Christchurch City Council

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Christchurch City Council will be held on:

 

Date:                                    Wednesday 29 July 2020

Time:                                   2pm

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

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Catherine Chu

Councillor Melanie Coker

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

Councillor Sara Templeton

 

 

24 July 2020

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Dawn Baxendale

Chief Executive

Tel: 941 6996

 

 

Samantha Kelly

Team Leader Hearings and Committee Support

941 6227

samantha.kelly@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.
Watch Council meetings live on the web:
http://councillive.ccc.govt.nz/live-stream

 


Council

29 July 2020

 

 


Council

29 July 2020

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Karakia Timatanga................................................................................................... 4 

1.        Apologies / Ngā Whakapāha................................................................................ 4

2.        Declarations of Interest / Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga................................................. 4

3.        Public Participation / Te Huinga Tūmatanui.......................................................... 4

3.1       Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga.................................................... 4

4.        Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga.......................................................... 4

Staff Reports

5.        Waste Management and Minimisation Plan........................................................... 5

6.        District Licensing Committee Member Recruitment Process.................................. 65

7.        Submission on amendments to National Environmental Standards for Air Quality... 71

8.        Covenant Consent approval for 19 Gleneagles Terrace, Hatherley.......................... 81

9.        Greater Christchurch Partnership: Focus for the next twelve months..................... 91

10.      Commercial film and video production - s71 proposal......................................... 101

11.      Civic Financial Services - Special General Meeting Proxy..................................... 107

12.      Resolution to Exclude the Public...................................................................... 117  

Karakia Whakamutunga

 

 

 


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

Karakia Timatanga

1.   Apologies / Ngā Whakapāha  

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

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.   Public Participation / Te Huinga Tūmatanui

3.1   Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

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

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

4.   Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga

There were no Presentation of Petitions at the time the agenda was prepared.

 


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

5.     Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/760929

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Helen Beaumont, Head of Three Waters and Waste,  helen.beaumont@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

David Adamson, General Manager City Services, david.adamsom@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide elected members with the Waste Assessment 2019 and draft Waste Minimisation Plan 2020 and receive approval to go to consultation, set up a hearings panel and delegate authority for the approval of the final Waste Management and Minimisation Plan to the Three Waters, Infrastructure and Environment Committee. Waste Minimisation plans are a requirement under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.

1.2       The decisions in this report are of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the level of community interest the draft plan could generate and the statutory requirement in the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 for the Council to undertake a special consultative procedure when preparing a new plan.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Agree to commence a special consultative procedure to consult on the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2020.

2.         Adopt the Waste Assessment 2019 (Attachment A) and the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2020 (Attachment B) for consultation.

3.         Agree it is necessary for better public understanding of the consultation to provide a summary of the information contained in the Assessment and Draft plan and delegate to the General Manager City Services authority to approve a Summary of Information for that purpose.

4.         Approve the establishment of a Waste Management and Minimisation Plan hearings panel to hear submissions and make a recommendation on the final Plan.

5.         Delegate to the Three Waters Infrastructure and Environment Committee authority to approve the final Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2020.

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, there is a statutory requirement to review our Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (the Plan) every six years. A review was completed in 2019 with an updated Plan developed in 2020.

3.2       Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (the Act), a special consultative procedure is required to consult on the draft Plan.  As part of that consultation we also have to notify the waste assessment that was carried out last year as part of the review. This process is required to be followed even if the decision is made not to amend the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. Not undertaking a special consultative procedure would result in Council not meeting the statutory requirements of the Act.

3.3       The Ministry for the Environment provides a quarterly levy fund to Council of approximately $350,000. This money may be withheld if a territorial authority has not met the statutory requirements regarding the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. Council has informed the Ministry for the Environment that the Plan will be finished by the end of October 2020.

3.4       To comply with the special consultative procedure, a hearings panel should be established to hear submissions and make a recommendation on any changes to the draft Plan. The Three Waters Infrastructure and Environment Committee requires delegated authority for approval of the final Waste Management and Minimisation Plan as Council would not be able to make a decision in time for the Ministry for the Environment deadline.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       As part of the review two options were identified: continue with the same approach as outlined in the 2013 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan with revised targets or undertake a more comprehensive review of the plan.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (the Act), Council has a responsibility to ‘promote effective and efficient waste management and minimisation’ within its district and to regulate the national waste disposal levy provisions. The adoption of a waste management and minimisation plan, reviewed every six years, is part of this responsibility.

5.2       The 2013 Plan was developed 3 years into our new 3-bin kerbside system and during the recovery period of the Canterbury earthquake sequence. It largely provided a continuation of existing services. To meet the current challenges the 2020 Plan builds on our achievements since 2013 and provides the next steps towards achieving our vision: Ōtautahi Christchurch is a sustainable city, working towards zero waste and a circular economy.

5.3       There has been a significant shift in the international recycling markets. This started with China’s National Sword Policy[1], introducing stricter controls over their importation of recycling products. Contamination thresholds came into force in March 2018[2], severely disrupting exports for paper and plastic materials. There has been a flow-on impact to other South East Asian markets, resulting in a dramatic drop in the prices for mixed paper and cardboard, and mixed plastics. This has created a surplus of products with contamination greater than 5 per cent as there is less demand for them.

5.4       The 2019 Norwegian Amendments[3] to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal[4] means exporters of contaminated, or hard-to-recycle plastic waste, will require consent from the Governments of receiving countries before shipping. While the amendment will not prevent the trade of plastic waste, it incentivises trade in high quality, sorted, clean plastic waste and help ensure that materials are being shipped for the purposes of recycling. The amendment is effective January 2021.

5.5       Central Government has recognised the issues in the waste, recycling and organics industry and developed a broad work programme that includes:

·     A review of the Landfill Levy (and pricing signals for waste diversion)

·     Product stewardship, where everyone involved (producers, brand owners, importers, retailers, consumers, collectors, and re-processers) in the lifespan of a product is called upon to take up the responsibility to reduce its environmental, health, and safety impacts[5]

·     Design of a New Zealand beverage container return scheme to recover the large number of beverage containers used each year so they can be re-used and recycled. The beverage containers - such as plastic PET bottles - would carry a refundable deposit, redeemable when the container is returned to a collection depot or other drop-off point

·     Additional legislative controls to support a more circular economy.

5.6       Christchurch’s current reliance on export markets and overseas processing is a significant challenge, with limited options for onshore facilities to recycle material. The Central Government work programme also has the potential to impact our resource recovery approach. For example, the proposed Container Deposit Scheme, if it is focused on the highest value commodities (collected at kerbside) could reduce the revenue currently collected.

5.7       The draft Plan has been prepared to meet these growing challenges in the waste, recycling and organics industries. The focus is not just about the services we provide, but considers broader waste management and minimisation objectives – both at a city and regional level.

5.8       Council’s efforts to reduce waste to landfill and ensure our services are meeting the needs of our residents are outlined in an action plan contained in the draft Plan. These actions are primarily focused on short-term activities to assist Council to respond the changing state of the waste and resource recovery industry.

6.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       A Waste Management and Minimisation Plan supports the Council’s community outcome: Sustainable use of resources and minimising waste.

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

6.2.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and Policy

·     Level of Service: 17.0.1.1 Advice to Council on high priority policy and planning issues that affect the City. Advice is aligned with and delivers on the governance expectations as evidenced through the Council Strategic Framework. - Reconfirm as necessary the Strategic Framework following council elections

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.3       The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

6.5       There are, however, the specific cultural (tikanga) issues associated with the disposal and management of waste, including the need for waste management practices to protect cultural values such as mahinga kai and wāhi tapu and the requirement for waste minimisation to be a basic principle of, and approach to, waste management. The opportunities for Council to work in partnership with Papatipu Rūnanga to ensure that waste management and minimisation practices protect significant values such as mahinga kai and wāhi tapu and are consistent with Ngāi Tahu tikanga are acknowledged in the draft Plan.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.6       Waste minimisation is a mechanism to support climate change mitigation as outlined in the draft Plan.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7       The decision has no accessibility impacts.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       The ‘Funding the Plan’ section of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan outlines the funding mechanisms.  The action plan identifies where additional funding may be required.

Other / He mea anō

7.2       The Ministry for the Environment provides a levy fund to Council of approximately $350,000 per quarter. If the draft plan is not approved by the end of October 2020 levy payments may be stopped.

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1       Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (the Act), Council has a responsibility to ‘promote effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within its district’ (s42).  For the purposes of meeting section 42, the Council is required to adopt a waste management and minimisation plan that includes the information set out in section 43(2). 

8.2       As already noted, the Council is required to review its plan every six years and the requirements when preparing, amending or revoking a plan are set out in section 44 of the Act.  These include a requirement to use the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.  Section 44(e) also provides that ‘the most recent assessment undertaken by the territorial authority under section 51 must be notified with the statement of proposal’.  (The statement of proposal in this case is the draft Plan.)

8.3       As both the waste assessment and the draft Plan are large documents it is recommended that a summary of information be prepared for the consultation.  This will provide an easy to understand summary of the assessment and the Plan, and the changes proposed from the current Plan to the new Plan.  Section 83(1)(a)(ii) of the Local Government Act 2002 states that ‘if the local authority considers on reasonable grounds that it is necessary to enable public understanding of the proposal, a summary of the information contained in the statement of proposal’ can be prepared.

8.4       The summary of information must be a fair representation of the major matters covered by the plan and assessment, and be in a form determined by the local authority, among other things (s83AA).

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.1       The legal considerations are described above.  As the timeframe being worked to for the consultation is tight it is recommended a delegation be given to the General Manager City Services to approve the summary of information.

8.2       This report has been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

9.   Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       As also outlined in the resource implications section, the Ministry for the Environment provides a levy fund to Council of approximately $350,000 per quarter. If the Plan is not approved by the end of October 2020 levy payments may be stopped.

9.2       The draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan outlines significant high level risks including the on-going viability of services due to changing market conditions as outlined earlier in this report.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft 2019 Waste Assessment for WMMP

11

b

Draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2020

28

 

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

Not applicable

Not applicable

 

 

 

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

Authors

Rowan Latham - Contract & Project Lead

Teresa Wooding - Senior Project Programme Lead

Sarah Hemmingsen - Senior Advisor

Judith Cheyne - Associate General Counsel

Approved By

Ross Trotter - Manager Resource Recovery

Helen Beaumont - Head of Three Waters & Waste

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Council

29 July 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


Council

29 July 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


PDF Creator


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

6.     District Licensing Committee Member Recruitment Process

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/714675

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Megan Pearce, Hearings and Council Support Manager, megan.pearce@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizen and Community, mary.richardson@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Council to approve commencement of a recruitment process to appoint Chair and List Members to the District Licensing Committee (DLC).  This report has been written to ensure the DLC will have a continuous membership in light that the term of a number of members is expiring toward the end of the year.

1.2       The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined on the basis that the decisions being made by the DLC are of local significance and effects a relatively small number of people at any one time.  The decision specifically required in this report is to commence a recruitment process to appoint membership to the DLC.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Approves that Council Officers commence a recruitment process to appoint Chair and List Members to the District Licensing Committee, with a view to:

a.         continue the appointment of four District Licensing Committees under section 186 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012;

b.         continue the appointment of Commissioners to Chair the District Licensing Committees and in doing so reconfirm that Elected Members will not sit on the District Licensing Committee; and

c.         make appointments to continue maintaining a list of seven persons approved to be members of the Council’s District Licensing Committees by proceeding to recruit at this time for the memberships expiring at the end of November 2020 and on 18 December 2020.

2.         Delegates to the Hearings and Council Support Manager the responsibility to undertake the recruitment process acknowledging that there will be a report to the Council for the appointment of the successful candidates.

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       Five of the seven members of the Council’s DLC have terms expiring in November and December of this year. In order to maintain a reasonably resourced DLC capable of adequately dealing with the quantum of applications received, a fully resourced DLC is required which requires a recruitment process.

3.2       No Council Officer currently holds the delegation to commence a recruitment process for the DLC and therefore the Council is required to issue an instruction to do so on their behalf.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Under section 189(2) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act (SSAA), “a territorial authority must appoint 1 member as the chairperson and that person must be a member of that territorial authority or a commissioner appointed to the licensing committee”.

4.2       Since its inception in 2013, the Council has decided that Councillors not be appointed to the DLC, and instead appoint external Commissioners. While appointing Councillors to the DLC is an option under the SSAA, given the time commitment required to consider over 3,300 applications per year, it is not considered a practicable option.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       Under section 192 SSAA, the Council must establish, maintain and publish a list of persons approved to be members of the Council’s DLC. The Council’s current DLC has four Commissioners sitting as Chairs and three List Members. Five of the current seven Members have terms expiring at the end of 2020.

5.2       The current appointment periods for Mr Blackwell and Ms White expire at the end of November 2020. The current appointment periods for Mr Wilson, Mr Rogers and Ms Surrey expire on 18 December 2020. It is recommended to run a single recruitment process commencing as soon as practicable for these five expiring appointments. Once the recruitment process is complete, recommended appointments will be reported to the Council for approval.

5.3       It is recommended that the current make-up of the DLC is appropriate; four Chairs and an additional three List Members. This number allows for adequate membership to cover non-availability of Members and any issues arising from conflicts of interest.

5.4       The decision affects all wards/Community Board areas. While individual applications to the DLC are of interest to specific Community Boards, the issue of appointments to the DLC is metropolitan.

6.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.1.1   Activity: Governance & Decision Making

·     Level of Service: 4.1.22 Provide services that ensure all Council and Community Board Meetings are held with full statutory compliance - 100% compliance

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2       There are no policies relevant to this decision. Recruitment of the DLC is a statutory requirement.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.4       The decision does not create implications for climate change.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.5       The decision to recruit does not directly have any accessibility considerations. However, there may be applicants, who if successful, may require additional support regarding accessibility in order to carry out the functions required of this position. These will be considered on a case by case basis, if applicable.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement – There will be minimal costs to implement the requirement to recruit. These will include any advertising fees and can be accommodated in existing budgets.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – Members, as per legislation, are entitled to receive (at current rates) the following fees:

7.2.1   The Chairperson of a DLC is paid $624 per day ($78 per hour for part days), and

7.2.2   Other members are paid $408 per day ($51 per hour for part days).

7.2.3   Members are entitled to be reimbursed for reasonable expenses.

7.3       Funding Source – The fees for licensing applications and the like are set by regulation under the SSAA. They are intended to recover the Council’s costs in performing its functions.

Other / He mea anō

7.4       There are no other resource implications with this decision.

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1       Under section 186 of the SSAA, the Council must appoint one or more DLCs as, in its opinion, are required to deal with licensing matters for its district.  The functions of the DLCs include determining applications and renewals for licences and manager's certificates (section 187 of the SSAA).

8.2       Each DLC must consist of three members appointed by the territorial authority.  The Council must appoint one member as the chairperson and that person must be an elected member of the Council or a Commissioner appointed to the DLC.

8.3       The other two members of the DLC must be appointed from the Council’s “list” maintained under section 192. 

8.4       Certain persons are excluded from being appointed on the DLC, such as Constables, Licensing Inspectors, Medical Officers of Health, as well as Council employees and those with involvement in the alcohol industry.  A person may be approved for inclusion for a period of up to five years and may be approved for any one or more further periods of up to five years.

8.5       The SSAA envisages that there can be some flexibility with the membership of each DLC on a day to day basis.  This is the reason for having the list under section 192.  Furthermore, nothing in the SSAA prohibits a person from being a list member of one DLC and the chairperson/commissioner of another, assuming they meet all relevant competencies.

8.6       Since its inception in 2013, to allow for flexible appointments, the Council appointed the four Commissioners as a subordinate decision-making body (under clause 30 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002) to decide on the appointment of the committee members for each individual hearing.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.7       The legal consideration is referenced in section 8 above.

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

9.   Recruitment Process

9.1       Appointments under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (SSAA) are a statutory requirement. Persons must have experience relevant to alcohol licensing matters i.e. experiences which include knowledge of alcohol licensing, experience in legal and regulatory alcohol environments and knowledge of the SSAA (there are some eligibility disqualifications that apply).

9.2       There are a number of skills required by the DLC, including, but not limited to having an understanding of alcohol related harm, experience in legal processes, and ability to facilitate community participation. It is difficult to find these skills in equal capacity in all applicants, so ensuring a well balance DLC make-up is important.

9.3       Previous recruitment processes have been advertised as follows:

9.3.1   www.cccjob.co.nz (the Council’s job webpage),

9.3.2   www.seek.co.nz,

9.3.3   www.lawsociety.org.nz

9.3.4   Healthy Christchurch Newsletter.

9.4       Previous recruitment processes have drawn a healthy number of applicants but limited in terms of widespread representation of the community. It is anticipated that a more considered use of existing community networks and stakeholder databases be utilised for this upcoming recruitment process in an attempt to attract a wider cross-section of applicants that reflect the make-up of the community. 

10. Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1    There is a risk if appointments/approvals are not in place for the expiring of the current terms that the Council would not have any operational DLCs.  This risk can be mitigated by conducting a recruitment process and making the appointments/approvals prior to the current term expiring.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no appendices to this report.

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

Not applicable

Not applicable

 

 

 

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

Megan Pearce - Manager Hearings and Council Support

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support, Governance and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

7.     Submission on amendments to National Environmental Standards for Air Quality

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/745408

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Diane Shelander, Senior Policy Analyst, diane.shelander@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Brendan Anstiss, GM Strategy & Transformation,
brendan.anstiss@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval of its draft submission (Attachment A) on the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality (NESAQ).  This report has been written in response to the public consultation on the proposed amendments announced by the Ministry for the Environment. Information on the proposed amendments can be found at https://www.mfe.govt.nz/node/26510.

1.2       The Council previously submitted on the 2010 amendments to the NESAQ.

1.3       The submission period closes on 31 July 2020, an extension to the original closure date of 24 April 2020 published in the consultation documents due to impacts from COVID-19.

1.4       The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined to be low as the Council’s submission itself will not have a significant direct impact on the community.

1.5       In brief the key amendments proposed to the NESAQ are listed below, with additional detail provided in section 5 of this report.

·   Introducing two new standards for particulate matter in air that are 2.5 microns or smaller in size (PM2.5)

·   Replacing the current PM10 standard with the new PM2.5 standards as the measures against which compliance with clean air standards is assessed

·   Reducing the current standard for new and replacement solid fuel burners from no more than 1.5 grams particulates per kilogram of solid fuel  burned to 1.0 grams per kilogram

·   Adding new regulations to control mercury emissions from specific manufacturing processes and specific commercial and industrial operations.

1.6       The key messages in the draft submission (Attachment A) are:

·   Support for the introduction of new air quality standards for PM2.5, as well as the use of the new PM2.5 standards as the measures for determining clean air status of airsheds

·   Support for the amended standard for new and replacement solid fuel burners

·   Support for new requirements to control mercury air emissions.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Approve the submission to the Ministry for the Environment on the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality.

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       The matters addressed in the draft submission align with the community outcomes of resilient communities and healthy environment as well as related strategies, policies and programmes such as the Climate Change Programme.

3.2       The addition of PM2.5 standards would provide for a greater degree of protection of human health compared to the current provisions of the NESAQ, as finer particles have been determined to have a more significant effect on human health compared to coarser particulate matter.

3.3       The proposed reduction in the emissions standard for new and replacement domestic solid fuel burners to 1.0 grams per kilogram aligns with what is already in place in Canterbury for home heating. Including other domestic solid fuel burners such as cookers and water boilers in the proposed emissions standard would provide for greater coverage of devices that emit fine particulate matter. Note that existing domestic solid fuel burners would not be affected by the proposed amendments to the NESAQ.

3.4       The inclusion of new requirements for emissions of mercury to air will allow New Zealand to take an important step to ratifying the Minamata Convention for Mercury, which New Zealand signed in 2013.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Not lodging a submission. This option was considered but would be inconsistent with advancing the Council’s community outcomes and related strategies and plans.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       The Government’s proposals to amend the current National Environmental Standards for Air Quality are aimed at:

·   Improving human health outcomes by including two new standards for PM2.5 in addition to the current standard for PM10. PM2.5 are fine particles in the air no more than 2.5 microns in size. Research has shown that these smaller particles are more hazardous to human health than PM10.

·   Enabling New Zealand to meet its obligations under the Minamata Convention for Mercury, which New Zealand signed in 2013. One step in ratifying the Minamata Convention is to control emissions to air from mercury.

5.2       The proposed amendments would:

5.2.1   Replace PM10 with PM2.5 as the measures by which compliance with clean air standards are determined, with PM10 monitoring retained as it remains an important measure of air quality.

5.2.2   Establish two PM2.5 standards for which airsheds must comply: a 24-hour average concentration of not more than 25 micrograms per cubic metre (μg/m3) and an annual average of not more than 10 μg/m3. These two PM2.5 standards are the same as those recommended by the World Health Organisation.

5.2.3   Amend the standard for new and replacement solid fuel burners to emit no more than 1.0 grams particulates per kilogram of solid fuel burned, a reduction from the current standard of 1.5 grams per kilogram.

5.2.4   Establish new requirements for specific sources mercury air emissions, as one step to enable New Zealand to ratify the Minamata Convention for Mercury signed in 2013. The Minamata Convention

·     prohibits the use of mercury in a handful of manufacturing processes (none of which are said to be used in New Zealand)

·     requires international best practice for specific mercury emissions sources: coal-fired power plants; new or upgraded coal-fired industrial boilers above two megawatts; smelting and roasting processes used in the production of non-ferrous metals; waste incineration facilities; cement clinker production facilities.

6.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.1.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and Policy

·     Level of Service: 17.0.1.1 Advice to Council on high priority policy and planning issues that affect the City. Advice is aligned with and delivers on the governance expectations as evidenced through the Council Strategic Framework.  

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2       The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, including the community outcome ‘safe and healthy communities’ and the Council’s Sustainable Energy Strategy.

6.3       The decision also aligns with the Canterbury Health in All Policies Partnership, of which the City Council is a member.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.5       Supporting initiatives to reduce particulate matter emissions to air from combustion of solid fuels are expected have the ancillary benefit of reduction of carbon emissions. This aligns with the Council’s Climate Change Programme, the Sustainable Energy Strategy and the Resilient Greater Christchurch Plan.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6       This decision does not have a significant impact on accessibility.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       The cost to make a submission on the draft amendments to the NESAQ are minimal and are included within existing operational budgets.

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1       The ultimate decisions with respect to amending the NESAQ rests with the Minister for the Environment. The Council and any person have the right to submit on the proposed amendments to the NESAQ.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.1       There is no legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

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

9.   Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       There are no risks associated with Council making a submission on the proposed amendments to the NESAQ.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft submission - Amendments to National Environmental Standard for Air Quality

76

 

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality - particulate matter and mercury emissions - Consultation document

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/air/proposed-amendments-national-environmental-standards-air-quality-particulate-matter

Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality - particulate matter and mercury emissions - Summary document

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/air/proposed-amendments-national-environmental-standards-air-quality-particulate-0

 

 

 

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

Diane Shelander - Senior Policy Analyst

Approved By

Emma Davis - Head of Strategic Policy

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Council

29 July 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

8.     Covenant Consent approval for 19 Gleneagles Terrace, Hatherley

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/667465

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Amanda Ohs, Senior Heritage Advisor, amanda.ohs@ccc.com

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Brendan Anstiss, General Manager Strategy and Transformation, brendan.anstiss@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Council to approve alterations and an addition to the ‘Significant’ scheduled dwelling and setting at 19 Gleneagles Terrace known as ‘Hatherley.’

1.2       The dwelling and setting are protected by a conservation covenant.  This report has been written in response to staff receiving an application for a covenant consent for the works on 23 April 2020.

1.3       The proposed changes respond to the needs of the current owners, in a way which minimises impact on heritage fabric and values.  The works have been assessed by Council heritage staff as being consistent with the conservation covenant matters of discretion.  

1.4       The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined by the project having little or no impact on Council’s ability to carry out its role, and the low level of impact on ratepayers. While the decision is not easily reversible, as the result of the decision involves physical work to a building, these works will have a minor impact on the heritage values and fabric of this building and setting. The overall social and economic impacts that could arise from the project are positive. This decision is not significant enough to change the overall heritage value of the dwelling and setting.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Approve a covenant consent to undertake the alteration works to the dwelling and setting known as Hatherley at 19 Gleneagles Terrace. 

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       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. Conservation covenants are one mechanism for protection, as Council approval is required for certain changes to covenanted properties. This provides for managed change, allowing heritage places to be altered to remain relevant, viable and to meet users’ needs while at the same time retaining heritage fabric and values to the greatest extent possible.   

3.2       The alterations proposed will enable the ongoing use and retention of the dwelling, and will protect heritage fabric and values.  There will be minor effects on heritage fabric and values when considered against the requirements of the conservation covenant, and the works have been granted resource consent.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       The option of not granting the covenant consent was considered but discounted.  Not granting covenant consent would result in the planned changes not being undertaken, and no impact on heritage fabric and value.  However the dwelling and setting have already been altered in recent times to provide for the needs of different owners, and the current proposed alterations will ensure the ongoing viable use of the property.  The owners have put resources into obtaining the resource consent. 

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       The decision affects the following wards/Community Board areas: Fendalton Ward, Waimāero/Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board.

History and heritage significance

5.2       The dwelling Hatherley and its setting has overall heritage significance to Christchurch, including Banks Peninsula.

5.3       Hatherley has historical and social significance as for its association with the Dowling, Ballantyne and MacMillan families.  It was built in 1910 for Thomas Dowling, a former run manager and farmer who for a period managed Glenmark Station in North Canterbury and his wife Christie Ballantyne. In 1928 the house was purchased by Dr David MacMillan, a well-known surgeon and historian. The house remained in the MacMillan family until early in the 2000s.

5.4       The dwelling has cultural significance as it demonstrates the way of life of retired Canterbury farmers and a city medical practitioner, and architectural and aesthetic significance as an Edwardian Domestic Revival home designed by RA Ballantyne, of Clarkson and Ballantyne, and Christie’s cousin.

5.5       The dwelling has technological and craftsmanship significance because its construction, materials and detailing evidence the period in which it was built. The dwelling together with its setting have contextual significance because the large Edwardian home has retained a substantial garden setting despite being subdivided and has landmark status in the area.  The place also has potential to provide archaeological evidence relating to human activity on the site, including that which occurred prior to 1900.

Heritage status

5.6       The house is scheduled as a Significant Heritage item in Appendix 9.3.7.2 Schedule of Significant Historic Heritage of the Christchurch District Plan.

Conservation covenant

5.7       A conservation covenant protecting the house and its setting was entered into between the owners at the time, Bryony and Fiona MacMillan and Christchurch City Council (CCC) in 2002.

Ownership and use

5.8       The building was purpose built as a dwelling and remains in use as a private dwelling today.  The current owner is Michael Raymund Burtscher.

Description of proposed works

5.9       The proposed works that require covenant consent include an addition to the dwelling and external alterations to the boiler house and changes to the setting. These works have been granted resource consent (RMA 2018/1099 and RMA 2020/379).

5.10    The Gas House is identified as an exterior feature to be conserved in Schedule B of the covenant. The relocation of the Gas House within the setting is specifically permitted by the covenant.  The c1980s/90s boiler machinery will be replaced, a new roof flue installed in the same position as the previous one, and a ducted fresh air intake grill added to the end elevation. There are no internal alterations proposed. The Gas House changes will have a very minimal effect on the heritage values of the place and are considered to be acceptable in light of the matters of discretion outlined in the covenant. The changes mean this accessory building can continue in its original use. 

5.11    A pool house is proposed to adjoin the already altered west wing of the house – the existing kitchen annex - to provide access to the tennis court and proposed swimming pool.  This is an open sided structure with a corrugated iron roof to match the existing house.  The addition relates in term of the scale and proportion to the adjacent kitchen annex, and in accordance with the ICOMOS NZ Charter, 2010, it is compatible with the style and materials of the original house and is identifiably new (i.e. not a replica).  There was little if any remaining original heritage fabric in the western part of the house which is subject to this alteration, which minimises the loss of heritage fabric. 

5.12    Under the covenant the owner agrees to maintain and conserve the landscape setting of the property (Clause 2) in a neat, tidy and attractive condition. Changes to the setting include a new garage (to replace the earlier stables building demolished after the earthquakes), pool plant building (designed in sympathy with the Gas House), realigned driveway (positioned to protect scheduled trees) and a swimming pool.  These changes do not result in a loss of heritage fabric or values, and the general character of the setting with open grassed areas and mature trees and shrubs is maintained. The garage will be partly screened by trees from the street view.  Therefore these changes are considered to be acceptable in terms of the matters of discretion required by the covenant.   

5.13    The proposed changes are considered to meet the matters of discretion at 3. a, b, c, d, h of the covenant which address loss or compromise of heritage fabric and values,  reversibility, effects on visual appearance, and conservation principles of the ICOMOS New Zealand Charter for the conservation of places of cultural heritage value.  The proposed changes will serve to improve amenity for the users of the dwelling and setting, better connecting the house with the recreational opportunities the large setting provides and improves circulation and access. This aspect aligns with matters of discretion e and f which concern the continued use and long term conservation of the property.  

6.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       Approving appropriate change to heritage places through conservation covenants aligns to the Community Outcomes ‘Resilient Communities;’ ‘Liveable City’ and ‘Prosperous Economy’.

6.2       Approving appropriate change to heritage places supports delivery of the overarching strategic principle of “Taking an intergenerational approach to sustainable development, prioritising the social, economic and cultural wellbeing of people and communities and the quality of the environment, now and into the future.”

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

6.3.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and Policy

·     Level of Service: 1.4.3.1 Maintain the sense of place by conserving the city’s heritage places. - Provide advice as required in a timely manner, within 10 working days for consents

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4       The recommendation is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies as listed below:

6.5       Our Heritage, Our Taonga Heritage Strategy 2019-2029:

Our Heritage, Our Taonga is protected through collaboration and partnership (Whāinga Goal 4) in particular - Action 1. Protect heritage and Action 4. Support owners.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.6       Ngāi Tūāhuriri rūnanga hold Mana Whenua rights and responsibilities for the area the property is located. The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement - Nil

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Nil

7.3       Funding Source – N/A

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1       The Conservation Covenant is pursuant to Section 77 of the Reserves Act (1977), and requires the written consent of the Council (in addition to any resource consent and building consent requirements for any proposed additions, modifications or alterations of the exterior or interior of the buildings.  The Covenant states that the Council has full discretion and may impose such reasonable conditions to its consent as it sees fit.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.1       The legal consideration is whether the works proposed are in accordance with the requirements of the conservation covenant.  Heritage staff have assessed this to be the case, as outlined in 1.3 above.

8.2       This report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit of Council.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Statement of Significance for 19 Gleneagles Terrace

86

 

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

Not applicable

Not applicable

 

 

 

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

Amanda Ohs - Senior Heritage Advisor

Approved By

Brendan Smyth - Team Leader Heritage

Carolyn Ingles - Head of Urban Regeneration, Design and Heritage

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Council

29 July 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

9.     Greater Christchurch Partnership: Focus for the next twelve months

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/821297

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive, dawn.baxendale@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive, dawn.baxendale@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Brief Summary

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider the recommendations of the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee regarding the Partnership’s focus and funding for the 2020/21 financial year, resolved at their meeting on 12 June 2020.

2.   Chief Executive Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Receive the recommendations from the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee to:

a.    Recommend to the governance of Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council, Selwyn District Council, Canterbury Regional Council, the Canterbury District Health Board and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu that they agree the focus of the Partnership for the next twelve months, specifically to:

i.     Develop Greater Christchurch 2050 – setting a vision and plan for Greater Christchurch to achieve intergenerational wellbeing that also responds to climate change, and moving towards a zero carbon economy, noting the opportunity to reset that responding to COVID-19 provides.

ii.    Focus on our partnership with Central Government, alignment with Central Government’s Urban Growth Agenda, key policies driving investment, and advocacy on behalf of Greater Christchurch.

iii.   Strengthen the partnership with Mana Whenua and Iwi to ensure aspirations and outcomes for Māori are tangibly integrated into strategy and delivery.

iv.   Progress existing Greater Christchurch Partnership commitments, including Our Space actions, maintaining our focus towards a sustainable urban form which aligns land-use and transport, and enables an integrated and efficient public transport system, including mass rapid transit.

v.    Co-ordinate Greater Christchurch recovery actions, through forums, where needed.

b.    Recommend to the Canterbury Regional Council, Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, and the Waimakariri District Council to fund the required additional investment to deliver on the Greater Christchurch Partnership’s focus for the year ahead according to the current cost share arrangement and accounting for the $150,000 investment from the Christchurch City Council has made in phase 1 (Christchurch City Council $348,750, Environment Canterbury $498,750, Selwyn District Council $166,250 and Waimakariri District Council $166,250).

c.    Agree to request that the additional investment for FY2020/21 of up to $1,180,000 will be funded through the Canterbury Regional Council acting as ‘banker’ and that the Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council and Selwyn District Council agree to repay their share (as set out in recommendation 1(b)) over a term of no more than 5 years, with repayments to commence from FY2021/22, with the details to be finalised and agreed by their respective Chief Executives.

2.         Agree the focus of the Greater Christchurch Partnership for the next twelve months, specifically to:

a.         Develop Greater Christchurch 2050 – setting a vision and plan for Greater Christchurch to achieve intergenerational wellbeing that also responds to climate change, and moving towards a zero carbon economy, noting the opportunity to reset that responding to COVID-19 provides.

b.         Focus on our partnership with Central Government, alignment with Central Government’s Urban Growth Agenda, key policies driving investment, and advocacy on behalf of Greater Christchurch.

c.         Strengthen the partnership with Mana Whenua and Iwi to ensure aspirations and outcomes for Māori are tangibly integrated into strategy and delivery.

d.         Progress existing Greater Christchurch Partnership commitments, including Our Space actions, maintaining our focus towards a sustainable urban form which aligns land-use and transport, and enables an integrated and efficient public transport system, including mass rapid transit.

e.         Co-ordinate Greater Christchurch recovery actions, through forums, where needed.

3.         Note the approach to delivering on the current Greater Christchurch Partnership commitments, including Our Space actions, and that other matters arising throughout the year will be considered and prioritised by the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee and the Chief Executives Advisory Group, with implementation plans and progress updates reported regularly to the Greater Christchurch Committee.

4.         Note to deliver on the recommended approach, the total funding required for the Greater Christchurch Partnership from Partner Councils for the FY2020/2021 is $1,780,000.

5.         Note this is an additional amount of $1,180,000 over the $600,000 for the Greater Christchurch Partnership Budget signalled in the Partner Council’s 2018-28 Long Term Plans for the FY2020/21.

6.         Note that the cost share arrangement for funding the Greater Christchurch Partnership is as follows; Christchurch City Council (37.5%), Environment Canterbury (37.5%), Waimakariri District Council (12.5%), and Selwyn District Council (12.5%).

7.         Note that Environment Canterbury have:

a.         Agreed that the additional investment for FY2020/21 of up to $681,300 (being the Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council and Waimakariri District Council’s share) will be funded through the Canterbury Regional Council acting as ‘banker’; and

b.         Agreed that the Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council and Selwyn District Council repay their respective share over a term of no more than 5 years, with repayments to commence from FY2021/22, and delegated authority to the Chief Executive to finalise and agree the terms of lending.

8.         Agree to fund the Christchurch City Council’s required additional investment of $348,750 by way of the proposed funding arrangement of the Canterbury Regional Council acting as ‘banker’.

9.         Agree to repay the Christchurch City Council’s share of the additional investment ($348,750) to the Canterbury Regional Council over a term of no more than 5 years, with repayments to commence from FY2021/22, and delegates authority to the Christchurch City Council Chief Executive to finalise and agree the terms of lending.

10.       Note that Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee have requested that the Chief Executives Advisory Group provide advice to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee by the end of 2020 on the anticipated costs for Greater Christchurch 2050 implementation and other Partnership work programmes, for consideration as part of Long Term Plans 2021-2031 processes, with that advice to include consideration of the equity of the current funding cost-share arrangements.

11.       Note that Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee have requested that the Chief Executives Advisory Group provide advice to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee on streamlining collaborative governance structures at an upcoming meeting.

3.   Role of the Greater Christchurch Partnership

3.1       Greater Christchurch is a term used to describe Christchurch city and nearby areas within the Selwyn and Waimakariri districts, from Rolleston to Rangiora.

3.2       The Greater Christchurch Partnership (GCP) is a longstanding broad partnership that brings health, iwi, local, regional, and central government to the table.

3.3       Specifically, the role of the GCP Committee as set out in the joint Memorandum of Agreement (summarised) is:

·   Foster and facilitate a collaborative approach between the Partners to address strategic challenges and opportunities for Greater Christchurch.

·   Establish an agreed strategic framework to manage growth and address urban development, regeneration, resilience and long-term economic, social, cultural and environmental wellbeing for Greater Christchurch.

·   Show clear, decisive and visible collaborative strategic leadership to central government and communities across Greater Christchurch.

·   Oversee implementation of strategies and plans endorsed by the Committee.

·   Ensure the Partnership proactively engages with other related partnerships agencies and organisations critical to the achievement of its strategic goals.

3.4       The major opportunities and challenges facing communities and the urban area in Canterbury transcend the boundaries of territorial authorities and the statutory functions held by the partner agencies. Strong partnership is essential to leveraging the investment, resources and tools available in order to effectively deliver on communities’ aspirations, respond to opportunities and address challenges facing the sub-region.

3.5       Further information on the Greater Christchurch Partnership can be found at https://www.greaterchristchurch.org.nz/ 

4.   Facing the challenges and opportunities ahead through decisive, visible and collaborative leadership

4.1       Over the past nine years, Greater Christchurch has faced unprecedented challenges to its social, economic, cultural, and environmental fabric. With the global, national, regional and local impacts of COVID-19, Greater Christchurch is facing a new set of challenges. It is fundamental that we work together for Greater Christchurch and lead in a way that is decisive, visible and collaborative. 

4.2       The Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee have agreed and recommend to Council that the Greater Christchurch Partnership’s focus for the next twelve months should be on the following five priorities:

·   Develop Greater Christchurch 2050 – setting a vision and plan for Greater Christchurch to achieve intergenerational wellbeing that also responds to climate change, and moving towards a zero carbon economy, noting the opportunity to reset that responding to COVID-19 provides.

·   Focusing on our partnership with Central Government, alignment with Central Government’s Urban Growth Agenda, key policies driving investment, and advocacy on behalf of Greater Christchurch.

·   Strengthening the partnership with Mana Whenua and Iwi to ensure aspirations and outcomes for Maori are tangibly integrated into strategy and delivery.

·   Progressing existing Greater Christchurch Partnership commitments, including Our Space actions, maintaining our focus towards a sustainable urban form which aligns land-use and transport and enables an integrated and efficient public transport system, including mass rapid transit.

·   Co-ordination of Greater Christchurch recovery actions, through forums where needed.

4.3       These five priorities will be progressed through three interrelated work-streams as follows:

·   Work-stream 1: Establish an agreed strategic framework – Greater Christchurch 2050

·   Work-stream 2: Strategic Leadership and Partnership with Central Government

·   Work-stream 3: Implementation of existing commitments, including Our Space actions.

4.4       Greater Christchurch 2050 is a cross-cutting piece of work that will provide the foundation for the Partnership’s priorities and objectives, the vision and plan for the sub-region, the basis for the Urban Growth Partnership and broader Central Government engagement. It will provide the context for COVID-19 pandemic recovery actions and it will integrate the Partnership’s objectives for a sustainable urban form which aligns land-use and transport, and enables an integrated and efficient public transport system, including mass rapid transit.

5.   Greater Christchurch Partnership work programme priorities for the next twelve months

Work-stream 1 : Establish an agreed strategic framework – Greater Christchurch 2050

5.1       The Urban Development Strategy 2007, associated 2016 Update, and Our Space 2018-2048 is the agreed Strategic Framework for Greater Christchurch.

5.2       In the first quarter of 2020, the Committee considered that a strategic ‘re-set’ and vision for Greater Christchurch was needed, therefore it commenced scoping the Greater Christchurch 2050 project. To prepare for this re-set, prior to the Level 4 restrictions, the Partnership undertook a current state assessment across social, cultural, economic and environmental factors to provide an evidence-based review for identifying the opportunities and challenges facing Greater Christchurch.

5.3       The impacts of COVID-19 on social, economic, cultural and environmental factors are evolving, however it is clear that the impacts are significant. It is critical that Greater Christchurch has effective mechanisms for partnering with and leveraging the tools and investment of Central Government to support the sub-region to not only recover from this most recent major shock, but also to drive Greater Christchurch towards a more aspirational future.

5.4       With the significant impacts and major changes Greater Christchurch has experienced since the Urban Development Strategy was created in 2007 and its 2016 update,  the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee considers that the time is right to re-set the strategic framework for Greater Christchurch by creating a vision and plan for the 2020-2050 horizon that can inspire and drive action towards intergenerational wellbeing for the people of Greater Christchurch, positions Greater Christchurch in the national and international context, ties in with the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission’s and councils’ 30-year infrastructure strategies, and provides a basis for Central Government and private sector confidence to invest in Greater Christchurch.

5.5       Specifically it is recommended that the deliverables resulting from the Greater Christchurch 2050 work are:

·   A clear, collaborative vision for the sub-region including the outcomes, objectives and targets over the short, medium, and long-term (2020-2050).

·   A sub-regional plan that includes what is required to address key sub-regional challenges and opportunities to successfully recover from COVID-19 and track towards the vision over the short, medium and long-term.

·   An Urban Growth Partnership with Central Government (further discussed below in work-stream 2).

·   Re-set engagement and relationships with key parts of Central Government on the vision and plan for the sub-region (further discussed below in work-stream 2).

5.6       Partnership with Ngāi Tahu and Mana Whenua is essential to delivering a relevant collaborative vision and plan for the sub-region. Ngāi Tahu is a significant contributor to the economic and social wellbeing of people not only in Greater Christchurch, but throughout the South Island and New Zealand. A re-set strategic framework provides the opportunity to tangibly integrate the aspirations and outcomes of Māori into strategy as a foundation to deliver greater wellbeing for all people. Progressing the Greater Christchurch 2050 work will require meaningful engagement and partnership with Ngai Tahu and Mana Whenua.

5.7       Strong involvement and ownership from community and the private sector is fundamental to developing a new relevant vision for Greater Christchurch. This will require effective engagement, partnering and collaboration. As the vision and plan covers outcomes over the short, medium and long term over a 30-year horizon, the voice and involvement of youth is fundamental to this process.

5.8       The benefits of undertaking this work are that it will enable:

·   A clear vision for Greater Christchurch to inspire and drive action.

·   Speaking with one voice - providing cohesive and coherent leadership.

·   Engaging effectively with Central Government to leverage investment and tools.

·   Meaningful partnership with Māori and Ngāi Tahu.

·   Partnership focus and collaboration on the most impactful challenges and opportunities for Greater Christchurch.

·   A framework to integrate shared goals and targets within Partner’s individual areas of responsibility (such as Long Term Plans) to deliver on shared outcomes and projects that achieve greater benefits for the sub-region.

·   Presenting a confident narrative nationally and internationally about Greater Christchurch.

·   A platform for pursuing an Urban Growth Partnership and developing an enduring partnership between Central Government and Greater Christchurch that moves beyond the extraordinary recovery and regeneration relationship and enables aligned investment and outcomes.

·   Local COVID-19 recovery actions of Partners to be supported through having a clear and relevant articulation of the vision and plan to 2050.

5.9       The implications of not delivering Greater Christchurch 2050 and without taking this opportunity now to re-set the vision and plan, include the following:

·   Community and private sector confusion, frustration or lack of engagement in the success of Greater Christchurch as a result of not having a clear vision.

·   Plans and programmes not adequately reflecting Ngāi Tahu values and aspirations and missing opportunities to work collaboratively and bring added value.

·   Partners establishing individual priorities without the benefit of a collective shared view.

·   Central Government focusing efforts on partnerships elsewhere in New Zealand.

·   Reduced external investment, programme integration and potential duplication and implementation inefficiencies.

5.10    The next steps for progressing Greater Christchurch 2050 will see the establishment of the project team, designing the vision development process including the engagement approach, and creating the detailed milestones for the work. Once designed, the detailed milestones will be brought to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee for consideration.

Work-stream 2 - Strategic leadership and partnership with Central Government

5.11    Greater Christchurch has had bespoke relationships with Central Government and legislation through the recovery and regeneration phases since the Canterbury Earthquake Sequences 2010-2011.

5.12    With Partners determining that now is the time to lift the emphasis on opportunities and positioning Greater Christchurch to contribute to national wellbeing, it is necessary for Greater Christchurch to ensure it has a strong partnership with Central Government. COVID-19 has heightened the need for this and it is critical that Greater Christchurch is positioned to capture and leverage the benefits of Central Government tools and investment to support the regions recovery.

5.13    The Urban Growth Agenda has a mandated role for Central Government to partner with high-growth areas and iwi as a means of facilitating pace and scale in urban development and ensuring government investment in infrastructure is aligned to help deliver connected, thriving and sustainable urban communities.

5.14    Urban Growth Partnerships are established in other high growth areas around New Zealand, such as, Future Proof (Hamilton, Waipa and Waikato sub-region) and Smart Growth (Western Bay of Plenty). These partnerships and the work within them provide a strong basis for these areas to engage with Central Government on a range of Central Government initiatives, such as those relating to infrastructure. It is recommended that Greater Christchurch pursues an Urban Growth Partnership as a critical step in pursuing a broader agenda for engaging with Central Government.

5.15    Formalising an Urban Growth Partnership involves preparing a proposal for Central Government and drafting a Terms of Reference which addresses how Greater Christchurch is working in alignment with the Urban Growth Agenda, in partnership with Central Government.

5.16    To support pursuing an Urban Growth Partnership, it is critical that Greater Christchurch 2050 is progressed to provide confidence that there is a clear vision for Greater Christchurch that includes a spatial view of a sustainable urban form which aligns land-use and transport and seeks to achieve an integrated and efficient public transport system, including mass rapid transit.

5.17    It is also recommended that a wider agenda is created and engagement with Central Government progresses across departments such as the Treasury, the Infrastructure Commission, The Department of Internal Affairs, and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. The work that will be produced through Greater Christchurch 2050 will support this engagement.

5.18    The implications of the Partnership not prioritising an Urban Growth Partnership and proactively re-setting relationships across Central Government include losing the opportunity to effectively engage with and leverage critical policy, investment and tools that are required to support the sub-region to recover from COVID-19, and drive greater wellbeing outcomes for the people of Greater Christchurch. As a result, Greater Christchurch risks losing relevance in the national context and capturing investment and people that are required to secure the success of Greater Christchurch.

5.19    The next steps for progressing the relationship and engagement with Central Government are to:

·   Accelerate engagement with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development on progressing the Urban Growth Partnership and preparation of a proposal.

·   Plan an agenda for engagement with other parts of Government.

Work-stream 3 - Implementation of existing commitments

5.20    The Partnership has previously adopted a prioritised set of existing shared work programme commitments, including those outlined in the future development strategy, Our Space 2018-2048. Partners remain committed to the delivery of these commitments but the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee recommends these are programmed and scheduled to allow for Greater Christchurch 2050 to be prioritised over the next twelve months.

5.21    Priorities will be determined by the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee and the Chief Executives’ Advisory Group based on those most able to be efficiently delivered and to inform upcoming planning and business case processes, including:

·   District Plan Reviews, Structure Plans, Town Centres Strategies

·   Central City revitalisation

·   Change to Canterbury Regional Policy Statement

·   Review of Canterbury Regional Policy Statement, in particular Chapter 6 relating to Greater Christchurch

·   Future Public Transport Business Cases

·   Regional Land Transport Plan, Long Term Plans, Infrastructure Strategies.

5.22    Actions that require significant incorporation of projections data and an understanding of future trends will likely be deferred for a period to establish a clearer view on the impacts of Covid-19 on these matters. Following the gazettal of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development on 23 July 2020, consideration will be given to how Our Space actions will be implemented.

5.23    In this context, work would proceed in relation to:

·   Developing a social and affordable action plan

·   Undertaking an evaluation of minimum densities to inform new development

·   Finalising a Mode Shift Plan for Greater Christchurch (to complement the associated preparation by council partners of transport business cases, including for public transport)

·   Aligning Long Term Plans and Infrastructure Strategies (including an option for common content relating to Greater Christchurch)

And respective councils continuing to progress:

·   A change to the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement using the Resource Management Act streamlined planning process

·   Detailed structure planning and town centre master-planning work in Selwyn and Waimakariri

·   Facilitating redevelopment of existing urban areas in Christchurch City.

5.24    Implementation of the following actions would be scheduled for a period later than outlined in Section 6.2 of the Our Space document:

·   Model alignment, recalibration and integration for growth, development capacity and transport assessments

·   Undertaking the next housing and business development capacity assessment.

6.   Governance and Timing

6.1       Given the critical importance of establishing a clear vision and plan for Greater Christchurch along with a re-set relationship with Central Government, it is recommended that Greater Christchurch 2050, the work on an Urban Growth Partnership and the work to establish a strategic agenda for engaging with Central Government are accelerated immediately and with urgency.

6.2       To enable the acceleration of this agenda the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee has established a sub-group of the Committee comprising of Mayor Lianne Dalziel, Mayor Dan Gordon, Mayor Sam Broughton, Chair Jenny Hughey, and Dr Te Maire Tau, supported by their respective Chief Executives, to meet more regularly than the scheduled committee meetings to support and progress this work.

6.3       To support the Partnership’s priorities and ensure visible and decisive leadership for Greater Christchurch, the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee is reviewing and ensuring our collaborative governance structures, in particular to assist the development of an Urban Growth Partnership and the relationship to other Committees, are fit for purpose and streamlined for the priorities above as it is critical that governance arrangements support integration of transport and land use, there is no duplication, and there is clarity to the public on leadership and responsibilities. These recommendations will be brought back to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee and Council for consideration.

7.      Funding for the Greater Christchurch Partnership’s focus for the next 12 months

7.1       When preparing Councils’ Long Term Plans 2018-2028, the Greater Christchurch Partnership budget for each of the three following financial years, including FY2020/21, was signalled as being $600,000, with the funding apportioned as follows: Christchurch City Council (37.5%), Environment Canterbury (37.5%), Waimakariri District Council (12.5%), and Selwyn District Council (12.5%).

7.2       To deliver on the recommended work programme for the year ahead, the total funding required for the Partnership for the FY2020/2021 is $1,780,000. This funding reflects that delivering a new vision and plan, along with establishing a fit for purpose partnership with Central Government on the future for the sub-region that moves beyond the extraordinary recovery and regeneration relationship, and supports investment in the sub-region to be secured, are significant and strategic pieces of work, with significant benefits and outcomes to be achieved.

7.3       The Chief Executives’ Advisory Group has reviewed the proposed work plan and budget provision and confirms that the amount sought is not unreasonable given the work required to prepare, engage on, and finalise the Greater Christchurch 2050 vision and plan along with the associated work to progress an Urban Growth Partnership.  The Chief Executives consider the additional funding sought should be set as an upper limit. In undertaking this consideration and recommendations, the Chief Executives have considered both the benefits of the outputs of this work as well as the implications of not undertaking this work and associated expenditure. These are set out above in paragraphs 5.8 and 5.9.

7.4       To deliver this work the additional funding required is $1,180,000. This takes account of the $210,000 from the Partnership Budget available for project expenses and $110,000 that was underspent in the first (scoping) phase of the Greater Christchurch 2050 project.

7.5       It is recommend that the Christchurch City Council fund the additional required investment of $348,750 to deliver on the Greater Christchurch Partnership’s focus for the year ahead according to the current cost share arrangement and accounting for the additional $150,000 investment from the Christchurch City Council has made in phase 1.

7.6       The Chief Executives’ Advisory Group and Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee have discussed the options and recommend that the additional investment for FY2020/21 of up to $1,180,000 be funded through the Canterbury Regional Council acting as ‘banker’ and that the Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council and Selwyn District Council agree to repay their share (as set out in paragraph 7.5) over a term of no more than 5 years, with repayments to commence from FY2021/22, with the details to be finalised and agreed by the respective Chief Executives.

7.7       On 23 July 2020, the Canterbury Regional Council considered the request from the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee and agreed the proposed funding arrangements for the Greater Christchurch Partnership, including the proposal for the Canterbury Regional Council to lend a maximum total amount of $681,300 to the Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council and Waimakariri District Council on the terms described in this paper.

7.8       The Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee have requested that the Chief Executives’ Advisory Group provide advice to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee by the end of 2020 on the anticipated costs for Greater Christchurch 2050 implementation and other Partnership work programmes, for consideration as part of Long Term Plans 2021-2031 processes, with that advice to include consideration of the equity of the current funding cost-share arrangements.

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no appendices to this report.

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

 

 

 

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

Dawn Baxendale - Chief Executive

Approved By

Dawn Baxendale - Chief Executive

  


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

10.   Commercial film and video production - s71 proposal

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/852960

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

David Falconer, Team Leader City Planning, david.falconer@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Brendan Anstiss, General Manager Strategy and Transformation, brendan.anstiss@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for Council to consider providing feedback on the Proposal for enabling commercial film and video production under section 71 of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration (GCR) Act.

1.2       The Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Hon Poto Williams received the Proposal for the development and operation of commercial film or video production facilities from Regenerate Christchurch on the 18th June. This followed Council’s consideration of the draft Proposal at its meeting on the 11th June and providing feedback to Regenerate Christchurch on the same day.

1.3       The Minister has decided to notify the Proposal and is inviting views in writing from the 7th July until the 5th August 2020. The Proposal can be found at www.dpmc.govt.nz/film-studio.

1.4       This Proposal sets out changes that enhance the ability of the District Plan to provide for the development and operation of commercial film and video production facilities.

1.5       The Council supported the draft Proposal in its feedback dated 11th June, and requested amendments to the draft rules package to ensure greater certainty of outcomes and to mitigate the risk of impacts on the surrounding environment. This included the following points:

1.5.1   Provision of infrastructure and reverse sensitivity in the Rural Urban Fringe Zone;

1.5.2   Landscaping in the Rural Urban Fringe Zone;

1.5.3   Site Coverage in the Rural Templeton Zone; and

1.5.4   Technical amendments to provide clarity.

1.6       Regenerate Christchurch made some changes to the Proposal in response to Council’s feedback, including requiring noise insulation for buildings under the air noise contour, more landscaping, connection to reticulated water and wastewater systems, and permanent film studios to have a minimum site area of at least 6ha.

1.7       Staff recommend that Council provide feedback in support of this Proposal.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Approves providing the feedback (Attachment A) in support of the Commercial film and video production - s71 proposal.

 

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       The Proposal supports the development of film studios, which was identified in Council’s submission to the Infrastructure Industry Reference Group in April as a potential “shovel-ready” project in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, with quantifiable public benefit that could quickly stimulate the economy and provide employment within the District, greater Christchurch, and wider Canterbury region.

3.2       The attached feedback supports the Proposal to enable film studios.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Not supporting the draft Proposal - This option is not the preferred option as it would not help reduce the consenting barriers for film studios, and thus would not make it any more attractive for film studios to establish in Christchurch. The Proposal considers a number of alternative options, including Do Nothing or using a RMA process, and concludes that a section 71 process is the most appropriate. Planning staff agree with that assessment.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       The Proposal sets out changes that enhance the ability of the planning framework, including the District Plan, to provide for the development and operation of commercial film or video production facilities. The Proposal submits that this would support the regeneration of the Christchurch district and greater Christchurch and is otherwise consistent with the objectives and policies of the District Plan.

5.2       More detail on the Proposal can be found in the Council report dated 11 June 2020, item 10 https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2020/06/CNCL_20200611_AGN_4046_AT_WEB.htm. On 11th June, Council considered the draft Proposal and feedback provided to Regenerate Christchurch on the same day. Regenerate Christchurch then slightly modified the Proposal and sent it to the Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Hon Poto Williams for consideration on the 18th June. The Associate Minister has subsequently decided to notify the Proposal and is inviting views in writing from the 7th July until the 5th August.

5.3       The Council supported the draft Proposal in its feedback dated 11th June, requesting amendments to the draft rules package to ensure greater certainty of outcomes and to mitigate the risk of impacts on the surrounding environment. This included the following points:

·    Provision of infrastructure and reverse sensitivity in the Rural Urban Fringe Zone;

·    Landscaping in the Rural Urban Fringe Zone;

·    Site Coverage in the Rural Templeton Zone; and

·    Technical amendments to provide clarity

5.4       The latest version of the Proposal has included some changes in response to some of Council’s feedback. These changes include:

Council’s feedback

Changes made

Provision of infrastructure and reverse sensitivity in the Rural Urban Fringe Zone

Noise insulation rules have been added for sound stages and studios located near the Airport flight paths (i.e. under the Airport Noise Contours)

Connection to reticulated water and waste water systems is now required

Landscaping in the Rural Urban Fringe Zone

A 3m landscape strip is now required

Site Coverage in the Rural Templeton Zone

No changes have been made to the Proposal

Technical amendments to provide clarity

The policy has been amended to read: “provide for commercial film or video production activities and facilities on rural flat land close to the main Christchurch urban area”.

A minimum site area of 6ha is required for permanent commercial film or video production in rural zones.

 

5.5       Under the GCR Act the Associate Minister cannot make any further changes to this Proposal. The Associate Minister can either accept or reject the Proposal.

6.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.1.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and Policy

·     Level of Service: 9.5.1.1 Guidance on where and how the city grows through the District Plan. - Maintain operative District Plan

Supporting the Proposal to enable the development and operation of film or video production facilities aligns with the prosperous economy Community Outcomes.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2       The decision on the feedback on the Proposal is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

6.3       The provisions of the District Plan do not suggest that the absence of explicit recognition for these activities on a more permanent basis, is the result of any identified incompatibility with the District Plan’s objectives and policies, or because these activities could be expected to generate unknown and potentially significant adverse effects. Rather, the development and operation of commercial film or video production facilities and their potential environmental effects are generally compatible with the purpose and functions of a number of zones, the environmental outcomes they seek to achieve and the characteristics of the activities they currently provide for. The current non-complying or discretionary status of permanent commercial film or video production facilities is therefore a result of such activities not being explicitly provided for rather than any identified inconsistency with the planning regime.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.4       The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value. Therefore this decision does not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.5       This decision does not have a significant impact on climate change.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6       This decision does not have a significant impact on accessibility.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       There is no cost to the Council if it provides feedback as this process is being led by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake Proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1       The Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration is the ultimate decision maker under this process. Under section 68 of the GCR Act the Council can provide feedback on the Proposal.

9.   Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       Not all of Council’s previous feedback on the Proposal was taken on board in the final Proposal. No further amendments to the Proposal are able to be made through this process. However, the matters Council raised which were not taken on board are not significant and Council can make minor amendments to the District Plan to address these matters as required, through future plan changes, if Council chooses too.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a  

CCC Draft Written Comments on the Film Studio Proposal (Under Separate Cover)

 

 

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

Not applicable

Not applicable

 

 

 

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

Authors

David Falconer - Team Leader City Planning

Mark Stevenson - Team Leader City Planning

Approved By

David Griffiths - Head of Planning & Strategic Transport

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

11.   Civic Financial Services - Special General Meeting Proxy

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/845298

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, linda.gibb@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Carol Bellette, General Manager Finance and Commercial Group, carol.bellette@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek the Council’s approval of a proxy to vote at Civic Financial Services’ (Civic) Special General Meeting (SGM) to be held on 12 August 2020, and to seek voting instructions.  This report has been written due to receiving a covering letter and notice of SGM from Civic on 7 July 2020 which are at Attachments A and B respectively.

1.2       The SGM has been convened for the purpose of re-tabling resolutions that were passed at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) on 17 June due to Auckland Council’s advice to Civic that it had mistakenly voted in favour of the resolutions, instead of against. 

1.3       The resolutions at issue are those that the Christchurch City Council sought relating to Civic’s decision to reduce superannuation fund management fees for members funded by shareholder earnings, without either formal or informal engagement with the Council as the second largest shareholder behind Auckland Council.  The resolutions were carried at the AGM but had Auckland Council voted against as it now says it intended to, the resolutions would not have been carried.

1.4       The resolutions are as follows:

1.   It is noted that the Board, effective from 1 April 2020, has made the decision to reduce the management fee charged to the members of the SuperEasy and SuperEasy KiwiSaver Superannuation Schemes from 0.50% to 0.44% per annum.  This has the effect of reducing the extent of funds that might otherwise be available for distribution to shareholders in favour of benefitting the superannuation scheme members.

2.   That effective from 1 April 2021 the Board returns the management fee charged to the members of the SuperEasy and SuperEasy KiwiSaver Superannuation Schemes back to 0.50%.

3.   That the Board tables options on changing superannuation fee structures to shareholders detailing the effect, if any, on the payment of future dividends.

1.5       Following the AGM, Civic notified shareholders that resolution 2 had passed by 72,226 shares, and resolution 3, by 1,214,200 shares.  Auckland Council has 2,195,042 shares and therefore neither resolution would have carried if it had voted against them. 

1.6       At the AGM, the Council’s two candidates for director roles on the Civic Board were not passed, instead shareholders preferred to reappoint the incumbent directors who were retiring by rotation and standing for re-election.  No voting statistics were provided other than that 80.26% of shares were voted.  This means that the governance concern of long time tenure of three of the five board members continues to prevail.

1.7       There is nothing in Civic’s constitution or the Companies Act 1993 that prevents Civic from taking this action.  However, staff consider it to be a disproportionate measure when the outcome will be simply to relieve the Board of a requirement to be transparent about its decision. 

1.8       Civic Financial Services (Civic) is exempted as a Council-controlled organisation (CCO) under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) due to its business having previously been insurance which was governed by a different (but now repealed) statute.  Staff consider that transparency and accountability will be better served by removing the exemption which is no longer relevant.  This will require an amendment to the LGA which staff will take up with the relevant Government department.

1.9       The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined by considering the likely impact the decisions could have on the community.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1.         Appoints Carol Bellette, General Manager Finance and Commercial Group as its proxy and the Chair of the Civic Financial Services Board as alternate to vote at the Special General Meeting on 12 August 2020; and

2.         Agrees that the proxy votes in favour of the resolutions as follows:

a.         It is noted that the Board, effective from 1 April 2020, has made the decision to reduce the management fee charged to the members of the SuperEasy and SuperEasy KiwiSaver Superannuation Schemes from 0.50% to 0.44% per annum.  This has the effect of reducing the extent of funds that might otherwise be available for distribution to shareholders in favour of benefitting the superannuation scheme members.

b.         That effective from 1 April 2021 the Board returns the management fee charged to the members of the SuperEasy and SuperEasy KiwiSaver Superannuation Schemes back to 0.50%.

c.         That the Board tables options on changing superannuation fee structures to shareholders detailing the effect, if any, on the payment of future dividends.

3.         Directs staff to engage with the appropriate Government department to seek the removal of the historical exemption granted to Civic Financial Services from being a Council-controlled organisation since its business is no longer governed by any other industry-specific legislation.

 

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       To enable the Council to vote at the SGM.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       The only other option is to abstain from voting.

5.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

5.1       The decisions are not related to the Council's Long Term Plan (2018 - 2028) and strategic priorities (e.g. addressing climate change challenges).

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

5.2       The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.   Specifically, good governance is a core tenet of the Council’s Policy for the Appointment and Remuneration of Directors.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

5.3       The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

5.4       Not applicable.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

5.5       Not applicable.

6.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

6.1       There are no financial implications for the Council.

7.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

7.1       Companies Act 1993.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

7.2       This report has been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

8.   Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

8.1       Not applicable.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Civic Financial Services - Letter advising Special General Meeting

111

b

Civic Financial Services - Notice of Special General Meeting and Proxy Form

112

 

 

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name

Location / File Link

Not applicable

Not applicable

 

 

 

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

Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor

Approved By

Len Van Hout - Manager External Reporting & Governance

Diane Brandish - Head of Financial Management

Carol Bellette - General Manager Finance and Commercial (CFO)

  


Council

29 July 2020

 

PDF Creator


Council

29 July 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 

 


Council

29 July 2020

 

 

12.   Resolution to Exclude the Public

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Note

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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


Council

29 July 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

13.

Appointment of directors to CCHL boards - Enable Services, Lyttelton Port Company, Orion NZ and to Council-controlled organisation - Vbase Ltd

s7(2)(a)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons

To protect the identity of the private individual who is the subject of this report to minimise any risk to his/her professional reputation.

After the appointment has been made public by Christchurch City Holdings Ltd.

 

 



[1] https://www.wasteminz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/WasteMINZ-2018-Mike-Ritchie-on-China-National-Sword.pdf

[2] https://recyclinginternational.com/business/industry-concern-as-china-confirms-new-thresholds-for-contaminants/2068/

[3] https://www.ban.org/news/2019/5/10/basel-convention-agrees-to-control-plastic-waste-trade; https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/news-and-communications/latest-news/news/nz-agrees-to-basel-convention-plastic-waste-amendment

[4] http://www.basel.int/

[5] https://sustaintrust.org.nz/blog/making-it-mandatory-expanding-product-stewardship-in-nz