes achieved with Central City Landmark Heritage Grant funding acting as an incentive to the owners to invest substantial amounts of their own funds into a heritage building requiring repairs.

Financial Implications

5.7       In FY20 $1.2m of funding remains to be allocated.  Allocating $900,000 to this building will see $300,000 remaining in the fund for allocation to further projects.

Central City Landmark Heritage Grant subject building

Funding Year

Funding

The Christchurch Club, Latimer Square

2012/2013

$1,700,000

Former Trinity Congregational Church, 124 Worcester Street

2012/2013

$1,000,000

West Avon Apartments, 279 Montreal Street

2013/2014

$800,000

Former CBS Building, 159 Manchester Street

2014/2015

$900,000

Old Stone Class Room Building, St Michaels & All Angels

2014/2015

$855,000

Former Community of the Sacred Name, 181 Barbadoes Street

2013/2014

$950,000

Midland Club, Oxford Terrace

2015/2016

$869,500

33 New Regent Street Shops

2015/2016

$900,000

McLean’s Mansion, 387 Manchester Street

2016/2017

$1,934,000

Former Public Trust Building, 152 Oxford Terrace

2017/2018

$1,934,000

Former Post Office Building, 31 Cathedral Square

2018/2019

$900,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2018/2019

$600,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2019/2020

$300,000

Proposed grant to former Wellington Woollen Mills Building

2019/2020

$900,000

Proposed grant to former State Insurance Building

2019/2020

$300,000

Proposed grant to former State Insurance Building

2020/2021

$600,000

Total Available Funds remaining

2019/2020

$0

Total Available Funds remaining

2020/2021

$900,000

 

5.7.1   Option Advantages:

·     It supports the retention of a 'Highly Significant' heritage building in a very prominent location;

·     Through repair and occupation this grant assisted repair will help to reinforce the Central City as the focus for commercial, social and cultural activities;

·     It promotes the retention of a heritage building to an appropriate use with minimal change to the exterior and minimal loss of remaining heritage fabric;

·     It will preserve the existing physical characteristics and qualities of this part of the Central City - including the ornate marble stone and curtain wall glazed facade to Lichfield Street;

·     Through a conservation covenant the grant affords protection to the landmark value of the building and will maintain its relationship to the busy Central City street;

·     With the grant acting as an incentive the project to restore the building is likely to generate significant private investment into the Christchurch local economy.

5.7.2   Option Disadvantages

·     This would be a relatively large grant to a single building project and will use up a significant proportion of the FY 20 Central City Landmark Heritage Grant fund. However, this is exactly the kind of large scale retention, repair and restoration project envisaged.

5.1       Option 2: A lower level of Central City Landmark Heritage Funding of up to $600,000.

Option Description

5.1.1   Option 2 would be for a lower level of financial support to the project. This option proposes funding of $600,000 from the Central City Landmark Heritage Grant fund. This lower amount of grant funding would possibly be insufficient to give the building owner the confidence and willingness to undertake and complete the works to the building to the highest specification. Other grant levels are obviously possible other than the two options set out in this report. Apart from the level of financial support, this option has all the same impacts and alignments as Option 1. The table below has the lower option of both Central City Landmark Heritage grants presented to this Committee.

Financial Implications

5.1.2   In FY20 $1.2m of funding remains to be allocated.  Allocating $600,000 to this building will see $600,000 remaining in the fund for allocation to further projects.

Central City Landmark Heritage Grant subject building

Funding Year

Funding

The Christchurch Club, Latimer Square

2012/2013

$1,700,000

Former Trinity Congregational Church, 124 Worcester Street

2012/2013

$1,000,000

West Avon Apartments, 279 Montreal Street

2013/2014

$800,000

Former CBS Building, 159 Manchester Street

2014/2015

$900,000

Old Stone Class Room Building, St Michaels & All Angels

2014/2015

$855,000

Former Community of the Sacred Name, 181 Barbadoes Street

2013/2014

$950,000

Midland Club, Oxford Terrace

2015/2016

$869,500

33 New Regent Street Shops

2015/2016

$900,000

McLean’s Mansion, 387 Manchester Street

2016/2017

$1,934,000

Former Public Trust Building, 152 Oxford Terrace

2017/2018

$1,934,000

Former Post Office Building, 31 Cathedral Square

2018/2019

$900,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2018/2019

$600,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2019/2020

$300,000

Proposed grant to former Wellington Woollen Mills Building

2019/2020

$600,000

Proposed grant to former State Insurance Building

2019/2020

$600,000

Total available funds remaining

2019/2020

$0

Total available funds remaining

2020/2021

$1,500,000

 

5.1.3   Option Advantages

·     It supports the retention of a 'Highly Significant' heritage building in a very prominent location;

·     Through repair and occupation this grant assisted repair will help to reinforce the Central City as the focus for commercial, social and cultural activities;

·     It promotes the retention of a heritage building to an appropriate use with minimal change to the exterior and minimal loss of remaining heritage fabric;

·     It will preserve the existing characteristics and qualities of this part of the Central City;

·     Through a conservation covenant the grant affords protection to the landmark value of the building;

·     With the grant acting as an incentive the project to restore the building is likely to generate significant private investment into the Christchurch local economy;

·     When compared with Option 1, more funding remains for allocation to other projects within the Central City area.

5.1.4   Option Disadvantages

·     The lower level of grant funding may be insufficient to encourage the owner of the building to continue with the process of securing, repairing and upgrading the building to the highest standards possible;

·     These lower grant sums would be inconsistent with other levels of previously approved funding to other developer’s projects of a similar scale and complexity;

·     Lower grant funds may undermine the ability of the owner to raise funds from other sources.

Options Considerations / Te Whaiwhakaarotanga

5.2       The Council promotes heritage as a: valuable educational and interpretation resource; contributor to the visitor experience; and an economic benefit for the district. It recognises heritage as contributing to the identity and wellbeing of our communities and the district.

5.3       The Council aims to maintain and protect built, cultural, natural, and significant moveable heritage items, areas, and values, which contribute to a unique city, community identity, character and sense of place and which provide links to the past.

5.4       The Heritage Protection activity includes the provision of advice, the heritage grants schemes, and heritage education and advocacy. Other relevant considerations include the overall aims for heritage retention and promotion in the city.

5.5       Central City Landmark Heritage Grants provide opportunities to achieve positive heritage outcomes. These include the retention and protection of more heritage fabric and values than the resource consent process requires, and alignment with the conservation principles of the ICOMOS NZ Charter.

5.6       Additional considerations which the Committee may take into account are: the ongoing level of financial input from the owner; the overall percentage of funding support still being relatively low; and the comparable levels of grant support to similar heritage buildings and items.

6.   Community Views and Preferences / Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

6.1       The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant scheme is aligned to the Community Outcomes ‘The city’s heritage and taonga are conserved for future generations’ and ‘The central city has a distinctive character and identity’. Central City Landmark Heritage Grants contribute towards the number of protected heritage buildings, sites and objects, which is a measure for these outcomes.

7.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

7.1       The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Policy is as follows:

‘That the Council acknowledges the need to retain and recover those Central City heritage buildings which the community recognises as key built landmarks which contribute to the continuing sense of identity for the Central City.

That the Council provides a Central City Heritage Landmarks Fund to assist with the retention, repair, reconstruction and seismic strengthening of Central City heritage landmark buildings which are able to be recovered for continuing use.’

The schemes ‘Operational Guidelines’ are used in the interpretation and application of this Policy. 

1.1       The Council also requires the owner to enter into conservation covenants.  Covenants act as a protective mechanism, ensuring the building and setting is retained once the work is undertaken.   Limited conservation covenants are required under the Heritage Conservation Operational Guidelines for properties receiving Central City Landmark Heritage Grants of $15,000 to $149,999.  A full conservation covenant is required for grants of $150,000 or more.

1.1       Covenants are a comprehensive form of protection of the buildings because they are registered on the property title, ensuring that the Council’s investment is protected. As the grant will be above $150,000 there is a requirement for a new full conservation covenant on this property title in association with this grant.

8.   Risks / Ngā tūraru

8.1       The grant scheme only allows funds to be paid out upon completion of the works, certification by Council heritage staff and upon presentation of receipts. This ensures that the grant scheme is effective and that funds are not diverted or lost.

9.   Next Steps / Ngā mahinga ā-muri

9.1       Implementation dependencies - The grant recipient is normally expected to acquire all resource, building and other consents required for the works.

9.2       Implementation timeframe - The grant recipient has an eighteen month time period to undertake the works and to claim the grant. An application to extend this timeframe can be made to the Council or relevant Committee.

 

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

10. Options Matrix / Te Poukapa

Criteria

Option 1

Option 2

Financial Implications

Cost to Implement

$900,000

$600,000

Maintenance/Ongoing

0

0

Funding Source

LTP Central City Landmark Heritage Grants

LTP Central City Landmark Heritage Grants

Impact on Rates

0

0

Criteria 1 Climate Change Impacts

Positive, when completed the building fabric with embodied energy will be retained. Waste will be minimised.

Positive, when completed the building fabric with embodied energy will be retained. Waste will be minimised.

Criteria 2  Accessibility Impacts

The building will be accessible to the public via the retail elements on the ground floor.

The building will be accessible to the public via the retail elements on the ground floor.

Criteria 3  Social & Community impacts

The street façade and unique sense of place will be retained and restored.

The street façade and unique sense of place will be retained and restored.

Criteria 4  Future Generation Impacts

Heritage will be preserved for future generations.

Heritage will be preserved for future generations.

 

Criteria

Option 1

Option 2

Impact on Mana Whenua

No impact.

No impact.

Alignment to Council Plans & Policies

Yes, particularly ‘Our Heritage, Our Taonga, Heritage Strategy 2019-2029’.

Yes, particularly ‘Our Heritage, Our Taonga, Heritage Strategy 2019-2029’.

Consistency with other grants of a similar nature

The grant will be consistent with other grants of this type.

A lower grant would not be consistent with other grants previously awarded for projects of a similar scale and complexity.


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Former Wellington Woollen Mills Statement of Significance

60

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Brendan Smyth - Team Leader Heritage

Approved By

Carolyn Ingles - Head of Urban Regeneration, Design and Heritage

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

13.   Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Approval for the former State Insurance Building, 116 Worcester Street

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

19/1468310

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Brendan Smyth, Heritage Team leader

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee to approve a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant for the heritage building at 116 Worcester Street, Christchurch, more commonly known as the former State Insurance Building.

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to dialogue with the owner of the building who wishes to see the building repaired, seismically upgraded and renovated internally and externally.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       This report proposes approval for a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant to assist with works to the former State Insurance Building at 116 Worcester Street, Christchurch.

2.2       The building’s Worcester Street façade in particular has high historical, architectural and landmark value and retention and repair is worthy of support.

2.3       The Council staff recommendation is for a grant of up to $900,000 for this building. This preferred option would be a grant comparable and consistent with previously approved Council grants for other Central City Landmark Heritage buildings. This grant will support and enable the positive heritage outcomes that will be achieved by the works, including the retention of original architectural fabric and heritage values.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approve a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $900,000 for the former State Insurance Building, 116 Worcester Street, Christchurch.

2.         Note that payment of this grant is subject to the applicants entering a full conservation covenant with the signed covenant having the Council seal affixed prior to registration against the property title.

 

4.   Context/Background / Te Horopaki

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       The entire building at 116 Worcester Street is scheduled as a ‘Highly Significant' building in the Christchurch District Plan. The building is also registered Category 2 by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (HNZPT) registration number 1931. Refer to Attachment ‘A’ the ‘Statement of Significance’ for further information.

4.2       The current owner of the building at 116 Worcester Street and contact for the grant is ‘116 Worcester Street Limited’.

 

Photographs of Worcester Street façade, 2019

4.3       The building was designed in a stripped classical style with Maori motifs and Art Deco influences by Cecil Wood in association with Christchurch architect Paul Pascoe. The initial design from 1931 was revised in 1933 following the 1931 Hawke’s Bay earthquake and the building was finally completed in 1935. The first use of the building was as offices for the State Fire and Accident Insurance Company and for the Lands and Survey and Lands and Deeds Departments.  The building included a substantial basement for secure record storage, a reinforced concrete frame and an unusual organically curving concrete staircase (just visible behind the glazing in the photograph above). The principal façade to Worcester Street included a dark coloured stone clad base, metal clad doors, a first floor projecting balcony, and five vertical panels of glazing and metal clad spandrel panels rising to the rooftop cap which included a central flagpole.

4.4       Internally the building included decorative features typical of the time including Art Deco light fittings but also included a significant amount of local stone as wall cladding. There were also unusual design features associated with its function as a store for important documents such as fire separation between floors and a minimal amount of timber following the lessons learnt from the fires which destroyed documents in the immediate aftermath of the Hawke’s Bay earthquake.

4.5       The building was extended in the early 1970’s with a substantial addition on the southern side and also had an extension at roof level. State Insurance was bought out by another insurance company in 1989 and this led to further changes and the removal of the Coat of Arms and the name. The building was modified again in the early 2000’s to accommodate the change of use to the Design and Arts College.

4.6       The building was impacted by the earthquakes, subsequent insurance repair disputes and a change of ownership but has been able to be retained and can now be repaired and upgraded as necessary for re-use. A full seismic upgrade scheme has been designed by the new owners with the aim of changing the use of building to living and rental accommodation. The façade to Worcester Street will be fully restored including attempts to recreate the Coat of Arms. The repairs will also include the restoration of the Paul Pascoe designed curving staircase.

The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Funding Scheme

4.7       The series of earthquakes occurring in the Christchurch region since September 2010 has resulted in the most significant loss of Central City heritage and character buildings in the history of Christchurch. This loss of heritage heightens the importance of opportunities to retain, repair and strengthen those remaining buildings having a significant connection to the past. The Council’s “Draft Central City Recovery Plan, December 2011”, signalled the need for increased heritage funding of $27.7 million to retain ‘landmark’ buildings. The intention was (and is) to enable a pro-active approach with owners to achieve the retention of key Central City landmark heritage buildings – including listed buildings and facades.  Funding has been allocated in subsequent Long Term Plans; the annual grant funding available has reduced over time to the current annual funding of $1.5m.  The tables set out in the ‘Options Analysis’ section below summarize the grants programme so far along with current funding.

Strategic Alignment / Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

4.8       The recommendations of this report align with, amongst others, the relevant strategies, plans and policies as listed below:

4.8.1   Our Heritage, Our Taonga Heritage Strategy 2019-2029;

4.8.2   Heritage Conservation Policy;

4.8.3   International Council on Monument and Sites (ICOMOS) New Zealand Charter 2010.

4.9       The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Scheme is aligned to the Community Outcomes: “Strong Communities” – ‘celebration of our identity through arts, culture, heritage and sport’ and “Liveable City” – ‘21st century garden city we are proud to live in’. Heritage grants contribute towards the number of protected heritage buildings, sites and objects, which is a measure for the outcome ‘The city’s heritage and taonga are conserved for future generations.’

4.10    The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Scheme supports delivery of the overarching strategic principle of wellbeing and resilience, as heritage contributes to our personal and community sense of identity and belonging, and enhances high levels of social connectedness and cohesion.

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

4.11.1 Activity: Strategic Planning and Policy

·     Level of Service: 1.4.2 Support the conservation and enhancement of the city’s heritage places.  - 100% of approved grant applications are allocated in accordance with the policy.

Decision Making Authority / Te Mana Whakatau

4.12    The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant budget is an annual fund provided for in the 2018 -28 Long Term Plan. This established funding source requires staff to present applications to the relevant Committee for their approval. The delegated authority for these decisions has been confirmed to be with this committee.

Previous Decisions / Ngā Whakatau o mua

4.13    Previously similar grants have been supported by Council for repair and upgrade works for various types of buildings. A summary is included in the table below (Section 5). From this it can be seen that this proposal is in line with other grants awarded through this process.

Assessment of Significance and Engagement / Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

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

4.15    The level of significance was determined by the heritage classification of the building and the amount of funding relative to that already approved by Council for allocation in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

4.1       It is noted that Tūāhuriri Rūnanga are the Tangata Whenua in this location.

4.2       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 Māori, their culture and traditions.

 

5.   Options Analysis / Ngā Kōwhiringa Tātari

Options Considered / Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

·   Preferred Option, a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $900,000;

·   Option 2, a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $600,000;

5.2       The following options were considered but ruled out:

·   Option 3 – no grant.  This option was discounted as the proposed works involve a building which has always been on the list of landmark buildings for which the scheme was intended to target and help to save; the heritage outcome for the property will be positive if the work is undertaken; and the proposed grant will be in line with other grants that have been awarded previously. There are sufficient funds remaining in the fund to cover this grant.

Options Descriptions / Ngā Kōwhiringa

5.3       Preferred Option: Central City Landmark Heritage Funding of up to $900,000.

Option Description

5.4       This report proposes funding of $900,000 from the Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Fund. It is envisaged that this grant funding would not cover all of the required seismic upgrade and facade refurbishment works but it is not certain what percentage of the total spend required for the project that this grant would represent. The owners estimate the full costs will be in the region of between seven and eight million dollars.  The scale of the building and hence the amount of repair is such that the grant would be well below the normal maximum limit for a landmark grant of fifty percent of the total cost of the works. There is no insurance payment to assist with these repair, refurbishment and upgrade works.

5.5       It is not proposed to rehouse the Design and Arts College so the proposed use of the building will be different than before the earthquakes with primarily a mixture of living space. The scope of work is likely to include required upgrades to structure to achieve above or close to full New Build Standard (NBS); installation of new complying fire egress and fire protection systems, as well as enhanced disabled access.  Along with a building consent process these works will require a resource consent as they will have an impact on the Worcester Street façade. The façade was damaged between the first and second floor level and the lower portions of the façade will have to be rebuilt to achieve the repairs necessary. The intention is to recreate the façade with as much of the original material as possible including the original doors, stone cladding, metal spandrels and glazing.

5.6       Central City Landmark Heritage Grant support to other projects to date is summarised in the table below. The level of grant support proposed for the former State Insurance Building is comparable to a number of other grants for similar scaled buildings. A number of these projects have now been completed and illustrate the positive outcomes achieved with Central City Landmark Heritage Grant funding acting as an incentive to the owners to invest substantial amounts of their own funds into a heritage building requiring repairs.

Financial Implications

5.7       In FY20, assuming an approved grant to 96 Lichfield Street, $300,000 remains to be allocated.  Allocating a $900,000 grant to this building will require the remaining $600,000 to be allocated from the FY21 budget to enable the quantum of funding proposed in this option.

Central City Landmark Heritage Grant subject building

Funding Year

Funding

The Christchurch Club, Latimer Square

2012/2013

$1,700,000

Former Trinity Congregational Church, 124 Worcester Street

2012/2013

$1,000,000

West Avon Apartments, 279 Montreal Street

2013/2014

$800,000

Former CBS Building, 159 Manchester Street

2014/2015

$900,000

Old Stone Class Room Building, St Michaels & All Angels

2014/2015

$855,000

Former Community of the Sacred Name, 181 Barbadoes Street

2013/2014

$950,000

Midland Club, Oxford Terrace

2015/2016

$869,500

33 New Regent Street Shops

2015/2016

$900,000

McLean’s Mansion, 387 Manchester Street

2016/2017

$1,934,000

Former Public Trust Building, 152 Oxford Terrace

2017/2018

$1,934,000

Former Post Office Building, 31 Cathedral Square

2018/2019

$900,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2018/2019

$600,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2019/2020

$300,000

Proposed grant to former Wellington Woollen Mills Building

2019/2020

$900,000

Proposed grant to former State Insurance Building

2019/2020

$300,000

Proposed grant to former State Insurance Building

2020/2021

$600,000

Total Available Funds remaining

2019/2020

$0

Total Available Funds remaining

2020/2021

$900,000

 

5.7.1   Option Advantages:

·     It supports the retention of a 'Highly Significant' heritage building in a very prominent location;

·     Through repair and occupation this grant assisted repair will help to reinforce the Central City as the focus for commercial, social and cultural activities;

·     It promotes the retention of a heritage building to an appropriate use with minimal change to the exterior and minimal loss of remaining heritage fabric;

·     It will preserve the existing physical characteristics and qualities of this part of the Central City - including the prominent landmark Art Deco style facade to Worcester Street;

·     Through a conservation covenant the grant affords protection to the landmark value of the building and maintains its relationship to the important Central City street;

·     The grant will help to ensure the protection of a rare cluster of heritage buildings with the adjacent former Government Buildings to the west and the former Trinity Congregational Church to the east;

·     With the grant acting as an incentive the project to restore the building is likely to generate significant private investment into the Christchurch local economy.

5.7.2   Option Disadvantages

·     This would be a relatively large grant to a single building project and will use up a significant proportion of this years and the following years Central City Landmark Heritage Grant fund. However, this is exactly the kind of large scale retention, repair and restoration project envisaged for this scheme.

5.1       Option 2: Lower Central City Landmark Heritage Funding of up to $600,000.

Option Description

5.1.1   Option 2 would be for a lower level of financial support to the project. This option proposes funding of $600,000 from the Central City Landmark Heritage Grant fund. This lower amount of grant funding would possibly be insufficient to give the building owner the confidence and willingness to undertake and complete the works to the building to the highest specification. Other grant levels are obviously possible other than the two options. Apart from the level of financial support, this option has all the same impacts and alignments as Option 1. The table below has the lower option of both Central City Landmark Heritage grants presented to this Committee.

Financial Implications

5.1.2   In FY20 $1.2m of funding remains to be allocated.  Assuming an approved grant of $600,000 to 96 Lichfield Street, allocating $600,000 to this building will allocate the remaining funds for FY20 and leave all of FY21 funds in place for future projects.

 

Central City Landmark Heritage Grant subject building

Funding Year

Funding

The Christchurch Club, Latimer Square

2012/2013

$1,700,000

Former Trinity Congregational Church, 124 Worcester Street

2012/2013

$1,000,000

West Avon Apartments, 279 Montreal Street

2013/2014

$800,000

Former CBS Building, 159 Manchester Street

2014/2015

$900,000

Old Stone Class Room Building, St Michaels & All Angels

2014/2015

$855,000

Former Community of the Sacred Name, 181 Barbadoes Street

2013/2014

$950,000

Midland Club, Oxford Terrace

2015/2016

$869,500

33 New Regent Street Shops

2015/2016

$900,000

McLean’s Mansion, 387 Manchester Street

2016/2017

$1,934,000

Former Public Trust Building, 152 Oxford Terrace

2017/2018

$1,934,000

Former Post Office Building, 31 Cathedral Square

2018/2019

$900,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2018/2019

$600,000

Former Sargood Ewen & Son Building, 92 Lichfield Street

2019/2020

$300,000

Proposed grant to former Wellington Woollen Mills Building

2019/2020

$600,000

Proposed grant to former State Insurance Building

2019/2020

$600,000

Total Available Funds Remaining

2019/2020

$0

Total Available Funds Remaining

2020/2021

$1,500,000

 

5.1.3   Option Advantages

·     It supports the retention of a 'Highly Significant' heritage building in a very prominent location;

·     Through repair and occupation this grant assisted repair will help to reinforce the Central City as the focus for commercial, social and cultural activities;

·     It promotes the retention of a heritage building to an appropriate use with minimal change to the exterior and minimal loss of remaining heritage fabric;

·     It will preserve the existing characteristics and qualities of this part of the Central City;

·     Through a conservation covenant the grant affords protection to the landmark value of the building;

·     The grant will help to ensure the protection of a rare cluster of heritage buildings with the adjacent former Government Buildings to the west and the former Trinity Congregational Church to the east;

·     With the grant acting as an incentive the project to restore the building is likely to generate significant private investment into the Christchurch local economy;

·     When compared with Option 1, more funding is left for allocation in 2020/2021 to other projects within the Central City area.

5.1.4   Option Disadvantages

·     The lower level of grant funding may be insufficient to encourage the owner of the building to continue with the process of securing, repairing and upgrading the building to the highest standards possible;

·     These lower grant sums would be inconsistent with other levels of previously approved funding to other developer’s projects of a similar scale and complexity;

·     Lower grant funds may undermine the ability of the owner to raise funds from other sources.

Options Considerations / Te Whaiwhakaarotanga

5.2       The Council promotes heritage as a: valuable educational and interpretation resource; contributor to the visitor experience; and an economic benefit for the district. It recognises heritage as contributing to the identity and wellbeing of our communities and the district.

5.3       The Council aims to maintain and protect built, cultural, natural, and significant moveable heritage items, areas, and values, which contribute to a unique city, community identity, character and sense of place and which provide links to the past.

5.4       The Heritage Protection activity includes the provision of advice, the heritage grants schemes, and heritage education and advocacy. Other relevant considerations include the overall aims for heritage retention and promotion in the city.

5.5       Central City Landmark Heritage Grants provide opportunities to achieve positive heritage outcomes. These include the retention and protection of more heritage fabric and values than the resource consent process requires, and alignment with the conservation principles of the ICOMOS NZ Charter.

5.6       Additional considerations which the Committee may take into account are: the ongoing level of financial input from the owner; the overall percentage of funding support still being relatively low; and the comparable levels of grant support to similar heritage buildings and items.

6.   Community Views and Preferences / Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

6.1       The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant scheme is aligned to the Community Outcomes ‘The city’s heritage and taonga are conserved for future generations’ and ‘The central city has a distinctive character and identity’. Central City Landmark Heritage Grants contribute towards the number of protected heritage buildings, sites and objects, which is a measure for these outcomes.

7.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

7.1       The Central City Landmark Heritage Grant Policy is as follows:

‘That the Council acknowledges the need to retain and recover those Central City heritage buildings which the community recognises as key built landmarks which contribute to the continuing sense of identity for the Central City.

That the Council provides a Central City Heritage Landmarks Fund to assist with the retention, repair, reconstruction and seismic strengthening of Central City heritage landmark buildings which are able to be recovered for continuing use.’

The schemes ‘Operational Guidelines’ are used in the interpretation and application of this Policy. 

1.1       The Council also requires the owner to enter into a conservation covenant.  Covenants act as a protective mechanism, ensuring the building and setting is retained once the work is undertaken.   Limited conservation covenants are required under the Heritage Conservation Operational Guidelines for properties receiving Central City Landmark Heritage Grants of $15,000 to $149,999.  A full conservation covenant is required for grants of $150,000 or more.

1.1       Covenants are a comprehensive form of protection of the buildings because they are registered on the property title, ensuring that the Council’s investment is protected. As the grant will be above $150,000 there is a requirement for a new full conservation covenant on this property title in association with this grant.

8.   Risks / Ngā tūraru

8.1       The grant scheme only allows funds to be paid out upon completion of the works, certification by Council heritage staff and upon presentation of receipts. This ensures that the grant scheme is effective and that funds are not diverted or lost.

9.   Next Steps / Ngā mahinga ā-muri

9.1       Implementation dependencies - The grant recipient is normally expected to acquire all resource, building and other consents required for the works.

9.2       Implementation timeframe - The grant recipient has an eighteen month time period to undertake the works and to claim the grant. An application to extend this timeframe can be made to the Council or relevant Committee.

 

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

10. Options Matrix / Te Poukapa

Criteria

Option 1

Option 2

Financial Implications

Cost to Implement

$900,000 (over 2 years)

$600,000

Maintenance/Ongoing

0

0

Funding Source

LTP Central City Landmark Heritage Grants

LTP Central City Landmark Heritage Grants

Impact on Rates

0

0

Criteria 1 Climate Change Impacts

Positive, when completed the building fabric with embodied energy will be retained. Waste will be minimised.

Positive, when completed the building fabric with embodied energy will be retained. Waste will be minimised.

Criteria 2  Accessibility Impacts

The building will be accessible to the public via the likelihood of retail elements on the ground floor.

The building will be accessible to the public via the likelihood of retail elements on the ground floor.

Criteria 3  Social & Community impacts

The street façade and unique sense of place will be retained and restored.

The street façade and unique sense of place will be retained and restored.

Criteria 4  Future Generation Impacts

Heritage will be preserved for future generations.

Heritage will be preserved for future generations.

 

Criteria

Option 1

Option 2

Impact on Mana Whenua

No impact.

No impact.

Alignment to Council Plans & Policies

Yes, particularly ‘Our Heritage, Our Taonga, Heritage Strategy 2019-2029’.

Yes, particularly ‘Our Heritage, Our Taonga, Heritage Strategy 2019-2029’.

Consistency with other grants of a similar nature

The grant will be consistent with other grants of this type.

A lower grant would not be as consistent as other grants already awarded from this scheme.


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

116 Worcester Street Statement of Significance

76

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Brendan Smyth - Team Leader Heritage

Approved By

Carolyn Ingles - Head of Urban Regeneration, Design and Heritage

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

14.   Approval of an Extension of Time for a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant for McLean's Mansion, 387 Manchester Steet.

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/101333

Presenter(s) / Te kaipāhō:

Brendan Smyth, Heritage Team Leader

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is to request that the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee approve an extension of time of eighteen months for the Central City Landmark Heritage Grant for the heritage building known as McLean’s Mansion located at 387 Manchester Street, Christchurch.

2.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

2.1       This report is staff generated in response to the requirements of the Operational Guidelines and Policy of the Central City Landmark Heritage Grant scheme. This requires approval from the Council for extensions of time in the uptake of Central City Landmark Heritage Grants.

2.2       The request is for an extension of time of a further eighteen months for the building owner to claim the grant. The new completion date for the project would be 8 June 2021. The work to the building is underway and part of the grant has been released but the scale of the project and the amount of preparatory work has meant that the initial timeframes were not able to be met.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approve an extension of time of eighteen months for the uptake of the Central City Landmark Heritage grant previously approved for McLean’s Mansion, 387 Manchester Street, Christchurch. The new completion date for the project would be 8 June 2021.

 

4.   Context / Background / Te Horopaki

     

Manchester Street Facade, January 2020 with contractors notice board, security fence and site office.

Issue or Opportunity / Ngā take, Ngā Whaihua rānei

4.1       The detached former residential building at 387 Manchester Street, known as McLean’s Mansion, is scheduled as 'Highly Significant' in the Christchurch District Plan. The buildings are on the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (HNZPT) List as Category I (List Number 300).

4.2       The large residential building was designed by the architect RW England and constructed in 1899-1900. The building was designed in a Jacobean Revival style and included exterior elements such as decorated parapets, balustrades and bay windows. The main Manchester Street façade included two ornate bell shaped towers with prominent patterned rolled lead roofing and multiple finials.  The interior of the building was also richly detailed with ornate plaster ceilings and decorative carpentry.  The large scale of the building is a notable factor in giving the building such a high degree of prominence. It has a total of fifty-three separate rooms and includes internal galleries around the grand entrance stair as well as a large glazed skylight. Excluding the numerous chimneys, the building was constructed from timber frame aided by an only recently discovered hidden internal cast iron frame. It was reputed to be the largest timber framed residence in New Zealand at the time of its construction.

4.3       Over the years since its completion as a single dwelling, the building has changed use a number of times to function, among other uses, as a dental school and as a music academy.

4.4       The building was damaged in the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes and the building has been vacant since this time. The current owners have secured the building with temporary structural bracing and other measures internally. There was considerable risk to the building from illegal entry and vandalism as well as continuing deterioration from lack of occupation and necessary maintenance.

4.5       The Council approved a Central City Landmark Heritage Grant of $1,934,000 on 8 December 2016. A previous extension was granted on 6 June 2018 to give a projected completion date of December 2019.  The works covered by the grant have not been completed due primarily to the sheer scale and complexity of the building. The new owner, ‘The McLean’s Mansion Charitable Trust’ has started the task of stabilizing, retaining and seismically upgrading the building and this work is progressing steadily. A main contractor has been appointed and has established a site office on the grounds. Interior reusable heritage components have been protected, stored and/or catalogued as necessary and work is proceeding on the new structural elements required for the new use as an Art Gallery. Large amounts of redundant material, primarily bricks from the chimneys and plaster from the wall and ceiling linings, has been removed and processed for reuse or disposal. The security of the building has been enhanced with live cameras and light beam activated alarms to prevent further vandalism and damage to the remaining heritage fabric. New services including water supply and power have been installed. The watertightness of the building exterior has also been established and maintained.

Decision Making Authority / Te Mana Whakatau

4.6       The Council has delegated decisions on all ‘Heritage’ matters to this Committee.

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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 / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Brendan Smyth - Team Leader Heritage

Approved By

Carolyn Ingles - Head of Urban Regeneration, Design and Heritage

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

15.   2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund

Reference:

20/102843

Presenter(s):

Sam Callander - Funding Team Leader

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee to consider an application for funding from the 2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund (DRF) from the organisations below.

Organisation

Project Name

Amount Requested

Amount Recommended

Living Springs

Wi Fi Upgrade

$30,000

$0

WORD Christchurch

WORD Festival

$30,000

$30,000

 

1.2       There is currently a balance of $43,036 remaining in the 2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund.

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Approves a grant of $30,000 from its 2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund to WORD Christchurch towards the WORD Festival.

3.   Key Points

Issue or Opportunity

3.1       Two applications with requests greater than $15,000 have come to the 2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund (DRF)

Strategic Alignment

3.2       The recommendations align to the Council's Toi Otautahi Christchurch Arts Strategy.

Decision Making Authority Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund

3.3       The Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee determines the allocation of the Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund for each community.

3.4       Allocations must be consistent with any policies, standards or criteria adopted by the Council.

3.5       The purpose of the DRF is "to assist community groups where the project and funding request falls outside other council funding criteria and/or closing dates. This fund is also for emergency funding for unforeseen situations."

3.6       The Fund does not cover:

·   Legal challenges or Environment Court challenges against the Council, Council Controlled organisations or Community Board decisions.

·   Projects or initiatives that change the scope of a Council project or that will lead to ongoing operational costs to the Council (though Community Boards can recommend to the Council that it consider a grant for this purpose).

Assessment of Significance and Engagement

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

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

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

Discussion Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund

3.10    At the time of writing, the balance of the 2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund is as below.

Total Budget 2019/20

Granted To Date

Available for allocation

Balance if Staff Recommendation adopted

$137,046

$94,010

$43,036

$13,036

 

3.11    Based on the current Discretionary Response Fund criteria, the applications listed above are eligible for funding.

3.12    The attached Decision Matrix, (Attachment A) provides detailed information on the application.  This includes organisational details, project details, financial information and a staff assessment.

3.13    There have been 19 previous applications to the 2019/20 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund as detailed below. Application requests below $15,000 are decided by staff delegation.

 

Organisation

Project Name

Amount Requested

Granted

Peace Foundation Disarmament and Security Centre

Implementing Peace City Recommendations

$8,400

$1,000

Riccarton Bush Trust

Riccarton House and Bush Design and Consultancy Services

$12,410

$12,410

Canterbury Combined Leisure Marching

New Zealand National Leisure Marching Day

$2,000

$1,500

Tug Lyttelton Preservation Society Inc.

2019 Docking Survey

$83,240

$10,000

University of Canterbury Foundation

Christchurch Town Hall Book (Umbrella Group for Book Project)

$2,000

$1,000

The Art & Industry Biennial Trust (trading as SCAPE Public Art)

SCAPE Public Art Season 2019

$100,000

$30,000

START Trust

Conference Attendance

$8,000

$1,600

Social Service Council of the Diocese of Christchurch

Community Energy Efficiency Programme

$52,500

$5,000

Christchurch Collective for the Homeless

Homelessness in Christchurch

$8,000

$0

Korowai Tahi Trust

Maori Weaving National Hui 2019

$14,750

$10,000

Dress for Success

Premises 'Fit Out'

$5,000

$2,500

Kids Fishing Charitable Trust

Take A Kid Fishing 2019

$2,445

$1,500

Canterbury Rugby League Incorporated

Samoa International Rugby League team Christchurch visit

$8,000

$4,000

Cultivate Christchurch

Youth Internship Coordinator

$15,000

$6,000

Wandersearch Canterbury

Manager Wages

$2,200

$0

Christchurch Vegan Society

Otautahi Christchurch : the vegan capital

$14,600

$1,500

UpstreamNZ

UpstreamNZ

$9,845

$6,000

Deaf Society of Canterbury

Staff Wages

$5,879

$0

Christchurch Community Accounting

Investment in Growth

$5,000

$0

Total

$359,269

$94,010

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Staff Panel Decision Matrices

88

 

 

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

Nicola Thompson - Community Funding Advisor

Sam Callander - Team Leader Community Funding

Approved By

Michael Down - Finance Business Partner

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

16.   Capital Endowment Fund Applications: 2019/20 Round 2

Reference:

20/88339

Presenter(s):

John Filsell- Head of Community Support, Governance & Partnerships
Sam Callander - Community Funding Team Leader

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee to consider applications for funding from the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund Round 2 from the organisations listed below, noting that the recommendations can be accommodated within the funds available.

 

Organisation

Project Name

Amount Requested

Amount Recommended

Burnside Bowling Club

Accessible Men’s Bathroom Upgrade

$52,000

$52,000

Canterbury Brain Collective

BrainTree Wellness Centre

$250,000

$100,000

CCC Recreation, Sport and Events Unit

Recreation, Sport and Events Sustainability Advisor Role

$172,000

$86,000 Year 1

$86,000 Year 2

The Pukeko Centre Inc Society

The Pukeko Centre – Multi Purpose Sports Hall

$250,000

$200,000

Summit Road Society Inc

John Jameson Lookout

$185,000

$150,000

Total 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund Round 2

$659,000

$588,000

 

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Makes a grant of $52,000 from the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund Round 2 to Burnside Bowling Club Inc for the Accessible Men’s Bathroom Upgrade.

a.         Payment will be released in one instalment to Burnside Bowling Club Inc subject to:

i.          Evidence of the approved building consents to be provided to the Community Funding Team Leader. If funding requirements are not met by 30 June 2020, the grant will be withdrawn and returned to the Capital Endowment Fund.

b.         Final reporting is to be submitted 12 months following payment or completion of the Accessible Men’s Bathroom Upgrade project, whichever comes first.

2.         Makes a grant of $100,000 from the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund Round 2 to the Canterbury Brain Collective for the BrainTree Wellness Centre.

a.         Payment will be released in one instalment to the Canterbury Brain Collective subject to:

i.          Evidence that four million dollars fundraising has been confirmed, approved by the Community Funding Team Leader. If funding requirements are not met by 30 June 2021, the grant will be withdrawn and returned to the Capital Endowment Fund.

b.         Reporting is to be submitted 12 monthly and upon completion of the BrainTree Wellness Centre.

3.         Makes a total grant of $172,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to The Christchurch City Council Recreation Sports and Events Unit for the Recreation, Sports and Events Sustainability Advisor.

a.         Payment will be released in two instalments of $86,000 from the 2019/20 and 2020/21 Capital Endowment Fund respectively.

i.          The Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee note that the funding granted in this application represents Council’s total contribution to this project over its lifetime and there can be no expectation of further finding in the future.

b.         Reporting is to be submitted 12 monthly and upon completion of the Recreation, Sports and Events Sustainability Advisor project.

4.         Makes a grant of $150,000 from the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund Round 2 to the Summit Road Society for the John Jameson Lookout.

a.         Payment will be released in one instalment to the Summit Road Society subject to:

i.          Evidence that fundraising has been confirmed to make a total of $300,000 available to the project; approved by the Community Funding Team Leader. If funding requirements are not met by 30 June 2021, the grant will be withdrawn and returned to the Capital Endowment Fund.

b.         Reporting is to be submitted 12 monthly and upon completion of the John Jameson Lookout project.

5.         Makes a grant of $200,000 from the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund Round 2 to The Pukeko Centre for The Pukeko Centre – Multi Purpose Sports Hall.

a.         Payment will be released in one instalment to The Pūkeko Centre Inc Society subject to:

i.          Evidence that fundraising has been confirmed to make the project viable, approved by the Community Funding Team Leader. If funding requirements are not met by 30 June 2022, the grant will be withdrawn and returned to the Capital Endowment Fund.

b.         Reporting is to be submitted 12 monthly and upon completion of the The Pukeko Centre – Multi Purpose Sports Hall.

 

3.   Key Points

Issue or Opportunity

3.1       On 12 April 2018 the Council resolved to establish criteria for distributing the proceeds of the Capital Endowment Fund (CEF) (CNCL/2018/00057).  On 10 May 2018 Council resolved to utilise all income from the CEF for three years, 2018/19 to 2020/21 (i.e. not use part of the income to inflation-protect the fund). 

3.2       On 13 December 2018 Council established eligibility and assessment criteria for the CEF and an application process.  Assessment criteria are as follows:

3.2.1   Evidence that the proposal is for a specific project or activity projects.  Or evidence of economic or environmental benefits.

3.2.2   Evidence that the project demonstrates a benefit for the City of Christchurch, or its citizens, or for a community of people living in Christchurch.

3.2.3   Evidence that the benefits will be experienced now and in the future.

3.3       On 29 August 2019 Council resolved to grant $572,075 to four community applicants in Round 1 of the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Funding round

Strategic Alignment

3.4       The recommendations align to Council’s Strategic Framework; each application’s alignment is detailed in the respective decision matrix attached.

3.5       Decision Making Authority

3.5.1   Authority for making grant decisions for the Capital Endowment Fund sits with the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee.

3.5.2   Allocations must be consistent with any policies, standards or criteria adopted by the Council.

Assessment of Significance and Engagement

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

3.7       The level of significance was determined by:

·   The number of people affected and/or with an interest.

·   The alignment of recommended applications with Council’s strategic directions

·   The operation of the Capital Endowment Fund is an agreed level of service.

·   The recommendations meet Council’s eligibility requirements for the fund.

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

Balance of the Capital Endowment Fund Available for Allocation

3.9       At the time of writing, the balances of the Capital Endowment Fund for years 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 are as below, with further detail in Attachment A: CEF - Income and Allocations 2019-20 to 2020-21.

CEF Year

CEF Total Fund

(000s)

Allocated

Available for allocation

Total of staff recommendations** 

Available if staff recommendation adopted 

2019/20

$4064*

$3,346

$718

$688

$30

2020/21

$3,399

$2,574

$825

$186

$639

* Includes $463k carried forward from 2018/19

** Includes recommendations from Public Excluded report "Capital Endowment Fund – Event Opportunity"

 

3.10    Based on the current Council approved Capital Endowment Fund criteria, the applications listed above are eligible for funding.  Attachments B – F contain decision matrices and supporting documents which provide detailed information on the applications.  This includes project details, financial information and a staff comments.

3.11    The remaining balance of the 2019/20 Capital Endowment Fund following approvals by the Council will be carried forward to Round One of the 2020/21 financial year for Consideration in August 2020.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Capital Endowment Fund Income and Allocations 2019-20 to 2023-24

95

b

Burnside Bowling Club - Decision Matrix and Supporting Documents

96

c

Canterbury Brain Collective - Decision Matrix and Supporting Documents

99

d

Christchurch City Council Recreation, Sport and Events Unit - Decision Matrix and Supporting Documents

103

e

The Pukeko Centre Inc Society - Decision Matrix and Supporting Documents

139

f

Summit Road Society - Decision Matrix and Supporting Documents

177

 

 

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

Sam Callander - Team Leader Community Funding

Ruby Sione - Community Funding Advisor

Approved By

Michael Down - Finance Business Partner

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

17.   Community Resilience Partnership Fund

Reference:

20/102638

Presenter(s):

Sam Callander - Funding Team Leader
Josh Wharton – Community, Partnerships & Planning Advisor
Jacqui Miller – Community Recreation Advisor (Coastal-Burwood)

 

 

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to recommend to the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee the allocation of grants from the Community Resilience Partnership Fund. 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         Makes a grant of $7,000 to  Brackenridge Services Ltd from the Community Resilience Partnership Fund towards the Brackenridge Activity Programme.

2.         Makes a grant of $40,000 to Bros for Change Charitable Trust from the Community Resilience Partnership Fund for Year One of the Te Pānga Pōkare initiative.

Subject to the return of a satisfactory monitoring report, the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee makes a grant of $40,000 to Bros for Change Charitable Trust from the Community Resilience Partnership Fund for Year Two of the Te Pānga Pōkare initiative.

 

3.   Key Points

Issue or Opportunity

3.1       The contract with the Ministry of Health identified that the Community Resilience Fund will support projects that strengthen communities by increasing community participation, connectedness and resilience.

Strategic Alignment

3.2       The recommendation is aligned to the Strategic Framework and in particular the strategic priority of enabling active citizenship and connected communities. It will provide a strong sense of community.

Objectives of the Community Resilience Fund

3.3       The objectives of the Fund are to invest in initiatives which contribute to Community Resilience through:

·   Community Connection and Activation

·     Strengthen connections between neighbours, families, whānau and communities of shared interest and identity, as well as geographically.

·     Create and activate places within local communities that increase access to opportunities for physical activity and social connection.

·   Community-led Response

·     Support local community-led initiatives.

·     Recognise and utilise the resources, skills, knowledge and infrastructure of local communities.

·     Build on existing community strengths and reflect the local context.

·   Capacity Building

·     Strengthen the capacity and capability of communities to identify and deliver effective services and activities that will increase community resilience and wellbeing.

·     Identify and cultivate local leadership.

·   Collaboration

·     Create collaborative ways of working that will endure beyond the completion of a specific project.

·     Engage a broad range of stakeholders to identify common interests and benefits that might be achieved by working together and engender long-term commitment to being part of the solution.

·   Innovation and Enterprise

·     Encourage innovation and creativity.

·     Encourage and enable social enterprise.

·   Removing Barriers to Participation and Resilience

·     Remove earthquake related barriers to participation and resilience.

·     Support initiatives that enhance peoples’ ability to access to appropriate services. 

·     Increase participation in, and awareness of, community, recreation, sports, arts, heritage and environment groups, programmes and local events.

3.4       The Council formally adopted the Objectives as the funding Criteria in October 2017.

Funding Process

3.5       The contract identified that the fund will primarily use a direct selection approach. This method was selected because:

·   This approach minimises the transaction and compliance costs for groups and Council.

·   Funding can be targeted based on the objectives of the fund.

·   Funding arrangements can be flexible and innovative activities developed as funding is not restricted by an application or contract.

Assessment of Significance and Engagement

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

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

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

Discussion

3.9       There are two (2) initiatives recommended for consideration from the Community Resilience Partnership Fund.

3.10    The applications have been reviewed and approved by the Psychosocial Governance Group.

3.11    The Council has allocated funding to 50 initiatives since October 2017.  The total allocation to date is $2,984,592 Year 1 and $2,271,400 Year 2.

3.12    At the time of writing, the balance of the Community Resilience Partnership Fund is $744,008.  If the recommendations in this report are adopted the balance will be $675,008.

3.13    Recommendations for the Community Resilience Partnership Fund are outlined in Attachment A. A summary matrix is detailed in Attachment B. The Community Resilience Partnership Fund funding history is listed in Attachment C.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Funding Proposals February 2020

188

b

Summary Matrix February 2020

194

c

Financial Tracking February 2020

195

 

 

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

Nicola Thompson - Community Funding Advisor

Sam Callander - Team Leader Community Funding

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

PDF Creator


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

 


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

18.   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:


Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee

27 February 2020

 

 

 

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

19

Major Event Opportunity

s7(2)(i)

Conduct Negotiations

ChristchurcNZ are in a competative bid process that requires confidentiality whilst in progress

1 July 2020

Upon public announcement of the outcome of the event bid