Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

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

 

Date:                                    Monday 3 August 2020

Time:                                   3:30pm

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Members

Alexandra Davids

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Michelle Lomax

Jake McLellan

Jackie Simons

Sara Templeton

Yani Johanson

 

 

29 July 2020

 

 

 

 

 

Arohanui Grace

Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

941 6663

arohanui.grace@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

Part A           Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B           Reports for Information

Part C           Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

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

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

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

C          3.        Confirmation of Previous Minutes / Te Whakaāe o te hui o mua........................ 4

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

B         5.        Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga............................... 4

B         6.        Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga.................................................. 4

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

Staff Reports

C          8.        Proposed Bus Passenger Shelter Installation Beside 23 Ensors Road............... 25

C          9.        Provision of School Bus Stop with time of day parking restrictions at redundant Metro bus stops on Linwood Avenue........................................................... 33

C          10.      Removal of redundant Metro bus stops on Gloucester Street between Linwood Avenue and Woodham Road...................................................................... 39

C          11.      Proposed No Stopping, Maryville Courts entrances on Salisbury Street and Colombo Street..................................................................................................... 45

C          12.      Proposed No Stopping Restrictions, Salisbury Street.................................... 55

C          13.      Port Hills Grazing Deed of Licence.............................................................. 61

C          14.      Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - August 2020............................................................................................................. 71

 

B         15.      Elected Members’ Information Exchange / Te Whakawhiti Whakaaro o Te Kāhui Amorangi............................................................................................................. 82

C          16.      Resolution to Exclude the Public................................................................ 83  

Karakia Whakamutunga

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 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.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes / Te Whakaāe o te hui o mua

That the minutes of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Wednesday, 8 July 2020  be confirmed (refer page 5).

4.   Public Forum / Te Huinga Whānui

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

5.   Deputations by Appointment / 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. 

6.   Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga

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


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

Unconfirmed

 

 

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                    Wednesday 8 July 2020

Time:                                   3:30pm

Venue:                                 The Board Room, 180 Smith Street,
Linwood

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Members

Alexandra Davids

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Michelle Lomax

Jake McLellan

Sarwa Templeton

Yani Johanson

 

 

 

8 July 2020

 

 

 

 

 

Arohanui Grace

Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

941 6663

arohanui.grace@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

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

 


Part A           Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B           Reports for Information

Part C           Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

Karakia Timatanga:

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies / Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2020/00051

That an apology for absence from Jackie Simons be accepted.

Michelle Lomax/Jake McLellan                                                                                                                           Carried

2.   Declarations of Interest / Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

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

Part C

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2020/00052

That the minutes of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Monday, 29 June 2020 be confirmed.

Tim Lindley/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                                  Carried

4.   Public Forum / Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

4.1      Menlo Terrace, St Andrews Hill

Mr Graeme Nottage, on behalf of the residents of Menlo Terrace, addressed the Board on the ongoing maintenance issues of Menlo Terrace.  Menlo Terrace is a privately owned shared road.  The residents have noted an increase of foot traffic to access a private walkway from Menlo Terrace to St Andrews Hill Road since another private walkway has been blocked off by the installation of a retaining wall post 2011/12 Canterbury Earthquakes.  Mr Nottage advised that the residents are looking for assistance for the maintenance of Menlo Terrace or for residents to “gift” the Terrace to the Council as legal road.

 

After questions from the Board members, the Chairperson thanked Mr Nottage for his presentation.

Attachments

a       Documents for Menlo Terrace Public Forum   

 

4.2      Ferry Road, Rutherford Street and Palinurus Road Intersection

Mr Matthew Houston and Ms Joanna Houston, local residents, addressed the Board on the Ferry Road/Rutherford Street/Palinurus Road signalised intersection.  Their main concern is the phasing of the lights when trying to turn from Ferry Road (travelling from the city) into Rutherford Street.  They consider that the timing for the right turning arrow display is not long enough to allow more than one car to turn during a sequence.

 

The Board agreed to seek staff advice on how to improve the safety of turning traffic from Ferry Road (travelling from the city) into Rutherford Street at the signalised intersection of Ferry Road/Rutherford Street/Palinurus Road as a matter of urgency particularly in light of the upcoming Woolston Village upgrade works.

5.   Deputations by Appointment / Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

6.   Presentation of Petitions / Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

7.   30 Garlands Road - Relocation of an existing bus stop

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2020/00053 (Original staff recommendations accepted without change)

Part C

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

1.         Pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

a.         That all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north side of Garlands Road commencing at a point approximately 46 metres west of its intersection with Tanner Street (measured from the prolongation of the western kerb line of Tanner Street), and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 63 metres, be revoked.

b.         That the stopping of vehicles is prohibited at all times on the on the north side of Garlands Road commencing at a point approximately 46 metres west of its intersection with Tanner Street (measured from the prolongation of the western kerb line of Tanner Street), and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately five metres.

c.         That a marked bus stop be installed on the north side of Garlands Road  commencing at a point approximately 51 metres west of its intersection with Tanner Street (measured from the prolongation of the western kerb line of Tanner Street), and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 15 metres.

d.         That the stopping of vehicles is prohibited on the north side of Garlands Road  commencing at a point approximately 66 metres west of its intersection with Tanner Street (measured from the prolongation of the western kerb line of Tanner Street), and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 12 metres.

2.         That these resolutions take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place (or removed, in the case of revocations).

Sara Templeton/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                         Carried

 

Michelle Lomax left the meeting at 04:08 p.m.

Michelle Lomax returned to the meeting at 04:10 p.m.

Jake McLellan left the meeting at 04:11 p.m.

Jake McLellan returned to the meeting at 04:12 p.m.

 

8.   Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - July 2020

 

Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu 

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

1.         Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for July 2020.

2.         Receive and note the information provided to the Board on:

a.         Impact assessment on Community Recovery from CONVID-19 on community activity.

b.         Redcliffs Archaeological Centre and Interpretation.

c.         Herberden Avenue and Evan Pass Roads – Safety Improvements.

3.         Consider items for inclusion in an upcoming Board’s Newsletter.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2020/00054

Part C

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

1.         Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for July 2020.

2.         Receive and note the information provided to the Board on:

a.         Impact assessment on Community Recovery from CONVID-19 on community activity.

b.         Redcliffs Archaeological Centre and Interpretation.

c.         Herberden Avenue and Evan Pass Roads – Safety Improvements.

 

Part B

3.         Request staff advice on the post fire remediation for replanting Tunnel Road and Heathcote River True Right reserves.

Sara Templeton/Michelle Lomax                                                                                                                        Carried

 

 

9.   Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Submissions Committee Minutes - 11 June 2020

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2020/00055 (Original staff recommendation accepted without change)

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

1.    Receives the minutes from the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Submissions Committee meeting held 11 June 2020.

Darrell Latham/Tim Lindley                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

10. Elected Members’ Information Exchange

Part B

Board members exchanged information on the following:

·    The Board discussed the Council’s position and current work on Climate Change.  It was noted that a report is due to the Council’s Sustainability & Community Resilience Committee in October 2020.

·    The Board acknowledged the work of the Coastal Pathway Group (especially the Group’s Treasurer Tim Lindley) and Council in submitting a successful $15.8 million funding application to the Governments “Shovel-ready” projects for the Coastal pathway to be completed.  The funding application is to complete the pathway section between Redcliffs and Rapanui.

 

10.1   Ōpāwaho/Heathcote River - Comparison of Pre and Post Land Drainage Programme

The Board noted that the land drainage work on the Ōpāwaho/Heathcote River appears to have been successful. In particular it was noted that there was minimal flooding following the recent heavy rainfall and king tide. 

The Board agreed to request staff advice on the cost comparisons of the flooding pre and post the Land Drainage Dredging Programme.

 

10.2   Linwood Avenue School – Slip lane

The Board agreed to request staff to work with the Linwood Avenue School Acting Principal on the safety of the Linwood Avenue School slip lane on Linwood Avenue and report to the Board on the outcome of the discussions.

 

 

10.3   Redcliffs School – Resource Consent Non Compliance

·    The Board noted that there had been a hearing on Friday 3 July 2020 regarding the Redcliffs School building compliance.  The Board discussed the Council’s media response dated 1 July 2020 in relation to the Redcliffs School resource consent non-compliance.

 

The Board agreed to request staff advice as to why the Community Board was not informed of the Redcliffs School resource consent non-compliance issue.

 

Sara Templeton left the meeting at 04:44 p.m.

Sara Templeton returned to the meeting at 04:54 p.m.

 

11  Resolution to Exclude the Public

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2020/00056

Part C

That at 5:02pm the resolution to exclude the public set out on pages 69 to 70 of the agenda be adopted.

Darrell Latham/Tim Lindley                                                                                                                                    Carried

 

Michelle Lomax left the meeting at 05:06 p.m.

Michelle Lomax returned to the meeting at 05:08 p.m.

The public were re-admitted to the meeting at 5:21pm.

   

Karakia Whakamutunga:

 

Meeting concluded at 5:22pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 3rd DAY OF AUGUST 2020

 

Alexandra Davids

Chairperson

   


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

7.     Correspondence

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/803811

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Liz Beaven, Community Board Advisor, Liz.Beaven@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Arohanui Grace, Manager Community Governance Linwood-Central-Heathcote, Arohanui.Grace@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

Correspondence has been received from:

Name

Subject

Team Leader City Planning, Strategy and Transformation Group

Update on home-share accommodation – Feedback now online

Joanna Gould

Richmond Community Wellbeing/Remember Richmond Residents

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the Correspondence Report dated 03 August 2020.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Update on home-share accomodation - Feedback now online

12

b

J Gould - Richmond Community Wellbeing/Remember Richmond Residents

13

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 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


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

8.     Proposed Bus Passenger Shelter Installation Beside 23 Ensors Road

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/196979

Report of:

Serena Chia, Graduate Transport Engineer, Serena.Chia@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager:

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

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to consider for approval the installation of a bus passenger shelter at an existing bus stop located adjacent to 23 Ensors Road. 

1.2       The origin of the report is staff generated. The bus stop locations prioritised for shelters to be installed are typically the bus stops where the average weekday passenger boardings meet a demand threshold of more than 20 people boarding a bus per weekday. This means shelters are being installed at bus stops that are most used by people accessing public transport.

1.3       Public transport is a key provision to support mode shift, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, traffic congestion and traffic crashes. Measures that promote the use of public transport helps the Council achieve its:

·   Strategic framework of providing a well-connected and accessible city promoting active public transport, as well as meeting the challenge of climate change through every means available.

·   Long Term Plan outcome of improved user satisfaction of public transport facilities, through providing sheltered waiting areas for customers commuting by bus.

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

1.5       The level of significance was determined by consideration of the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and the requirements as set out in section 339 of the Local Government Act.

1.6       Only a shelter where the owner or occupier of the adjacent property has provided feedback indicating no objection or where there were no responses received to the consultation is included within this report. Where an objection has been presented by the owner or occupier of an affected property, staff present a decision making report to a Hearings Panel. The Hearings Panel then assess the objection against the criterion as outlined in Section 339 of the Act and make recommendations to the relevant Community Board or Committee. The Community Board or Committee will then determine the outcome of the objections in accordance with criterion outlined in Section 339 of the Local Government Act 1974.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

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

1.         In accordance with Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a.         Approve the installation of a bus passenger shelter on the west side of Ensors Road (beside 23 Ensors Road) commencing at a point approximately 77 metres southwest of its intersection with Opawa Road and extending in a southwesterly direction for a distance of 3.6 metres.

 

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

3.1       Each year the Council installs bus passenger shelters to improve the sheltered waiting areas at bus stops. A bus passenger shelter is proposed for the bus stop location presented in this report, due to the average weekday passenger boardings meeting the demand threshold of more than 20 daily passenger boardings per weekday. The bus stop beside 23 Ensors Road has an average of 44 passenger boardings per weekday.

3.2       The location of the bus stop, and hence the proposed shelter, relative to their surrounding locality, is indicated in the Figure 1.

Figure 1: Bus stop beside 23 Ensors Road.

3.3       The proposed bus passenger shelter to be installed at the bus stop will be a Council shelter type. The image shown in Figure 2 is an example of what the shelter is likely to look like.

Figure 2: Example of the shelter type

3.4       The advantages of this recommended option include:

·   Protection from the weather

·   Seating and timetable information provided within the shelter

·   Increases the visibility and legibility of public transport

3.5       The disadvantages of this recommended option include:

·   Increase in the number of bus passenger shelters to be maintained by the Council

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Option 2 – ‘Do nothing’, no bus passenger shelter is installed.

4.2       The ‘Do Nothing’ option does not assist the Council achieve its Long Term Plan or Strategic Framework outcomes as indicated in section 6 of this report.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

Analysis Criteria / Ngā Paearu Wetekina

5.1       Staff assess each site based on the statutory requirement as set out in section 339 of the Local Government Act: “The council may erect on the footpath of any road a shelter for use by intending public-transport passengers or small passenger service vehicle passengers, provided that no such shelter may be erected so as to unreasonably prevent access to any land having a frontage to the road.

5.2       Staff undertake geometric, road safety and bus stop best practice design assessments for each proposed shelter location. Examples of such assessments include:

·   The shelter will not restrict nearby driveway or intersection sightlines.

·   The shelter can be located at an appropriate location relative to the bus stop, which makes it a logical place for passengers to wait within the shelter.

·   That a 1.5 metre (minimum) continuous accessible path of travel for pedestrian movement is maintained in front of the shelter.

·   Does not adversely impact the underground utilities.

·   Determine if other existing bus stop infrastructure needs to be relocated to ensure the location is accessible to the people who use the bus stop as well as the people who walk past the bus stop.

·   Determine if other accessibility and operational improvements are needed to be made to optimise the usability of the bus stop, for example extending the footpath to the kerb to ensure there is a hardstand for customers boarding or exiting the bus, or marking the bus stop to the recommended bus stop length.

Community Views and Preferences / Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

5.3       Consultation has been carried out with those specifically affected by this option due to the proximity of the property to the proposed shelter. The consultation period for the proposed shelter occurred from Tuesday 10 December 2019 to Friday 24 January 2020. The consultation notice and feedback form was posted by mail to the property owner, requesting their feedback.

5.4       No feedback was received during the consultation period and prior to the preparation of this report.

5.5       Environmental Canterbury is responsible for providing public transport services.  The Christchurch City Council is responsible for providing public transport infrastructure.  The installation of the bus passenger shelters are supported by Environmental Canterbury.

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

Strategic Alignment / Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       The Council’s Strategic Framework is a key consideration in guiding the recommendations in this report. The recommendations in this report help achieve the:

·   Community outcome of a well-connected and accessible city promoting active and public transport, and

·   Strategic priorities of meeting the challenge of climate change through every means available.

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

6.2.1   Activity: Public Transport Infrastructure

·     Level of Service: 10.4.4 Improve user satisfaction of public transport facilities. - >=7.3

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.3       The decision is consistent with the Council’s Plans, Policies and Strategic Framework.

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       Public transport is a key provision to support mode shift, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, traffic congestion and traffic crashes. Measures that promote the use of public transport make it a more attractive travel option, thereby supporting mode shift and the associated benefits to the environment.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6       Accessibility by access to opportunities: Improvements to bus stops have a positive impact to the well-being and accessibility of our community through freedom to access opportunities by other means than the private vehicle.

6.7       Accessibility by inclusive design: The placement of the shelter considers the accessibility and movement needs of those waiting for a bus and those walking past the shelter that their way is unimpeded.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement - $14,000 for the shelter supply and installation and hardstand, plus $1,000 for the planning, consultation and preparation of this report.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – The maintenance of the proposed bus shelter will be undertaken through existing maintenance contracts and will incur costs of between $200 and $700 annually.

7.3       Funding Source – Traffic Operations, Capital Expenditure budget for bus stop, seating and shelter installations.

7.4       If approved, the recommendations will be in the financial year 2020-2021. If the current stock of shelters is not suitable or available for this site, purchase of the appropriate style of shelter may delay the installation by approximately three months.

8.   Legal Implications

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

8.1       Under Section 339 of the Local Government Act 1974, the Council may erect on the footpath of any road, a shelter for use by intending public transport passengers or small passenger service vehicle passengers provided that no such shelter may be erected so as to unreasonably prevent access to any land having a frontage to the road. The Council is required to give notice in writing to the occupier and owner of property likely to be injuriously affected by the erection of the shelter, and shall not proceed with the erection of the shelter until after the expiration of the time for objecting against the proposal or, in the event of an objection, until after the objection has been determined.

8.2       Staff confirm the shelters will not prevent vehicular or pedestrian access to any land having a frontage to the road.

8.3       The relevant Community Boards have delegated authority from the Council to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations. The list of delegations for the Community Boards includes the resolution of bus passenger shelters under Section 339 (1) of the Local Government Act 1974.

8.4       Where no objection to the shelter has been presented by the owner or occupier of an affected property, staff present a decision making report directly to the relevant Community Board.

8.5       Where an objection has been presented by the owner or occupier of an affected property, staff present a decision making report to a Hearings Panel. The Hearings Panel then assess the objection against the criterion as outlined in Section 339 of the Act and make recommendations to the relevant Community Board. The Community Board will then determine the outcome of the objections in accordance with criterion outlined in Section 339 of the Local Government Act 1974.

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       Should the Community Board proceed with the ‘Do Nothing’ option (Option 2 of this report), the existing passenger waiting facilities remain, leading to no improvement to the level of service for passengers waiting for a bus. This may reduce patronage on wet days, as passengers may choose another mode of travel as there is no shelter provided at the bus stop.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

23 Ensors Road - Proposed Bus Passenger Shelter - Plan 20/201640 - For Board Aproval

31

 

 

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

Serena Chia - Graduate Transport Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

9.     Provision of School Bus Stop with time of day parking restrictions at redundant Metro bus stops on Linwood Avenue

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/201786

Report of:

Serena Chia, Graduate Transport Engineer, Serena.Chia@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager:

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

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to consider for approval the installation of a school bus stop sign with time of day parking restrictions to replace the redundant Metro bus stop on Linwood Avenue.

1.2       The bus stop has not been operating as a Metro bus stop since late 2018, however it continues to be used by three school bus routes (school bus routes 663, 665 and 666). To utilise the space when the school buses are not in service, staff are proposing to change the existing standard bus stop sign to a bus stop sign that includes time of day parking restrictions, which will be reflective of the school bus timetable.

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

1.4       The level of significance was determined by consideration of the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

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

1.         In accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

a.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles is prohibited on the north side of Linwood Avenue (beside 293 Linwood Avenue) commencing at a point approximately 16 metres northwest of its intersection (signalised cycle crossing) with Chelsea Street and extending in a northwesterly direction for a distance of approximately 20 metres, is reserved as a parking place in the form of a bus stop for the exclusive use of school buses between the time of 7.30am to 8.30am and 2.30pm to 4.00pm, Monday to Friday during school term times.

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

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

 

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

3.1       The bus stop is not operating as a Metro bus stop but is used by three school bus routes for students who attend Avonside Girls’ High School and Shirley Boy’s High School. The school bus routes operate once in the morning to get students to school and once in the afternoon, to drop students home after school ends.

3.2       The location of the school bus stop is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Existing redundant Metro bus stop beside 293 Linwood Avenue.

3.3       The advantages of this recommended option include:

·   Utilises the vacant bus stop space for on-street parking during the time of day when the school bus is not in service.

3.4       The disadvantages of this recommended option include:

·   None.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Option 2 – Do nothing, existing bus stop sign remains.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

Analysis Criteria / Ngā Paearu Wetekina

5.1       Due to the limited operation of the school bus route, staff are recommending that the bus stop is designated by means of a bus stop sign that displays time of day parking restrictions, thereby allowing other motorist to utilise the space when the bus stop is not in operation. The length of bus stop marking restrictions remain as per the existing provision.

Community Views and Preferences / Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

5.2       Staff consulted with the business complex beside the bus stop by personally handing in the consultation document. The consultation period for the proposed school bus park occurred from Thursday 16 January 2020 to Friday 31 January 2020.

5.3       No feedback was received during the consultation period and prior to the preparation of this report.

5.4       Environmental Canterbury is responsible for providing public transport services.  The Christchurch City Council is responsible for providing public transport infrastructure.

5.5       Council staff have contacted Environmental Canterbury about the proposal to change the existing bus stop operation to time of day parking restrictions, thereby allowing continued use of the space for the school bus routes, and by other motorists when the school buses are not in operation.

5.6       Environmental Canterbury staff have agreed that the proposal is a suitable compromise.

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

Strategic Alignment / Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       The Council’s Strategic Framework is a key consideration in guiding the recommendations in this report. The recommendations in this report help achieve the:

·   Community outcome of a well-connected and accessible city promoting active and public transport, and

·   Strategic priorities of meeting the challenge of climate change through every means available.

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

6.2.1   Activity: Parking

·     Level of Service: 10.3.3 Improve customer perception of the ease of use of Council on- street parking facilities. - >=52%

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.3       The decision is consistent with the Council’s Plans, Policies and Strategic Framework.

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       The existing bus stops provide access to school bus services, which supports travel demand management and management of traffic congestion near schools. This is a key provision to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, traffic congestion and traffic crashes, thereby supporting mode shift and the associated benefits to the environment.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6       Accessibility by access to opportunities: Providing access to school buses for students have a positive impact to the well-being and accessibility of our community.

7.   Resource Implications

Capex/Opex  / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement - $350 for the installation of school bus park sign, plus $1,000 for the planning, consultation and this report.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Transport Unit Operational Expenditure budget, includes maintenance of bus stop infrastructure, as and when it is needed.

7.3       Funding Source – Traffic Operations, Capital Expenditure budget for bus stop, seating and shelter installations.

7.4       If approved, the recommendations will be implemented in financial year 2020-2021.

8.   Legal Implications

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

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

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

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

9.   Risk Management Implications

9.1       Should the Community Board proceed with the ‘Do Nothing’ option (Option 2 of this report), this could negatively impact the public’s perception of the ease of use of Council’s on-street parking, where such improvements are feasible.

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

293 Linwood Avenue - Proposed School Bus Parking TG135623 - Plan No. 20/206486 - For Board Approval

38

 

 

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

Serena Chia - Graduate Transport Engineer

Brenda O'Donoghue - Passenger Transport Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

10.   Removal of redundant Metro bus stops on Gloucester Street between Linwood Avenue and Woodham Road

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/365557

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Serena Chia, Graduate Transport Engineer, Serena.Chia@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

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

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to revoke four redundant bus stops along Gloucester Street, between Linwood Avenue and Woodham Road. The location of the redundant bus stops are shown in Attachment A.

1.2       This report is staff generated with the intention to formally remove four redundant Metro bus stops along Gloucester Street that have been redundant since 2013. 

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

1.4       The level of significance was determined by consideration of the criteria set out in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. 

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

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

1.         Pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

Bus stop at 669/673 Gloucester Street

a.         That all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north side of Gloucester Street commencing at a point approximately 31 metres north east of its intersection with Surrey Street (measured from the prolongation of the eastern kerb line of Surrey Street), and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres, be revoked.

Bus stop at 30 Surrey Street/662 Gloucester Street

b.         That all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the south side of Gloucester Street  commencing at a point approximately 22 metres south west of its intersection with Surrey Street (measured from the prolongation of the western kerb line of Surrey Street), and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of approximately 12 metres, be revoked.

Bus stop at 615/617 Gloucester Street

c.         That all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the north side of Gloucester Street  commencing at a point approximately 25 metres north east of its intersection with Rochester Street (measured from the prolongation of the eastern kerb line of Rochester Street), and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of approximately 12 metres, be revoked.


 

Bus stop at 612/614 Gloucester Street

d.         That all existing parking and stopping restrictions on the south side of Gloucester Street commencing at a point approximately 12 metres north east of its intersection with Rochester Street (measured from the prolongation of the eastern kerb line of Rochester Street), and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of approximately 15 metres, be revoked.

2.         That these resolutions take effect when the removal of the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions being revoked as described in the staff report have been implemented.

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

3.1       The bus stops along this section of Gloucester Street were originally serviced by a Metro bus route. The bus service, which travelled along Gloucester Street between Linwood Avenue and Woodham Road, has not operated along this route since 2013. At the time, when the bus route was changed, the bus stops were not formally revoked and the bus stop infrastructure remained.

3.2       Should a bus route return to this section of Gloucester Street in the future, staff would reconsider the bus stop locations and consult as required.

3.3       The infrastructure that remains at the bus stops include:

·   At 669/673 Gloucester Street: bus stop post and sign;

·   At 30 Surrey Street/662 Gloucester Street: seat, bus stop post and sign;

·   At 615/617 Gloucester Street: bus stop post and sign; and

·   At 612/614 Gloucester Street: bus stop box, bus stop post and sign.

3.4       The advantages of this option include:

·   Removes unnecessary infrastructure from the road and footpath network, and the associated maintenance costs.

·   Removes the potential confusion that some people may think there is a bus route along Gloucester Street because there are bus stops.

·   Removes the potential inconsistent messaging of parking at bus stops. Nearby residents may be aware that the bus stops are no longer in used and be parking at the bus stops. This could be sending the wrong message to other passing motorists who are not aware of this.

3.5       The disadvantages of this option include:

·   None, there is no bus route along Gloucester Street and hence there is no longer a need for the bus stops.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Option 2 – Do nothing, the redundant bus stops and the associated bus stop infrastructure remain.

 

 

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

Community Views and Preferences / Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

5.1       Letters including the consultation plan were sent to the affected property owners and occupants who live closest to the redundant bus stops.

5.2       Two submissions were received and both were in favour with staff’s 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: Parking

·     Level of Service: 10.3.3 Improve customer perception of the ease of use of Council on- street parking facilities. - >=52%

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

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       Not applicable as the bus stops are no longer serviced by a bus route. The Orbiter and Yellow bus route continues to operate near both ends of the section of Gloucester Street and have captured passenger demand along Woodham Road and Linwood Avenue.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.5       Not applicable as the bus stops are no longer serviced by a bus route.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement - $3,500 for the removal of line markings, a seat and four bus stop posts and signs. $1,000 for staff costs associated with planning, consultation and reporting.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – the removal of the existing redundant infrastructure will also remove the need for future maintenance expenditure.

7.3       Funding Source – Traffic Operations, Capital Expenditure budget for bus stop, seating and shelter removals.  

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

8.1       Part 1, Clause 7 and 8 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2018 provides the Council with the authority to install and revoke stopping and parking restrictions (including bus stops) by resolution.

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

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

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

9.   Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       Should the Community Board proceed with the ‘Do Nothing’ option, all of the bus stop infrastructure will continue to need on-going maintenance as and when it is needed.

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A - Proposed removal of redundant Metro bus stops along Gloucester Street between Linwood Avenue and Woodham Road _ Plan no.20/367399

43

 

 

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

Serena Chia - Graduate Transport Engineer

Patricia Su - Passenger Transport Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

11.   Proposed No Stopping, Maryville Courts entrances on Salisbury Street and Colombo Street

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/173047

Report of:

Peter Rodgers, Traffic Engineer, peter.rodgers@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager:

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

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to consider approving no-stopping restrictions by the Salisbury Street and Colombo Street exits from Maryville Courts.  This report is being provided to fulfil resolution LCHB/2019/00139 of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board from its meeting of 9 December 2019 where the Community Board resolved to:

5. Request staff to consult on options for the removal of car parking to improve visibility for drivers leaving Maryville Courts and report back to the Board.

1.2       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 the low level of impact and low number of people affected by the recommended decision.

 

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

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

1.         Approve that all stopping and parking restrictions on the northern side of Salisbury Street commencing at a point 108 metres east of its intersection with Colombo Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 19 metres be revoked.

2.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Salisbury Street commencing at a point 108 metres east of its intersection with Colombo Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 19 metres.

3.         Approve that all stopping and parking restrictions on the eastern side of Colombo Street, commencing at a point 64 metres north of its intersection with Salisbury Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 44 metres, be revoked.

4.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the eastern side of Colombo Street, commencing at a point 64 metres north of its intersection with Salisbury Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 44 metres.

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

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations

3.1       It is recommended to install no-stopping restrictions as per Attachment A. The length of no-stopping in this option is the minimum length needed to provide Minimum Gap Sight Distance, allowing a driver entering the roadway sufficient visibility of approaching traffic to make the desired turn safety. This should also increase safety for cyclists by increasing intervisibility between exiting vehicles and cyclists and reducing the need for exiting vehicles to encroach into the traffic lane, which can pose a hazard to cyclists.

3.2       Advantages to this option include:

3.2.1   Provides visibility, resulting in an increased perception of safety for drivers exiting Maryville Courts.

3.2.2   Supported by the majority of submitters.

3.3       Disadvantages include:

3.3.1   May set an expectation that the Council will install no-stopping restrictions at other similar residential vehicle entrances that do not meet operational policy.

3.3.2   Loss of parking.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered

4.1       Option two – do not install no-stopping restrictions is another viable option.

4.2       Advantages to this option include:

4.2.1   Does not set any expectation that the same treatment is provided to other similar residential vehicle entrances.

4.2.2   Does not result in any change in on-street parking.

4.3       Disadvantages include

4.3.1   Does not provide any improvements to visibility.

4.3.2   Is not supported by the majority of submitters.

5.   Detail

5.1       Maryville Courts have asked for parking to be removed to provide visibility from the vehicle exits from Maryville Courts.

5.2       Previous requests to install no-stopping restrictions at these vehicle entrances had been declined, as they are not consistent with operational policy. For further background information, refer to item 8 of the agenda of the 9 December 2019 meeting of the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.

5.3       On 9 December 2019, the Community Board resolved to install no-stopping restrictions over the vehicle entrances, and requested consultation on options for the removal of parking to increase visibility.

5.4       Removal of parking by installing no-stopping restrictions has been proposed which will provide the Maryville Courts vehicle entrances with similar visibility to a minor road intersection.

Community Views and Preferences

5.5       Property owners and occupiers were advised of the proposal by a combination of post and letter drop. Consultation ran from 28 February 2020 to 23 March 2020. 46 submissions were received, of which:

·   44 submissions supported the proposal

·   1 submission did not support the proposal

·   1 submission had indicated on the submission form they did not support the proposal, but had written comments on the submission form expressing support for the proposal.

5.6       Several submissions from #143 supported the proposal and also requested that the no-stopping restrictions be extended to include the shared driveway to #143. These submitters were advised that current operational policy does not support extending the same treatment to the shared driveway of #143. The Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board has considered the Maryville Courts entrance and had resolved to consider it an exception to operational policy.

5.7       One submission commented that parking was being removed to improve visibility to the driveway of 858/860 Colombo Street. The staff response was that the no-stopping lines on Colombo Street are not proposed specifically to improve visibility for 858/860 Colombo Street, these are proposed to provide visibility to the left from the Maryville Courts Colombo Street entrance, but these do have the side effect of providing the same or better visibility from 858 Colombo Street. On Salisbury Street, it is not necessary to provide visibility to the left as it is a one-way street.

5.8       Submissions with comments made are including in Attachment B.

5.9       The decision affects the following wards/Community Board areas:

5.9.1   Central Ward, within the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board area.

6.   Policy Framework Implications

Strategic Alignment

6.1       :

6.1.1   Activity: Traffic Safety and Efficiency

·     Level of Service: 10.0.6.1 Reduce the number of casualties on the road network. - <=124 (reduce by 5 or more per year)

Policy Consistency

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

Impact on 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

6.4       The impact on climate change from this decision is expected to be minor.

Accessibility Considerations

6.5       The decisions in this report may have a minor positive impact to accessibility by improving the visibility for drivers exiting the retirement home. The decisions may have a minor negative impact by reducing the available on-street parking spaces.

7.   Resource Implications

Capex/Opex

7.1       Cost to Implement - $200 for the installation of road markings.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – minor increase in maintenance costs.

7.3       Funding Source – Traffic Operations signs and markings budgets.

8.   Legal Implications

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report

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

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

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

Other Legal Implications

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

8.5       This specific report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit however the report has been written using a general approach previously approved of by the Legal Services Unit, and the recommendations are consistent with the policy and legislative framework outlined in sections 8.1 to 8.3.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed No Stopping, Salisbury Street and Colombo Street entrance to Maryville Courts, Plan for Board Approval

50

b

Submissions - Maryville Courts Proposed No Stopping

52

 

 

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

Document Name

Location / File Link

Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board 9th December 2019 meeting

Item 8. Maryville Courts (Salisbury Street and Colombo Street) - Proposed No Stopping Restriction

https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2019/12/LCHB_20191209_AGN_4178_AT.htm#PDF2_ReportName_25864

 

 

 

 

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

Peter Rodgers - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

12.   Proposed No Stopping Restrictions, Salisbury Street

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/795577

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Peter Rodgers, Traffic Engineer, peter.rodgers@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

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

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to consider options for no stopping restrictions on Salisbury Street.  This report has been written in response to a request from a resident of the area.

1.2       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 the low level of impact and low number of people affected by the recommended decision.

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

1.4       The recommended option is to install No Stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A.  The length of No Stopping in this option is the minimum length needed to provide Minimum Gap Sight Distance, allowing a driver entering the roadway sufficient visibility of approaching traffic to make the desired turn safety. 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

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

1.         Approve that all stopping and parking restrictions on the northern side of Salisbury Street commencing at a point 121 metres east of its intersection with Colombo Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 20 metres be revoked.

2.         Approve that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Salisbury Street commencing at a point 121 metres east of its intersection with Colombo Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 20 metres.

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

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

3.1       Safety concerns have been raised with Council regarding visibility for drivers leaving the car park at 199 Salisbury Street (Briscoes) towards oncoming traffic and cyclists. Implementing the noted recommendations will lead to a reduction in the risk of a crash by improving sightlines at the car park exit.

3.2       The recommendations in this report will help to achieve the desired community outcome of a well-connected and accessible city through improved road safety.

3.3       It is recommended to install No Stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A.  The length of No Stopping in this option is the minimum length needed to provide Minimum Gap Sight Distance, allowing a driver entering the roadway sufficient visibility of approaching traffic to make the desired turn safety. This should also increase safety for cyclists by increasing intervisibility between exiting vehicles and cyclists and reducing the need for exiting vehicles to encroach into the traffic lane, which can pose a hazard to cyclists.

3.4       Options within this report have been assessed against relevant industry-standard design guidance including the sight distance requirements of the Council’s Infrastructure Design Standard. 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Maintain the status quo – Do not install no stopping restrictions.

4.2       This option is not considered viable as this is a high volume vehicle entrance likely to be used by users unfamiliar with it and the road environment, and doing nothing does not address the concerns raised.

4.3       The advantages of this option include:

4.3.1   Retaining three on-street parking spaces.

4.4       The disadvantages of the option include:

4.4.1   Does not address the concerns raised.

4.4.2   Does not improve visibility at the high volume vehicle exit from 199 Salisbury Street.

 

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       The Council has received a request to install no stopping restrictions in order to improve safety for cyclists travelling along Salisbury Street, who are coming into conflict with vehicles exiting 199 Salisbury Street (Briscoes). Exiting vehicles have poor visibility towards oncoming traffic due to vehicles parked close to the vehicle exit, and are encroaching onto the road reserve in order to improve visibility.

5.2       Visibility can be limited by parked vehicles on Salisbury Street. There are high parking demands in the area, primarily for long term commuter parking.

5.3       This is a vehicle entrance/exit. Vehicles entering the road from private property are legally required to give way to users of the footpath and also required to give way to all traffic on Salisbury Street.

5.4       There have been no crashes recorded at this location in the last five years.  Salisbury Street is classified as Low-Medium risk under the Council’s risk mapping system.

5.5       Operational policy is to install no stopping restrictions at high volume commercial vehicle entrances with estimated traffic volumes of over 250 per day. This is considered on a case by case basis when requests are received. This vehicle entrance meets this criteria.

5.6       Approval is required by the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.

5.7       If approved, the recommendations will be implemented within the current financial year (generally around four weeks after the contractor receives the request, but this is subject to other factors such as resourcing and prioritisation beyond the Council’s control).

Community Views and Preferences

5.8       Affected property owners and residents were advised of the recommended option by post and letter drop.

5.9       One response was received from Briscoes, in support of the proposed restrictions. No comments were received.

5.10    The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports the preferred option.

5.11    The do nothing option is inconsistent with community requests to improve visibility at the intersection.

6.   Policy Framework Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa

Strategic Alignment / Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       The Council’s strategic priorities have been considered in formulating the recommendations in this report, however this area of work is not specifically covered by an identified priority.

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

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.3       The recommendations in this report are consistent with the Christchurch Suburban Parking Policy.

Impact on Mana Whenua / Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.4       The effects of this proposal upon Mana Whenua are expected to be insignificant.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.5       This proposal includes measures to encourage walking/cycling/public transport and therefore will result in positive changes to reduce carbon emissions and the effects of Climate Change.

6.6       This proposal does not have any significant effect upon carbon emissions and Climate Change.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7       This proposal improves accessibility for pedestrians/drivers/cyclists, by providing a safer means of exiting the car park.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement - $200 for installation of road markings.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Maintenance costs will be covered under the existing maintenance budget.

7.3       Funding Source – Traffic Operations signs and markings operational budgets.

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

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

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

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

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

8.5       This specific report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit however the report has been written using a general approach previously approved of by the Legal Services Unit, and the recommendations are consistent with the policy and legislative framework outlined in sections 8.1 to 8.3.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

199 Salisbury Street - Proposed no stopping restrictions plan for Board Approval

59

 

 

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

Peter Rodgers - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Steffan Thomas - Manager Operations (Transport)

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

  


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

13.   Port Hills Grazing Deed of Licence

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/112417

Report of:

Felix Dawson, Leasing Consultant; felix.r.dawson@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager:

Brent Smith, Principal Advisor Citizens and Community
Brent.Smith@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Executive Summary / Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura/Linwood Central-Heathcote Community Board to authorise the granting of a licence for the grazing of the Port Hills.  This report has been written because the current grazing arrangements are holding over and a new licence is required.

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 following completion of the assessment matrix.  The choice of grazier itself will affect a low number of people and have limited impact on the level of service or finances.

1.3       The Port Hills Reserves/Parks run from Scarborough to Bowenvale and are managed by the Regional Parks Team with the broad aim to manage the land for community benefit.

1.4       Stock grazing is a key management tool to achieve the aim and manage fuel load.

1.5       A Request for Proposal process has been undertaken for the purpose of selecting a grazier to enter into a grazing licence.  Two complying proposals were received and evaluated.

1.6       The Port Hills Reserves/Parks are held as Recreation Reserve, Scenic Reserve and ‘Park’ depending on the land parcel.  Staff hold the delegated authority to issue a five year grazing licence in regard to the Reserves Act land but not for the ‘Park’.  Staff are happy to enter into a licence with the preferred grazier for the reasons set out in this report

1.7       The decision in this report deals specifically with that part of the Port Hills Reserves/Parks that are not held under the Reserves Act 1977 but are held as ‘Park’.  For these properties the Community Board holds the delegation to issue a grazing licence and Board approval is sought to accept the proposal of the preferred grazier and to enter into a grazing licence with them for the ‘Park’ land as shown shaded on the attached plan (refer Attachment A).

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

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

1.         Approve the acceptance of Respondent A’s proposal to graze the Port Hills.

2.         Approve a Licence to Graze Park pursuant to s138 of the Local Government Act 2002 for the properties shown as Park and listed in the “Port Hills Grazing lease/report schedule in schedule 1, refer Attachment A of the officer report attached to the agenda for the meeting.

3.         Note that the Manager Property Consultancy and the Head of Parks acting jointly hold the delegation to enter into an a Licence to Graze Recreation Reserve pursuant to s53(1)(a)(ii) of the Reserves Act 1977 for the properties shown as Recreation Reserve and listed in the “Port Hills Grazing lease/report schedule in schedule 1, refer Attachment A of the officer report attached to the agenda for the meeting.

4.         Note that the Manager Property Consultancy and the Head of Parks acting jointly hold the delegation to enter into an Agreement to Graze Scenic Reserve pursuant to s55(1)(f) and s55(2)(a) of the Reserves Act 1977 for the properties shown as Scenic Reserve in schedule 1, refer Attachment A of the officer report attached to the agenda for the meeting.

5.         That the licence terms and conditions be:

(a)  For a period of (3) years with a right of renewal for a further two years providing a total of five years. 

(b)  Annual rent, refer PX attachment

(c)  Other licence terms and conditions generally in accordance with the Licence attached to the Request for Proposal, dated 14 October 2019, tender number 21664419.

6.         Authorise the Property Manager Consultancy to conclude and administer all necessary licence negotiations and documentation.

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations

3.1       The report recommends granting a licence to Respondent A because they achieved the best score out of the two proposals received.

3.2       The advantages of the preferred offer are:

·    There were no assumptions attached to the proposal.

·    Proven experience in management of much of the site including dealing with public access.

·    Close to market rental offered.

·    Allows opportunity to run Council land in conjunction with the grazing of neighbouring properties, allowing more efficiency in stock movements.

3.3       No disadvantages identified.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered

4.1       Grant licence to Respondent B

The advantage of this option is that it provides a new approach to grazing the land.

The disadvantages of this option is that:

·     Some assumptions attached to the proposal.

·     No on site experience.

·     No experience in grazing with public access.

·     Below market rental offered.

4.2       The option of running another Request For Proposal was considered and discounted on the basis that the potential advantage of producing a better offer is out-weighed by the cost of staff time and relatively low likelihood of a better offer, given the quality of those received.

5.   Detail

Background

5.1       The Port Hills Reserves/Parks (the Land) run from Scarborough to Bowenvale.

5.2       The property associated with this report (the Land) runs from Scarborough to the Rapaki Track and contains the following Reserves/Parks: Scarborough Hill Reserve, Greenwood Park, John Britten Reserve, Mt Pleasant Scenic Reserve, Scotts Valley Reserve, Castle Rock Reserve, Montgomery Spur Reserve. Refer to Attachment B for a map overview.

5.3       The balance of the Port Hills Reserves/Parks are contained in Bowenvale Park which falls within the Waihoro/Spreydon-Heathcote ward. 

5.4       This decision affects the following ward/Community Board areas:

5.4.1   Waikura/Linwood–Central-Heathcote Community Board. 

5.5       The Land is managed by the Regional Parks Team.  In broad terms the aims in managing the Land are to provide community benefit by way of access, and ecological value through enhancing the natural biodiversity of tussock grassland whilst protecting existing forest remnants and allowing regeneration in some areas.

5.6       Stock grazing is a key element to achieving the aims described above and in addition provides a mechanism to manage the fire fuel load.

5.7       Grazing has been undertaken for a number of years through contract grazing with individual licences for each Reserve/Park.  The current licences are held by two graziers.

5.8       All current licences have either expired and are holding over or are due to retire early this year. The issue therefore is that for management purposes a new licence needs to be issued for all Reserves/Parks in the Port Hills Reserve/Park.

Request for Proposal

5.9       A Request for Proposal (RFP) process was undertaken for grazing all Reserves/Parks under one grazier.   A key emphasis in the RFP was for the grazier to work in partnership with Regional Parks Staff so that the aim for the Reserves/Parks can be achieved.  Sometimes this involves moving stock on request and includes lighter grazing than would be undertaken on a strictly commercial operation.

5.10    Marketing was undertaken from 14 October 2019 - 6 November 2019 using the local government procurement tool ‘GETS’ and advertisement in the Christchurch Press.

Two complying proposals were received:

4.10.1       Respondent A - Company principal currently grazes around half the Land.  He has a proven relationship with Regional Parks, has demonstrated a willingness to graze at levels required by staff, move stock on request and an ability to deal with public access.  Respondent A runs a backup farm of 360 ha in South Canterbury. Close to market rental was offered with no departures from the proposed agreement/licence or assumptions attached.

4.10.2       Respondent B – is a new entity established for the purpose of the proposal with ‘Director A’  an ex-high country shepherd and current agribusiness banker, and ‘Director B’ is the current owner and General Manager of a 2,900ha Hill Station in Rakaia.  Rental offered was below market with some assumptions around quality of pasture and moving of stock on request leading to a suggestion that rental adjustment may be required.  Also assumed early access which is not an option.

5.11    Both proposals were assessed by a panel of three staff (two Parks and one Property), using the evaluation tool developed in conjunction with procurement and applying the following  criteria:

·    Experience and track record

·    Farm Operational Plan/Personnel

·    Financial Resources/Proposed rental

·    Service Delivery: Health and Safety/Environmental Sustainability 

Assessment resulted in Respondent A as the preferred option with a total score of 75% compared with Respondent B at 60%.

5.12    Both proposals presented a similar operational plan in terms of stock levels and breed suggesting a comparable approach to grazing would be applied.  Both also presented strong financial security and alternative farm back up demonstrating an ability to maintain the operation in changeable conditions.  In terms of environmental management both referred to a similar Operational Plan that keeps impact to a minimum.  Respondent B discussed introducing the concept of ‘Natural Capital’ to monitoring performance.  This is a concept that could be explored further in the future.

5.13    The key differences between the proposals was that Respondent B lacked experience on site and with farming involving public access. Respondent B also offered almost 60% less in rent and included conditions to the offer that were likely to result in negotiations for rent reductions.

Preferred Respondent

5.14    Respondent A Ltd has grazed Scarborough Hill Reserve since 2001, Greenwood Park, since 2003, Castle Rock Reserve and Montgomery Spur since around 2017.  In addition he currently grazes Department of Conservation (DOC) land on Godley Head, Taylors Mistake Bach owners land and Linda Stewart Reserve adjoining Castle Rock Reserve.  He has a proven track record on the key management issues relating to the land such as:

·    Moving stock on request.

·    Managing public access requirements such as public enquiries, damage to fences, stock disturbance.

5.15    Linking the neighbouring properties with the Land under a single grazier enables it to be grazed as one providing greater options and efficiency in terms of stock movement and management with opportunities to move stock between blocks as conditions demand.

5.16    Based on a positive credit check supported by an Accountant’s statement as to financial position the evaluation panel is confident in the ability of Respondent A to run a viable farm operation.

Proposed Licence: key Terms and Conditions

5.17    Licence Term:             Five years

Annual Rent:               Refer Public Excluded attachment

Rent review:                Three years

Parks Input:                             Regional Parks Staff have input into management including two monthly meetings with grazier and right to request removal, reduction or increase in stock

Public Access:            Year round access for recreation purposes

 

Community Views and Preferences

5.18    A Reserves Act 1977/Local Government Act 2002 notice was made on 23 November 2019 with a one month opportunity for submissions as is required under the Acts.  None were received.  The five year licence term provides flexibility in terms of future grazing options.  A Port Hills Plan should be completed within the five year licence term.  This would provide a broader consultation and engagement process on the long term future of the Port Hills as a whole.

 

6.   Policy Framework Implications

Strategic Alignment

6.1       The following grazing policy applies:

Grazing Licence Policy, 26 September 2002. 

Key sections are:

1.    That the Council tender(s) grazing licences for a maximum term of five years for any part of the approximately 708 hectares of Christchurch City Council administered land on the Port Hills

2.    That, where necessary the Council gives public notice in accordance with section 119 of the Reserves Act 1977 specifying the licence proposed to be granted.

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

6.2.1   Activity: Parks & Foreshore

·     Level of Service: 6.8.2.2 Parks are provided managed and maintained in a clean, tidy, safe, functional and equitable manner (Asset Condition).

Policy Consistency

6.3       The decision is consistent with the Council’s Plans and Policies as set out above.

Impact on 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.  Consultation in accordance with the Conservation Act 1987 is underway with a preliminary indication of consent. This will be updated at the time of presenting the report to the Community Board

Climate Change Impact Considerations

6.5       The RFP contained an assessment criteria regarding climate change affects and measures to minimise emissions.  In terms of environmental management both respondents referred to a similar Operational Plan that keeps climate change impact to a minimum. 

Accessibility Considerations

6.6       The choice of grazier does not raise any accessibility issues.

7.   Resource Implications

Capex/Opex

7.1       Cost to Implement – approximately $1000 covered in Opex budgets.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – ongoing management of the licence agreements covered in Opex budgets.

7.3       Funding Source – Regional Parks Opex budgets

Other

7.4       Not applicable

8.   Legal Implications

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report

8.1       The Community Board holds the delegation to authorise the granting of lease/licences over Park land held under the Local Government Act 2002, that is vested in the local territorial authority. (Staff hold the delegation to authorise the granting of lease/licences over Reserve land held under the Reserves Act 1977, that is vested in the local territorial authority)

8.2       The Council Chief Executive holds the delegation to authorise the consent of the Minister of Conservation as required pursuant to the Reserves Act 1977.

8.3       In exercising the Minister’s delegation the administering body (the Council) must give consideration to those matters previously applied by the Minister for example ensuring that:

·    The land has been correctly identified.

·    The necessary statutory processes have been followed.

·    The functions and purposes of the Reserves Act 1977 have been taken into account in respect to the classification and purpose of the Reserve as required under s40 of the Act.

·    The administering body has considered submissions and objections from affected parties and that on the basis of the evidence the decision is a reasonable one.

·    Pursuant to the requirements of section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, the administering body has consulted with and considered the views of tangata whenua or has some other way of making an informed decision.

8.4       Council officers have publicly notified the Council’s intention to consider granting a licence to Respondent A for five years under the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002.

8.5       Council officers are satisfied that the proposed licence complies with the Minister’s requirements.  Consultation with the tangata whenua is underway through the office of the Council’s Pou Whakatohutohu Tumuaki- Principal Advisor- Ngai Tahu Relationships. Any concerns will be reported by officers at the time of presenting the report to the community Board and the Council.

Other Legal Implications

8.1       The legal consideration is the preparation of a Deed of Licence and the application of the appropriate delegations.

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

9.   Risk Management Implications

9.1       There is a risk of:

·    Rent not paid

·    Grazing levels not achieved

·    Poor operational management including management of staff and equipment

9.2       The above consequences would be caused by a failure of the licensee to perform to expectations and could result in a loss of income through unpaid rent together with reputational damage/poor media coverage of bad management of a Council asset.

9.3       The risk is assessed as low on the basis that the financial consequences are relatively small and operational issues could be rectified.  The likelihood of these consequences occurring is considered low based on experience and track record of the preferred respondent.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Port Hills Grazing Schedule - 1

68

b

Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board - Port Hills Grazing Plan - 2

70

c  

Public Excluded Attachment - Proposed Annual Rental - Confidential

 

 

 

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.

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

14.   Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - August 2020

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

20/146048

Report of:

Arohanui Grace, Community Governance Manager
Arohanui.grace@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager:

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

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

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

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu 

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

1.         Receive the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for August 2020.

2.         Receive and note the information provided to the Board on:

a.         Sydenham Suction Tank Project.

b.         Woolston Village – Ferry Road Masterplan Landscape Change.

3.   Community Board Activities and Forward Planning

3.1       Memos/Information/Advice to the Board

3.1.1   Sydenham Suction Tank Project – Information is attached on the upcoming construction of a suction tank at the Sydenham Pump Station.  The potable water storage tank (suction tank) at the pump station was damaged irreparably during the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes. Since then, temporary water storage tanks have been in use. The Council must replace the temporary water storage tanks with a permanent tank so that the Council can meet the appropriate engineering standards and codes and so that the pump station can operate at full capacity. (Attachment A).

3.1.2   Woolston Village – Ferry Road Masterplan Landscape Change – As part of the Woolston Village Masterplan project staff have been working with Matapopore to include cultural references in the Woolston Village.  Matapopore do not support the use of Kauri in the planning scheme because Kauri are not endemic to the area. (Attachment B)

3.2       Board area Consultations/Engagement/Submission opportunities

3.2.1   At the time of writing this report there were no Council consultations within the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Board area.

3.3       Annual Plan and Long Term Plan matters

3.3.1   The Councillors are now considering the public feedback before the updated Draft Annual Plan 2020–21 is finalised at the Council’s 23 July 2020 meeting.


 

3.4       Board Reporting

3.4.1   The Board is asked to consider any matters they would like to suggest as articles for the Council’s Newsline.

3.4.1   The Board is also asked to consider any matters they would like the Board Chairperson to raise at Council.

4.   Community Board Plan – Update against Outcomes

4.1       The Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Plan 2020-22 was adopted at the Board’s 1 July 2020 meeting.

4.2       Resolving the flooding problem at Moa Reserve – was identified in the Community Board Plan 2020-22 as a priority.  The capping of the spring, and repairs to the drainage pipes was completed on 12 June 2020.  Positive feedback has been received from the surrounding residents on the work within the reserve by the contractors.

5.   Significant Council Projects in the Board Area

5.1       Strengthening Community Fund Projects

5.1.1   2020-21 Strengthening Communities Fund opened on Monday 9 March 2020 and closed Wednesday 15 April 2020.  The Board will consider the applications at its 17 August 2020 meeting.

Community Pride Garden Awards 2020 Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions in place during April and May 2020, this year’s Community Pride Garden Awards presentation ceremony was unable to take place. Certificates have been posted to recipients. Photos submitted by award winning gardeners, and a full list of the 2020 award recipients can be found at Garden Pride Awards.

5.2       Other partnerships with the community and organisations

5.2.1   Community Capacity Research Project

A Community Capacity Research project is underway to gain a better understanding of the extent to which communities have the ability to self-activate to achieve a common goal. Identifying communities that are well placed to self-activate will allow the Council to focus resources towards supporting those communities with less capacity to self-activate.

The next step in the project is to validate, the data gathered around levels of community capacity with Community Governance Teams, assisted by local community groups. This will take place through a series of local workshops facilitated by project team members and Community Development Advisors. The findings of the research project are anticipated to be shared with elected members in December 2020.

 

5.3       Community Facilities (updates and future plans)

5.3.1   Te Pou Toetoe

Within moments after the sod turning, groundworks for the new facility began. In addition to the mahi onsite, the project team are also working with the Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote governance team to engage with community groups, schools, activity providers and individuals in the Community Board areas to gain a understanding of how people would use the pool, what activities they'd like to see offered at Te Pou Toetoe and how these can complement the range of recreational opportunities already available in the greater Linwood area.

 

Opportunities for the public to engage with the project team have been held at the     Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board room on the 7 July 2020, at Eastgate Mall on the 9 July 2020 and the Greater Linwood Forum on 3 August 2020. Further opportunities have been planned for on-going conversations around the use of the facility.


 

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

6.1       Linwood Youth Festival Experience

Staff met with the Christchurch Youth Council on the 6 July 2020 at Eastgate mall to discuss the Linwood Youth Festival Experience (LYFE), its history, origins and review. The Christchurch Youth Council have agreed to work with staff to design and conduct a youth engagement for the greater Linwood area with a view to gaining a good understanding of what young people in the area want and need. It is anticipated that this mahi will involve planning and hosting an event, or a series of occasions which bring together young people to enable the group to conduct the research. The results will also provide guidance and recommendations on what form LYFE might take in future years.

It is hoped that this collaboration with the Christchurch Youth Council will help to refocus LYFE's original vision, a celebration of Linwood's youth, delivered by young people, for young people. 


6.2       Events Report Back

6.2.1   Matariki celebrations at Sumner

Sumner Community Resident's Association celebrated Matariki on the July 17 July 2020. Bringing with them the stars, fashioned out of harakeke, lanterns made from tin cans and other creations, around 100 people from the local community turned out to mark the occasion.


Art At Sumner Hub held their free Matariki workshops leading up to the event where the local residents could come and learn about the meaning of Matariki and how to make a range of creations they could use and wear at the celebrations.

7.   Updates from Other Units

7.1       Graffiti Update

7.1.1   The June 2020 Graffiti snapshot is attached (Attachment C).

8.   Community Board Funding Update

8.1       The Board will consider at its 17 August 2020 meeting how much to transfer to the Board’s Discretionary Response Fund.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Sydenham Suction Tank Construction Project

76

b

Woolston Village - Ferry Road Masterplan Landscape Change -  30 June 2020

78

c

Graffiti Snapshot - June 2020

80

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

15.   Elected Members’ Information Exchange / Te Whakawhiti Whakaaro o Te Kāhui Amorangi

 

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

 

 

 


Waikura/Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 2020

 

 

16.   Resolution to Exclude the Public

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Note

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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


Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

03 August 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.

Port Hills Grazing Deed of Licence

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment 3 - Public Excluded Attachment - Proposed Annual Rental

s7(2)(i)

Conduct Negotiations

Protect privacy of RFP submissions

On awarding of lease

17.

Public Excluded Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Minutes - 8 July 2020

 

 

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