Waikura

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

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

 

Date:                                    Wednesday 16 March 2022

Time:                                   4.30pm

Venue:                                 Audio/Visual Link

Under the current provisions of the Covid-19 Protection Framework (the Traffic Alert system) meeting attendance is only possible via an audio/visual link or by viewing a live stream (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNPb5ivHr6AzTjLcpX0-RNQ ) of the meeting. 

 

Please request access details from the Community Board Advisor  (liz.beaven@ccc.govt.nz) for the audio/visual link.

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Alexandra Davids

Michelle Lomax

Sunita Gautam

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Jake McLellan

Jackie Simons

Sara Templeton

 

 

16 March 2022

 

 

 

 

 

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

16 March 2022

 

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

Part A           Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B           Reports for Information

Part C           Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Karakia Tīmatanga................................................................................................... 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.        Briefings................................................................................................. 19

Staff Reports

C          8.        Former Woolston Amateur Swimming Club - Funding allocation..................... 21

A          9.        Hagley Park North - Tennis Court New Floodlights........................................ 25

A          10.      Slow Speed Neighbourhoods - Scarborough Hill........................................... 33

A          11.      Woodham Park - Former Caretaker's Residence and Grounds........................ 45

B         12.      Avebury House Heritage Park - Management of Park Bookings....................... 51

B         13.      Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Plan: Monitoring Report July to December 2021............................................................................. 55

B         14.      Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - March 2022............................................................................................................. 67

 

B         15.      Elected Members’ Information Exchange Te Whakawhiti Whakaaro o Te Kāhui Amorangi............................................................................................................. 99

C          16.      Resolution to Exclude the Public.............................................................. 100

Karakia Whakamutunga

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

Karakia Tīmatanga

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, 16 February 2022  be confirmed (refer page 6).

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.

 

4.1

Pedestrian links from Addington to Central City

Chris Freear, local resident will speak to the Board regarding pedestrian links from Addington to Central City.

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

6.1

At the Board’s 16 February 2022 meeting, Simone Pearson, resident of Dawson Street, tabled two petitions during her deputation to the Board.

 

1.    First petition supported the retaining of the current asphalt surface of Dawson Street.

 

The prayer of the petition reads:

We support retaining the current asphalt surface of Dawson Street. The planned resurfacing in chipseal stones poses a risk to; the health, safety and wellbeing of pedestrians and; of damage to properties and vehicles. (20 signatories)

 

2.    Second petition supported the change in designation from Dawson Street to Dawson Lane.

 

The prayer of the petition reads:

We the properties owners and residents support the change in designation from Dawson Street to Dawson Lane. (22 signatories)

 

At that time, the petition did not meet the provision of Standing Orders Clause 13 – Petitions and was not admissible. Clause 13 requires the petition to be received by the Chief Executive at least five working days before the date of the meeting at which it will be presented. That was not the case in that instance.

 

The petitions were forwarded to the Chief Executive Officer for consideration of acceptance and that acceptance was granted on 24 February 2022.

 

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

Unconfirmed

 

 

Waikura

Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

Open Minutes AND NOTES SUMMARY

 

 

Date:                                    Wednesday 16 February 2022

Time:                                   4.30pm

Venue:                                 Audio/Visual Link

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Alexandra Davids

Michelle Lomax

Sunita Gautam

Yani Johanson

Darrell Latham

Tim Lindley

Jake McLellan

Jackie Simons

Sara Templeton

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

Secretarial Note: It is noted that this meeting was held via audio/visual link on the Zoom platform owing to the country being under COVID-19 Protection Framework (the Traffic Alert System Red) on the date the meeting was scheduled. These minutes provide a written summary of the meeting proceedings.

 

The Chairperson opened the meeting and notified members and presenters that the meeting was being publicly livestreamed on YouTube and that the recording would be kept online for future viewing.

 

Karakia Tīmatanga:  

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

The Chairperson called for apologies.

 

There were no apologies received.

 

2.   Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

The Chairperson called for any declarations of interest. There were no declarations of interest recorded.

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

Part C

The Chairperson asked members to confirm that the minutes of the previous Board meeting held on 2 December 2021 were a true and correct record of the meeting. No issues or questions concerning the accuracy of the minutes were raised. The Chairperson called for a mover and seconder.

Tim Lindley moved that the minutes be confirmed. The motion was seconded by Jake McLellan. Following invitation from the Chairperson there was no debate on the item, and the motion was put to the vote and was declared carried.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00001

That the minutes of the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board meeting held on Thursday, 2 December 2021 be confirmed.

Tim Lindley/Jake McLellan                                                                                                                                   Carried

 

4.   Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

4.1

Hereford Street (Fitzgerald Avenue to Stanmore Road) Road Surface

Mr John Miller, local resident gave a presentation to the Board, on behalf of local residents, regarding Hereford Street (Fitzgerald to Stanmore Road) Road Surface.  

Mr Miller outlined that streets that run parallel to Hereford Street had traffic constraints and cycleways made Hereford Street from the central city to the east a popular route for motorists.

Mr Millar showed in the presentation the size of the road chip (3/5 grade, quarry chip) that was used in the resurfacing of Hereford Street last year.  Mr Millar showed photographs of significant “bald patches” on the road surface that he believes the resurfacing has failed.  The tar melts on moderately warm days on the “bald patches”.  The chipset continues to come loose gathering in the street gutters.  There has been damage to parked cars and on one instance a stone chip breaking a residents window.  Mr Millar commented that cyclists avoid cycling on this part of Hereford Street.

Mr Millar outlined that the residents’ concerns were:

·    The surface is noisy.

·    The road surface is not doing its job.

·    That the resurfacing is a false economy.

·    That the road surface will be patched instead of being re-laid.

The Board were advised by Mr Millar that the residents would like a quieter grade of chip that sticks to the road and is more suited to medium-density residential areas.

A Board member asked for more information on the increased noise that residents are experiencing.  Mr Millar advised that he is hearing approximately four times more noise than before the road was sealed.  Another resident, who was supporting Mr Millar’s public forum presentation, advised that she now has to have her house windows closed owing to the increased and invasive noise.

The residents are happy to have the road resealed with chip as long as the chip is a smaller chip that will be create less noise.

Mr Millar was asked if he thought it was chip failure or the tar “bleeding” through the chip. A Board member referred to a previous issue with a street where there was tar failure not chipset failure.  A Board member will forward a video to the Board members and Mr Millar of the process that was used to repair the street.

A Board member questioned when a Customer Service Request had been lodged and had Council replied to Mr Millar.  Mr Millar advised that he had not has information back from the Council.  The Board were advised that the Council’s Customer Services Team are briefing the Board in the near future on the review of the Customer Service Request (CSR) system (Hybris) on how Council will contact Council customers after the CSR has been raised.

After Board members clarified further points the Chairperson thanked Mr Millar for his presentation.

The Board requested staff advice on the repairs of Hereford Street, between Fitzgerald Avenue to Stanmore Road confirming that the repair will not be a patch repair, the timeline for the repair and advice of why residents are experiencing more road noise since the laying of the new road surface.

Attachments

a       4.1 Public Forum Hereford Street Fitzgerald Avenue to Stanmore Road - Road Surface Presentation  

5.   Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

5.1

Dawson Street

Simone Pearson and Joe Tonner, Dawson Street residents, gave a presentation to the Board regarding Dawson Street road surface, parking, street furniture and changing the street name.

Ms Simone Pearson outlined to the Board that the area to be surfaced is relatively small measuring approximately 455m2 owing to the street’s short length and narrow width.  Seven paved brick area and five planter boxes reduce the surface area by 30%.  Ms Pearson has spoken to the majority of Dawson Street residents who support the street’s function as a pedestrian walkway and for the resurfacing to be continue to be asphalt.

Ms Pearson, referred the Board to the Council’s Draft Central City Plan 2011 that promotes Dawson Street as a as part of the greenway, and being recognised as a woonerf pedestrian walkway.   Residents wish to support the Council’s vision by sealing the street in asphalt.

Ms Pearson advised that residents wish to change the name of Dawson Street to Dawson Lane.

Owing to increased housing density there has been an impact of increased parking in the street.  Residents would like to have clear indications of where people can park in the street.  As parking bays are already paved in brick showing parking spaces, Ms Pearson outlined that residents would like to have no parking restrictions installed.  Residents believe that parking ticks will make the issue worse.  Ms Pearson and residents believe that street furniture could be used to reduce some parking.

Board members discussed with Ms Pearson and Mr Tonner the cost difference between asphalting and chipsealing Dawson Street and the timing of the proposed road surfacing.  Ms Pearson and Mr Tonner confirmed they would rather the works be delayed to enable a better outcome for the street.

Ms Pearson tabled two petitions.  The petitions prayers saying:

We support retaining the current asphalt surface of Dawson Street. The planned resurfacing in chipseal stones poses a risk to; the health, safety and wellbeing of pedestrians and; of damage to properties and vehicles. (20 signatories)

We the properties owners and residents support the change in designation from Dawson Street to Dawson Lane. (22 signatories)

The Board was advised:

That the tabled petitions have not meet the provision of Standing Orders Clause 13 – Petitions of being received by the Chief Executive at least five working days before the date of the meeting  and is not admissible until the document has meet the requirements of Standing Orders Clause 13.  This advice is to be noted in the minutes.  The document can be received by the Board and it will be noted in the minutes that the Board took the petitions into consideration in their deliberations where appropriate.  When the petitions has met the criteria under Standing Orders it will be included in the next available Board meeting agenda.

After Board members clarified further points the Chairperson thanked Ms Pearson and Mr Tonner for their presentation.

Clause 7 of these minutes refers.

 

 

 

Attachments

a       Deputation on Correspondence Dawson Street Presentation   

6.   Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

7.   Correspondence

 

The Community Board Advisor joined the meeting by audio/visual link.

The Board took into account the deputation by Ms Pearson and Mr Tonner and the two petitions that were tabled during their deputation. Refer to Item 5.1.

The Board discussed what further information and action the Board requires, including requesting staff to advise on the Council’s Infrastructure Design Standards to accommodate the characteristics of a woonerf street (pedestrian focussed street) in the street/pavement renewal programme, highlighting the matter in the monthly Community Board’s presentation to the Council once staff advice has been received; and seeking a report on the proposal to change the street name.

The Chairperson called for a mover and seconder for a motion on the matters discussed. Jake McLellan moved the motion. The motion was seconded by Michelle Lomax.

 

 

Officer Recommendation Ngā Tūtohu

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receives the information in the Correspondence Report dated 16 February 2022.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00002

Part B

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receives the information in the Correspondence Report dated 16 February 2022.

2.        

2.         Requests staff advice on the timeline for resurfacing Dawson Street.   Note: The Board wishes to have the information well ahead of the planned resurfacing.

 

3.         Requests staff advice to look at an appropriate procurement options for smaller works by using other contractors than the Council’s current contractors.

 

4.         Requests staff advice on amending the Council’s Infrastructure Design Standards to accommodate the special characteristics of a woonerf street (pedestrian focussed street) in the street/pavement renewal programme.

 

5.         Requests that the matters regarding Dawson Street be raised at the Board’s monthly report and presentation to the Council, after the Board has received the advice from staff requested in resolution 3.

 

6.         Requests a report on changing the name of Dawson Street to Dawson Lane.

 

7.         Requests staff advice on the installation of no stopping restrictions and use of street furniture in lieu of no stopping restrictions at the entrance of Dawson Street (Kilmore Street end).

Jake McLellan/Michelle Lomax                                                                                                                      Carried

 

Jackie Simons left the meeting at 5:31 pm.

 

15      Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui continued

15.1

Public Transport

Clair McConchie, resident, spoke to the Board about her concerns about the behaviour on public transport giving many examples of the behaviour that she has witnessed.   Ms McConchie advised  that she has contacted the bus operators on the events that she has witnessed and talked to the Chief Executive of Go Bus about the events that she has witnessed.

 

Ms McConchie outlined to the Board that the security has been decreased at the Central City Bus Interchange in the mornings and outlined further instances that she is aware of incidents at the Bus Exchange.

 

Ms McConchie has talked to the staff at Environment Canterbury and was not satisfied with their response. Ms McConchie confirmed that she had not talked to the Environment Canterbury Councillors.

 

The Board were advised that Council is responsible for the security at Whakawhitinga Pahi Bus Interchange.

 

The Board discussed the concerns raised and offered advice to Ms McConchie to talk to the Environment Canterbury councillors.

 

After Board members clarified further points the Chairperson thanked Ms McConchie for her  presentation.

 

The Board agreed to request staff advice on the reasons for the decrease of security at Whakawhitinga Pahi Bus Interchange.

The Board agreed to write a letter to the Chairperson of Environment Canterbury advising Environment Canterbury on the matters raised in Ms McConchie’s public forum presentation to the Board’s 16 February 2022 meeting regarding behaviour on the city’s public transport buses.

 

Jake McLellan left the meeting at 5:45 pm.

 

8.   Part Jecks Place - Dedication of Road Reserve as Legal Road

 

The Council’s Property Consultant, Property Consultancy Team joined the meeting by audio/visual link and spoke to the report.

 

Staff outlined the history of the matter and explained that owing to a Kainga Ora (formerly Housing New Zealand) subdivision the lot is needing access.

 

The Chairperson thanked staff and called for a mover and seconder. Sunita Gautam moved the officer’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Sara Templeton.

Following invitation from the Chairperson there was no debate on the item, and the motion was put to the vote and was declared carried.

 

Community Board Decided LCHB/2022/00003 Original Officer Recommendation accepted without change).

Part A

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommends that the Council:

1.         Approve to dedicate the Local Purpose (Road) Reserve legally described as Lot 54 DP 15124 as road, pursuant to Section 111 of the Reserves Act 1977.

Sunita Gautam/Sara Templeton                                                                                                                         Carried

 

 

10. Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board 2021/22 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Sydenham Junior Cricket Club

 

The Council’s Community Recreation Advisor Linwood-Central-Heathcote joined the meeting by audio/visual link.

 

The Board were advised that the Spreydon-Cashmere Community Board has allocated $2,500 to the project from their Discretionary Response Fund. 

 

The Board discussed increasing the amount that staff have recommended to support the project.

 

The Chairperson thanked staff and called for a mover and seconder. Sara Templeton moved that the grant be increased to $1,500.  The motion was seconded by Tim Lindley.

 

The Board acknowledged the work of the Community Recreation Advisor Linwood-Central-Heathcote.

 

 

Officer Recommendation Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $1,000 from its 2021-22 Discretionary Response Fund to Sydenham Junior Cricket Club towards Participation for Minorities.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00004

Part C

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $1,500 from its 2021-22 Discretionary Response Fund to Sydenham Junior Cricket Club towards Participation for Minorities.

Sara Templeton/Tim Lindley                                                                                                                                Carried

 

Jake McLellan returned to the meeting at 5:56 pm.

 

9.   86 Bridle Path Road - Proposed Road Name

 

Board Comment

The Council’s Team Leader, Planning and Consents joined the meeting by audio/visual and spoke to the report.

The Chairperson thanked staff and called for a mover and seconder. Tim Lindley moved the officer’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Darryl Latham.

 

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00005 Original Officer Recommendation accepted without change).

Part C

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approves the following new lane name for 86 Bridle Path Road (RMA/2019/1610):

a.         Matuku Lane.

Tim Lindley/Darrell Latham                                                                                                                                  Carried

 

 

11. Waikura Linwood - Central- Heathcote 2021-21 Discretionary Response Fund Graeme Dingle Foundation - He Ara Akonga

 

The Council’s Community Development  Advisor Linwood-Central-Heathcote joined the meeting by audio/visual link and spoke to the report.

 

Staff confirmed that the project is not in relation to the schools’ curriculum.

 

The Board discussed the Strengthening Community Funding  to cover the current Board’s projects and any legacy projects the Board would like to continue between July to the end of September 2022.

 

The Board discussed allocating over two financial years.  The Board could refer some applications to the Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fun if the Board’s funds have been fully allocated.

 

The Chairperson thanked staff and called for a mover and seconder. Sunita Gautam moved the officer’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Michelle Lomax.

 

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00006 Original Officer Recommendation accepted without change).

Part C

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $10,000 from its 2021/22 Discretionary Response Fund to Graeme Dingle Foundation towards the He Ara Akonga Programme.

Sunita Gautam/Michelle Lomax                                                                                                                          Carried

 

Sunita Gautam left the meeting at 6:04 pm.

Sunita Gautam returned to the meeting at 6:05 pm.

 

12. Waikura Linwood - Central- Heathcote 2021-21 Discretionary Response Fund  St Johns Church and Community Centre - New Computer

 

The Council’s Community Development  Advisor Linwood-Central-Heathcote joined the meeting by audio/visual link and spoke to the report.

 

The Board discussed whether the group could gain a refurbished computer in light of the Board’s Sustainability Charter and the amount of computer waste entering the landfill.

 

The Chairperson thanked staff and called for a mover and seconder. Sara Templeton moved the officer’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Jake McLellan.

 

The Board acknowledged the work of the Community Development Advisor Linwood-Central-Heathcote.

 

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00007 Original Officer Recommendation accepted without change).

Part C

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Approves a grant of $1,645.00 from its 2021/22 Discretionary Response Fund to St Johns Church and Community Centre towards the Office Computer Replacement.

2.         Requests staff advice on the Council Community Computer Scheme: on how the computers are allocated what is provided with the computers and how do community organisations apply to the scheme.

Sara Templeton/Jake McLellan                                                                                                                          Carried

 

13. Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - February 2022

 

The Community Governance Manager joined the meeting by audio/visual link and spoke to the report. 

 

A Board member enquired about the status of the proposal for a plaque for the Linwood Cemetery to recognise service men and women buried in the cemetery.

 

The Board discussed how the certificates will be presented to the Edible and Sustainable and the Garden Pride awards.  The Board agreed that the certificates be posted to award recipients.

 

The Board discussed their concern about the transition of community groups to newly formed Boards, and with staff changes.  The Board agreed that the allocation of Strengthening Communities Fund (including the Discretionary Response Fund) needs to be discussed now.  The Board does not support the Board area groups  having to wait until they have transitioned to the new Boards to have full funding. The Board noted the anxiety that some of its Board area community groups are feeling not knowing how the funding will be allocated for the remainder of the Board’s term and at the start of the new Board’s term.

 

A Board member noted the advice given to the Board on the development of Aaron Drain and enquired if  Gurudwara Singh Sabha Christchurch had been specifically advised of the development.  Another Board member had received further staff advice on the communication with Gurudwara Singh Sabha Christchurch and agreed to forward it to the Board.

 

The Chairperson thanked staff and called for a mover and seconder. Michelle Lomax moved the motion. The motion was seconded by Sunita Gautam.

 

 

Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for January and February 2021.

 

Community Board Resolved LCHB/2022/00008

Part B

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receives the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report for January and February 2021.

2.         Agrees that the Edible and Sustainable and the Garden Pride Awards certificates be posted out to recipients.

3.         Requests that the matter of Strengthening Community Funding Allocation 2022-23 be raised at the Board’s monthly report and presentation to the Council asking the Council to provide community groups certainty on how  funding will be allocated for the remainder of the current Community  Boards’ term and at the start of the new Community Boards’ term.

Michelle Lomax/Sunita Gautam                                                                                                                          Carried

 

 

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

Part B

The Board exchanged information on the following:

·        The Board discussed the Redcliffs Residents Association’s concerns on the beach access around Redcliffs with the building of the final stage of the Coastal Pathway. The Board were advised that the Coastal Pathway Group has arranged for a member of their group to be the contact for the Redcliffs Residents Association to raise any concerns or make any requests in relation to the Coastal Pathway.

·        The Board acknowledged the residents’ concerns with the protestors’ campsite and some anti-social behaviour in Cramner Square. 

·        The Board were advised that prior to Christmas a resident contacted a Board member regarding the Waltham Road Christmas Lights.  Staff advice has been forwarded to the resident.

·        The Board were advised of extreme flooding in Mt Pleasant Road and leakage onto properties which Council has been working on to fix the leaks and the street drainage.  The Board agreed to support the resident.

·        The Board were advised that there is concern about the Cave Rock mast lighting shape and the times that the mast is alight.

·        The Board were advised that there have been community requests for signage advising not to dump rubbish in Ruru Road.  A Board member will lodge a Customer Service Request.

·        The Board were advised that a request has made by residents in the Ruru Road/Cypress Road area asking for no stopping restrictions to be placed at the intersection owing to parking being oversubscribed during winter sport at Linfield Park.   Residents advised that parking impacts on sight lines.  A Board member will lodge a Customer Service Request.

 

14.1   Sumner Beach - Dog Signage

The Board discussed the matter of the dog signage at Sumner Beach. 

Presently dogs need to be under effective control on Clifton Beach and Scarborough Breach and Park.  There are to be no dogs 1 November – 31 March.  A new patrol has been set up at Scarborough Beach, this means that dogs can run free, under effective control, on a patrolled swimming beach.  Staff have advised that the signage is going to be updated for Sumner 2022/23.  The Board noted that the Dog Bylaw is due to be reviewed in 2023.  Concern was highlighted that dog restrictions are different on either side of Cave Road which are swimming beaches.

The Board were advised that there is no dog control signage along the southern side of the estuary advising that dogs are not permitted in order to protect the estuary wildlife.  There is signage on the eastern side of the estuary. 

The Board agreed to request staff to erect simpler signage around the Estuary to advise that dogs are not permitted.

The Board agreed to request staff advice on additional signage for Sumner that acknowledges the issue of the swimming beaches and encourages dog owners to be mindful that the beaches are now swimming beaches and not to let their dogs run free.

The Board agreed to request staff advice on undertaking a small review on the Dog Control Bylaw  (like the Freedom Camping Bylaw recently)  to update the Sumner Beach dog control areas and for staff to include Sumner Beach areas when the Dog Control Bylaw is reviewed.

 

14.2   Greening the East Development Plan - Follow up

The Board discussed the exception of receiving a progress report on the Greening the East Development Plan that was adopted in 2021 in early 2022.

The Board agreed to request staff advice on the timeline of the Greening the East Development Plan progress report.

 

14.3   Doris Lusk Reserve - Sculpture

The Board agreed to request staff advice on the progress of the Doris Lusk Play Sculpture. 

 

14.4   Te Pou Toetoe Linwood Pool - Memorial Plaque and Tree

The Board noted that in the past it had agreed to install a tree and plaque in remembrance of the late Sally Buck, former City Councillor and Community Board member

The Board agreed to request staff advice on progressing the installation of a tree and plaque in remembrance of Sally Buck, former City Councillor and Community Board member before the disestablishment of the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.

 

 

Karakia Whakamutunga:

 

Meeting concluded at 7.03pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 16th  DAY OF MARCH 2022.

 

Alexandra Davids

Chairperson


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

7.     Briefings

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

22/300040

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Liz Beaven, Community Board Adviser

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Mary Richardson, Citizen and Community

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

The Board will be briefed on the following:

Subject

Presenter(s)

Unit/Organisation

Environment Canterbury 2022/23 Draft Annual Plan

Environment Canterbury Councillors:

Lan Pham

Nicole Marshall

Vicky Southworth

Phil Clearwater

Environment Canterbury

 

2.   Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Notes the information supplied during the Environment Canterbury Draft 2022/23 Annual Plan Briefing.

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

8.     Former Woolston Amateur Swimming Club - Funding allocation

Reference Te Tohutoro:

22/205130

Report of Te Pou Matua:

Rory Crawford, Community Recreation Advisor, Rory.Crawford@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager Pouwhakarae:

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

 

 

1.   Purpose of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to allocate the funds from the Woolston Amateur Swimming Club Funds. 

1.2       The decisions in this report low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined by evaluating the number of people who would be impacted by the allocation of the fund and the low risk to Council.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Acknowledges the funding received from the former Woolston Amateur Swimming Club; and

2.         Allocates $10,000 towards Learn to Swim Lessons for Local Youth in need who are identified by local schools; and

3.         Allocates $6,000 towards a pool inflatable that remains located permanently at Te Pou Toetoe Linwood Pool; and

4.         Installs a plaque of recognition to the Woolston Park Amateur Swimming Club at Te Pou Toetoe Linwood Pool marking the legacy of the Swimming Club noting the cost of the plaque is to be taken from the fund; and

5.         Allocates the unallocated balance of the fund (approximately $8,000) towards pool aids for young people with disabilities. 

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       Following consultation and engagement with committee members of the former Woolston Amateur Swimming Club it was unanimously agreed to with all parties that the allocation of the fund would be made for the recommended purposes outlined in the officer recommendations.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Do nothing –

4.1.1   Advantages

·     There are no advantages.

4.1.2   Disadvantages 

·     The remaining Fund will remain idle and not be utilised for the benefit of the local community

5.   Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1       The former Woolston Park Swimming Pool Association forwarded funding to the Woolston Community Association for the promotion of swimming activities in the area.  The current balance of the Fund is $22,129.68. Now that Te Pou Toetoe is open it is for the Board and the Woolston Community Association representatives to decide on the criteria of the former Woolston Pool and the Woolston Park Amateur Swimming Club Special Fund. The views and preferences of the Community Association on how the fund is to be allocated is reflected directly in the officers recommendations in Section 2.

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

5.2.1   Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

6.   Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       This report does not support the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031).

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

6.2.1   Strengthening Communities Strategy Outcome/Goal 6: Increasing participation in community recreation and sport programmes and events.

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 specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.4       This does not impact on Council’s climate change considerations.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.5       This does not require accessibility considerations.

7.   Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement - nil

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs - nil

7.3       Funding Source – N/A

Other He mea anō

7.4       N/A

8.   Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1       Delegation to approve the allocation of the Woolston Amateur Swimming Club Fund sits with the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9.   Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       This is a procedural matter that does not create any risks to Council.

 

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name

Location / File Link

 

 

 

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

 

 

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Rory Crawford - Community Recreation Advisor

Approved By

Arohanui Grace - Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

9.     Hagley Park North - Tennis Court New Floodlights

Reference Te Tohutoro:

22/166499

Report of Te Pou Matua:

Derek Roozen, Senior Network Planner Parks, derek.roozen@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager Pouwhakarae:

Mary Richardson, GM Citizens & Community, Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Purpose of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek a recommendation from the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee to approve proposed new floodlights in the Hagley Park Tennis Club area in Hagley Park North (refer Attachment A).  This report has been written in response to an application by the Club to install these lights.

1.2       The decision in this report is of low to medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  This rating was determined due to the importance of Hagley Park to the city in terms of its heritage landscape value and accessibility by the public for recreation, and the low level of potential effect of the proposed new lights on the park.  The financial impact of the decision is low as all costs are borne by the club.  The decision does not affect the Council’s ability to deliver agreed levels of service.  There is no obvious impact on Māori culture and traditions resulting from this proposed installation.

1.3       The affected/interested parties’ engagement and public notification undertaken reflects this assessment.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommends to the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee:

1.         That the proposed installation of new floodlights in the tennis court area in Hagley Park North is a metropolitan matter for it to consider and make a decision on.

2.         Receives the views of the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board on the proposed installation of new floodlights.

3.         Approves the application by the Hagley Park Tennis Club to install six new 12.2m high floodlight towers in the club’s tennis court area in Hagley Park North at sites indicated in paragraph 5.5 of the report and shown in Attachment A of this report.  Subject to:

a.    The applicant obtaining any necessary resource consents, and building consents, at its cost, before commencing installation of the new lighting system in the park.

b.    The applicant being required to deposit scaled as-built plans, as per the Council’s Infrastructure Design Standards, within two months of the work being completed.

c.    The applicant being responsible for all costs associated with the installation, insurance, operation, maintenance, and any future removal, of the lighting system.

d.    The applicant being responsible for ensuring that the lighting system is always maintained and operated in a safe condition.

4.         Requires that the approval and use of the lighting is subject to the following conditions:

a.    The tennis court floodlights are to be used on weekdays, Monday to Thursday only, between 5.30pm and 8.00pm.  Usage to begin no more than one month prior to the date daylight saving finishes.  Usage to end within one month after the date daylight saving begins.

b.    If the tennis courts are not in use, the lights will be turned off.

5.         Acknowledges that this approval will lapse if the development is not completed within two years of the approval date.

 

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       Installation of proposed new floodlights in Hagley Park is of metropolitan significance and decision making remains with the Council rather than the Community Board because:

3.1.1   Hagley Park is considered to be a metropolitan facility,

3.1.2   The proposed development is substantial,

3.1.3   A precedence exists in consideration and approval of other recent development proposals for the park, such as for the new changing rooms building on the adjoining North Hagley Community, Sports and Recreation Trust Board leased area to the north, and

3.1.4   The impact of the decision on the proposed installation of the lights extends beyond the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board area.

3.2       The Council’s Executive Leadership Team supports this matter to be dealt with by the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee with consideration of the Community Board’s views.

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Decline the application – Not Recommended.

This option would restrict the club’s ability to optimise its use of existing hard courts that are currently not lit.  Permission to install floodlights was anticipated when the courts were developed.

5.   Detail Te Whakamahuki

Background

5.1       The Hagley Park Tennis Club, formerly the United Lawn Tennis Club, has occupied the site in Hagley Park North since 1904.  In 2017 it included the Te Kura Tennis Club that had been based at Christchurch Boys High School.  It now markets itself as the Te Kura Hagley Park Tennis Club although its name as ground lessee remains as the Hagley Park Tennis Club.

5.2       In 2018 the Council approved the new hard surface tennis courts that are the subject of this current floodlighting proposal.

5.3       Existing floodlights of a slightly lower height (11 metres) to what are now being proposed service four other adjacent courts to the south.  The Council consented to these lights in 1996.

The Proposed Development

5.4       The Hagley Park Tennis Club has requested permission to erect new floodlight towers to cover four existing tennis courts.  This will comprise six approximately 12 metre high poles, each topped with fixed floodlights.  The middle two poles will have four floodlights, with two facing in opposite directions.  The other four poles at the ends of the four court area will have two floodlights directed into the court area.  The floodlights will be 800W LED lights that are more compact than the existing adjacent floodlights.  Power supply will be via cables run from the club house through conduits that were installed under the courts at the time of their development.

5.5       The proposed location of the light poles is shown on the following aerial view.  The accompanying schematic side view indicates the potential position and scale of the proposed lights (measurements in millimetres).

5.6       The reason the club is making this application is to provide illumination over the presently unlit courts, allowing them to be used when it is dark.  It will improve the club’s overall lighted court capacity to cater for its existing membership numbers and allow twilight and after dark play and coaching.

5.7       The club wishes to use the new lighting in a similar manner as the existing lighting on the adjacent four courts.  They will be available four evenings per week (Monday to Thursday) over the autumn and winter months between the hours of 5.30 pm and 8 pm and will shut-off automatically at 8 pm if they have not already been turned off.

Public Notification

5.8       The Hagley Park Reference group (HPRG) at its meeting on 27 October 2021 received information on the proposed floodlights from Tim Preston, representing the Club.  The HPRG expressed consensus and support for the installation of the lights as there were no concerns around light spill given there were no residential neighbours to be impacted.

5.9       On Friday 28 January 2022 we emailed a consultation leaflet about the proposed new floodlights to affected or interested parties including the applicant and individual members of the Hagley Park Reference Group (HPRG)

5.10    Council published a public notice in The Press on Saturday 29 January and on the Christchurch City Council’s website on Tuesday 15 February 2022.

5.11    The consultation leaflet informed readers that if they wished to enquire about and/or comment on the proposal they could do so by phoning or emailing the report writer by Wednesday 2 March 2022.

5.12    Two parties made contact before Monday 21 February 2022 and staff met with them to provide information and answer questions.

5.13    As at 23 February 2022 we had not received any comments or feedback.  If we receive any feedback by the concluding date of 2 March 2022 we will provide them to Community Board.

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

5.14.1 This is considered a metropolitan site that affects all of Christchurch.

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 (2021 - 2031):

6.1.1   Activity: Parks and Foreshore

·     Level of Service: 6.8.5 Satisfaction with the overall availability of recreation facilities within the city’s parks and foreshore network.  - Resident satisfaction with the availability of recreation facilities across the parks and foreshore network: >= 70%.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2       The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, particularly goal one of the Physical Recreation and Sport Strategy – a safe physical environment that encourages participation in recreation and sport.

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.

6.4       The proposed development is entirely within the already wholly developed area of the tennis club and, other than an expected periodic light spill that will be contained largely within the club’s area, there will be no adverse effect on the nearby Avon River corridor and trees.

6.5       The notification brochure was sent to Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd, and the Mana Whenua have been consulted through the internal engagement process and have not raised any issues.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.6       No natural features of the park are affected nor is there any addition to hard surface coverage of the park.  There will be additional power consumption, however, the lighting uses efficient LED technology.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7       The access road into Hagley Park and to the Botanic Gardens will remain open and unaffected. There is no impact on accessibility.

7.   Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement – The Council is responsible for its own costs incurred in reporting the proposed development.  All floodlight/tower, power connection and resource/building consent costs are the responsibility of the Hagley Park Tennis Club.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – None for the Council.

7.3       Funding Source - Parks Unit operational budget for Parks Planning response and reporting.

Other He mea anō

7.4       There are no other resource implications.

8.   Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1       Hagley Park North is a recreation reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977.  It is on land held in fee simple title as a reserve for recreation purposes by the Christchurch Corporation (that is, the Mayor, Councillors, and Citizens of the City of Christchurch).  It is administered and managed as a sports park by the Council’s Parks Unit.

8.2       The Hagley Park Tennis Club has a ground lease for the whole of the area used by the club for tennis activity purposes, including the tennis courts, clubhouse and car parking area.  The lease allows for the installation of new floodlights with landowner approval.

8.3       Landowner approval for installation of floodlights on specific sites on sports parks comprises two separate elements and is delegated as follows:

8.3.1   To the community board that has the park in its area of jurisdiction for its decision on installing floodlights on that park.  In this case this delegation has been retained by the Council as the park is of metropolitan significance. Page 94 of the Delegations Register applies:

“To decide on the installation of floodlights on sports parks (whether the sports park is located on a park or reserve).  Subject to the Council obtaining the necessary resource consents.”

8.3.2   To the Head of Parks and the General Manager Citizens & Community for a joint decision on the siting of floodlights on a park. Manager approval of this report constitutes this delegated decision. Page 46 of the Council’s Delegations Register applies:

“To make decisions on the siting of floodlights on sports parks, noting the appropriate community board would have decided on the installation of those floodlights.”

8.4       The Executive Leadership Team (ELT) on 20 February 2022 approved a staff recommendation to the Council’s Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee that the proposed installation of the floodlights on the Hagley Park Tennis Club court area is a metropolitan matter to be considered and resolved by the Committee instead of the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.  ELT further required that the Community Board’s views, after public notification had been completed, would be considered in the staff report to the Committee.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.5       Any required resource consents or building consents are to be obtained by the club prior to installation of the floodlights.

8.6       All costs and legal requirements in association with the electricity supply, upkeep, maintenance and insurance in regard the floodlights are to be incurred by the club.

8.7       There is no legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision.  Therefore, advice has not been sought from the Council’s Legal Service Delivery.

9.   Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       There is low risk associated with this proposal. The club tripled its membership in 2017 with the addition of the members of the Te Kura Tennis Club, and numbers have held at around the same increased level to the present time.  The new lights will help to maintain the membership level by providing improved lit court capacity.

9.2       There is minimal, if any, risk to the Council in approving the application. The club will be responsible for all aspects of the lighting tower installation and maintenance to a high standard. The club will also be responsible for any required Temporary Access Licence / Traffic Management Plan during the installation phase, and Health and Safety requirements at all times.

 

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Hagley Park North Tennis Court New Floodlights -  Proposed Floodlight Location Plan - March 2022

32

b  

Hagley Park North Tennis Court New Floodlights - Christchurch Civic Trust Comments - March 2022 (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

c  

Hagley Park North Tennis Court New Floodlights - Staff Advice in reply to Christchurch Civic Trust Comments - March 2022 (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

 

 

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name

Location / File Link

 

 

 

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

 

 

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Derek Roozen - Senior Network Planner Parks

Approved By

Kelly Hansen - Manager Parks Planning & Asset Management

Rupert Bool - Manager Hagley Park

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

10.   Slow Speed Neighbourhoods - Scarborough Hill

Reference Te Tohutoro:

22/115104

Report of Te Pou Matua:

Gemma Dioni, Senior Transportation Engineer gemma.dioni@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager  Pouwhakarae:

Jane Davis, General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services, jane.davis@ccc.govt.nz

 

1.   Purpose of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to consider the consultation feedback and views on the proposed speed limit changes for the Slow Speed Neighbourhood on Scarborough Hill, and to make a recommendation to Council.

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

1.4       The recommended option is to reduce the speed limits from 50 km/hr to 40 km/hr in accordance with Attachment A

2.   Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommends that the Council:

1.         Approves, pursuant to Part 4 Clause 27 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 and Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017, that the speed limits on the following roads be revoked and set generally as identified in Attachment A to the staff report and listed below in clauses 1a-1r (including resultant changes made to the Christchurch City Council Register of Speed Limits and associated Speed Limit Maps).

a.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Flowers Track (entire length).

b.         Approve that the permanent speed limit on Flowers track (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

c.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Godley Drive (entire length).

d.         Approve that the permanent speed limit on Godley Drive (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

e.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hours on Heberden Avenue commencing at a point 200 metres north east of its intersection with Esplanade and extending in a north easterly direction to its intersection with Taylors Mistake Road.

f.          Approve that the permanent speed limit on Heberden Avenue commencing at a point 200 metres north east of its intersection with Esplanade and extending in a north easterly direction to its intersection with Taylors Mistake Road be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

g.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Langdale Place (entire length).

h.         Approve that the permanent speed limit on Langdale Place (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

i.          Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Peninsula View (entire length).

j.          Approve that the permanent speed limit on Peninsula View (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

k.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Scarborough Road (entire length).

l.          Approve that the permanent speed limit on Scarborough Road (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

m.       Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Smugglers Cove (entire length).

n.         Approve that the permanent speed limit on Smugglers Cove (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

o.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Taylors Mistake Road (entire length).

p.         Approve that the permanent speed limit on Taylors Mistake Road (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

q.         Revoke the existing permanent speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour on Whitewash Head Road (entire length).

r.          Approve that the permanent speed limit on Whitewash Head Road (entire length) be set at 40 kilometres per hour.

2.         Approve that these resolutions take effect when the signage that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place (or removed in the case of revocations).

3.         Authorise staff to make any typographical changes or to correct minor errors or omissions in the above descriptions of the roads to which the speed limits apply (being changes that do not affect the materiality of the resolutions).

3.   Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1       The preferred option is to change the speed limits as outlined in the staff recommendations in this report for the following reasons:

3.1.1   Traffic speed data indicates that the most road users in this area already recognise that the currently posted speed limit is not safe and appropriate for this area, and are travelling below this limit.

3.1.2   Reduces the likelihood and severity of crashes and improves safety on local roads.

3.1.3   Aligns with the overall vision of the Ministry of Transport / Te Manatū Waka New Zealand Road Safety Strategy - Road to Zero 2020-2030.

3.2       Achieving safe and appropriate speeds that reflect the road function, design, safety, and use for safer use by all. Local neighbourhood roads are low volume and low speed roads and are where we would see more of our vulnerable road users such as school children, cyclists and pedestrians on the road and footpaths.

3.3       Council determined through the Long Term Plan (LTP) to implement at least five slow speed neighbourhoods per year over the next three years.  The Scarborough Hill Slow Speed Neighbourhood is identified as one of the five neighbourhoods.

4.   Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Maintain the status quo

4.1       Maintain the status quo – Retain the existing speed limits.

4.2       The advantages of this option include:

4.2.1   There are no identified benefits to road safety or consistency of speed limits from retaining the existing speed limits.

4.2.2   No further costs are incurred for providing or modifying speed limit signs.

4.3       The disadvantages of the option include:

4.3.1   Does not align with the objectives of the Waka Kotahi Speed Management Guide 2016.

4.3.2   Does not align with the overall vision of Road Safety Strategy- Road to Zero 2020-2030.

4.3.3   Does not align the posted speed limits with the operating speeds, the safe and appropriate speeds, and does not help improve the credibility and consistency across the network.

4.3.4   Does not deliver one of the five slow speed neighbourhoods this financial year as identified in the Long Term Plan.

5.   Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1       Improving safety on local roads in Christchurch is a priority for Council and is also a national priority under the principles and guidance of the Road to Zero - New Zealand’s road safety strategy for 2020-2030. Road to Zero sets an initial target to reduce deaths and serious injuries on New Zealand’s roads, streets, cycleways, and footpaths by 40 percent over the next 10 years. There are several focus areas being looked at nationally to achieve this, but where significant difference can be made is through having safe and appropriate speeds on our roads.

5.2       It is proposed to reduce the speed limit from 50km/h to 40km/h on selected streets in Scarborough and Taylors Mistake.

5.3       There have been 6 reported crashes in this area over the 5-year period 2016-2020 (including available 2021 data). All of the crashes were non-injury, and most were single vehicle loss of control type crashes.

5.4       Neighbourhoods are areas where we can make the most difference with slower speeds to improve safety for these vulnerable road users, because everyone should be able to get where they’re going safely whether they are walking, cycling, driving, motorcycling, or accessing public transport.

5.5       These slower speeds will also assist in improving pedestrian connectivity through the neighbourhood by making it safer for people to cross to get where they are going.

5.6       The slow neighbourhood speed limit has been determined based on several speed management principles. The fundamental principle is that speed affects the severity of all crashes. Even when speed doesn’t cause the crash, it’s what will most likely determine whether anyone is killed, injured, or walks away unharmed from that crash.

5.7       Scarborough Road, Taylors Mistake Road, and the connected local road network has some history of community complaints and requests for service related to speed and associated concerns such as;

·   Safety of people walking on the road due to the absence of footpaths in some locations

·   Dangerous curves and absence of barriers

·   Presence of parked vehicles and narrow roadway making it difficult for opposing traffic to pass

5.8       In terms of existing operating speeds in the area, Council data for Scarborough Road shows that the average speed is 42.2 km/h.  Waka Kotahi data suggests that all roads in the area have mean operating speeds between 20-40 km/h. The Agency’s information also indicates an assessed 40 km/h safe and appropriate speed for all roads in the area.  Both sets of data indicates that most road users in this area already recognise that the currently posted speed limit is not safe and appropriate for this area, and are travelling below this limit. Implementing a lower speed limit will help to reinforce this safer driving behaviour, and help those unfamiliar with the area understand the safe and appropriate speed. Research suggests that, in some environments, changing speed limit signage alone (without complimentary engineering treatments) may result in a 2-3 km/h reduction in operating speeds. Installation of new speed limit signage in this area may also therefore result in a slight reduction in operating speeds.

5.9       Approval is required by the Council.  If approved, the recommendations will be implemented within the next financial year (generally around 6-8 weeks after the Contractor receives the request).

Community Views and Preferences

5.10    Residents were encouraged to head online from 5 November to 5 December 2021 to have their say.  A consultation summary is provided in Attachment B.

5.11    The consultation was advertised through a letter box flyer, Newsline story, social media posts on community Facebook pages, on-site signage and the online Have Your Say portal.

5.12    Council received 37 submissions.  The majority of submitters (31, 86%) were residents from Scarborough, Taylors Mistake and Sumner with the remainder from outside the project area. Two submitters did not provide an address. From the submissions received, 61% clearly supported the initiative and 17% clearly opposed.  Feedback from the remaining 25% of submitters showed no clear indication for or against.

5.13    Although the majority of submitters did support the slow speeds proposed there were concerns on the current state of the road between Sumner and Taylors Mistake, and requests for road surface repairs to be completed.

5.14    Key themes:

·   Clear signage reminding road users to slow down and give way (14%)

·   Repair road surfacing on the road between Sumner and Taylors Mistake (11%)

·   Widen Taylors Mistake Road (11%)

5.15    To complement the key themes, submitters also commented on the need for enforcement, footpath widening, and whether a corner mirror can be installed on the hairpin bend.

6.   Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       The New Zealand Road Safety Strategy - Road to Zero: sets a target to reduce death and serious injuries on New Zealand roads by 40% over the next 10 years. There are five key focus areas: infrastructure improvements and speed management, vehicle safety, work related road safety, road user choices, and system management.

6.2       Waka Kotahi’s Speed Management Guide 2016: setting safe and appropriate speeds, consistency and credibility of speed limits.

6.3       Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017: requires that road controlling authorities must set speed limits that are safe and appropriate, and encourages a consistent approach to speed management throughout New Zealand.

6.4       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.

6.5       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031):

6.5.1   Activity: Transport

·     Level of Service: 10.0.6.1 Reduce the number of death and serious injury crashes on the local road network  - ≤ 105 crashes

·     Level of Service: 10.5.1 Limit deaths and serious injury crashes per capita for cyclists and pedestrians - ≤ 12 crashes per 100,000 residents

·     Level of Service: 16.0.10 Maintain the perception that Christchurch is a walking friendly city - ≥85% resident satisfaction

·     Level of Service: 10.0.2 Increase the share of non-car modes in daily trips - ≥17% of trips undertaken by non-car modes

·     Level of Service: 10.5.2 Improve the perception that Christchurch is a cycling friendly city) - ≥65% resident satisfaction

·     Level of Service: 10.5.3 More people are choosing to travel by cycling - ≥12,000 average daily cyclist detections

·     Level of Service: 10.0.41 Reduce emissions and greenhouse gases related to transport - ≤1.10 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents

6.5.2   Capital Programme

·     Capital Programme ID 65987 - $250,000 capital expenditure per year for three years to implement at least five slow speed neighbourhoods a year.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.6       The decisions in this report are consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8       This proposal includes measures to slow vehicle speeds and improve road safety.  This could encourage people to use alternative modes to the private vehicle which will result in positive changes to reduce carbon emissions and the effects of Climate Change.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9       This proposal will result in vehicles travelling at reduced speeds, which will provide a safer and more accessible environment for all road users, including pedestrians and cyclists.

7.   Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       Cost to Implement – approximately $13,000.

7.2       Maintenance/Ongoing costs – approximately $2,000/year.

7.3       Funding Source - Slow Speed Neighbourhoods project 65987

Other

7.4       None identified.

8.   Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1       Speed Limits must be set in accordance with the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017.

8.2       Clause 27 (Part 4) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to set speed limits by resolution.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

8.4       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 – 8.3.

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Slow Speed Neighbourhood - Scarborough - Plan For Approval

40

b

Consultation Sumary - Slow Speed Neighbourhood - Scarborough

41

 

 

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name

Location / File Link

 

 

 

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

 

 

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Gemma Dioni - Senior Transportation Engineer

Hannah Ballantyne - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Stephen Wright - Acting Manager Operations (Transport)

Steffan Thomas - Head of Technical Services & Design

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 





Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

11.   Woodham Park - Former Caretaker's Residence and Grounds

Reference / Te Tohutoro:

21/263711

Report of / Te Pou Matua:

Maria Adamski, Asset Engineer - Parks Heritage & Buildings, maria.adamski@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager / Pouwhakarae:

Mary Richardson, GM Citizens & Community, Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

1.   Purpose of the Report / Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek approval to demolish the former caretaker's house and outbuildings in Woodham Park at 157 Woodham Road.  This report has been written to progress the Parks Unit's intention to remove the caretaker's house following the last caretaker having vacated it in 2009.

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 by the removal of the house being of low impact to the community with benefits including the opening up the road frontage for increased surveillance, incorporating the site formally into Woodham Park and deterring unauthorised behaviour.

 

2.   Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board recommend to Council to:

1.         Approve the removal of the former caretaker’s house, garage and shed from Woodham Park and incorporate the area into the park with appropriate landscape treatment and enhancement.

 

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

3.1       This report continues a process started in 2009 to develop a landscape plan for Woodham Park and to remove the caretaker's house to incorporate the site into the larger park.

3.2       Woodham Park requires increased road frontage presence to make the park more visible and inviting, increase passive surveillance consistent with CPTED principles (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design), and to remove unsightly structures. The house is in disrepair and attracting unauthorised activities that are affecting neighbours.

 

 

4.   Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1       Instead of demolition, the Community Board have expressed an interest in making the building available for community use. Proposals to occupy the house would need to be invited through a ‘Request For Proposals’ process. All proposals would be evaluated in accordance with the requirements of Section 77 of the Local Government Act 2002.  The park is a Public Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 and consists of three land parcels.  One land parcel is held for recreation purposes. The process to classify the other two, including the main parcel on which the house sits, is to yet to be completed. Under the Reserves Act 1977 the building would need to support a recreational pursuit occurring on the park. Community use must relate directly to the park or this section of the park would need to be surveyed and go through a Reserves Act process to be classified as Local Purpose Reserve. This option is not recommended due the coat associated and time delays.

4.1.1   Advantages

·   The former caretaker’s house would be retained as evidence of the historic association of caretakers housed at garden parks for the care and maintenance of that park.

·   Potential community use of the building.

4.1.2   Disadvantages

·   The Council would be required to repair the property before it could be leased. There is no budget in the LTP for this work which is estimated at up to $400,000.

·   It is likely that building and resource consents would be required for community or commercial use as a change of use.

·   This option would require substantial capital input from the third party to bring the building and associated facilities up to community use standards.

·   Lost opportunity to open up the road frontage of the park.

4.2       Public rental of the property. This option does not comply with the requirements of Section 44(1) of the Reserves Act 1977. This option is discounted.

4.3       Upgrade the property to enable it to be re-utilised for staff rental accommodation - This option has minimal community benefit apart from providing limited on-site surveillance of the park and deterring unwanted behaviour.  On-site accommodation is no longer provided for staff unless there is a specific requirement to do so.  This option would incur an estimated cost of $400,000 to upgrade the building to comply with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and comply with the Healthy Homes Standards. Ongoing maintenance and administration costs would be approximately $1,000 per year. This option is discounted.

4.4       Do nothing would be an inappropriate course of action contrary to responsible management of public assets. It would lead to complete deterioration of the asset, create a safety hazard and encourage activities unacceptable to the local community. This option is discounted.

5.   Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1       The recommended option is to demolish and remove the existing buildings and integrate the area into Woodham Park.

5.1.1   Advantages:

·   Provides for an increased road frontage presence to make the park more visible and inviting and removes an unsightly building that is attracting antisocial behaviour.

·   Opens up sightlines for increased park surveillance

·   Provides additional open space for the general public to enjoy as well as developing the plant collection and garden content for the benefit of the users

·   Provides public access to a number of interesting plant specimens in the garden of the house including weeping blossom, old fashion roses, michelia, golden totara and camelias.

·   Provides an opportunity to highlight the park’s colonial heritage theme of acquiring former homesteads for community parks in the 40s and 50s.

5.1.2   Disadvantages:

·   Removal of a building that could potentially be used if upgraded.

·   Removal of the building adds to landfill.

5.2       In 1940, the Christchurch City Council purchased 1.32 hectare ‘Woodham’ for £2280 from Captain Ivimey for a children's playground and neighbourhood park.  It contained a two-storey residence, which was partly removed in 1941, outbuildings and two glasshouses.

5.3       In August 1941 a design was prepared for a caretaker’s house using salvaged materials from the original residence. These include some windows (lead light window), front gate and boundary wall.

5.4       The house had a resident caretaker up until 1996 and was subsequently a Parks staff residential tenancy until 2009. The house has been vacant since 2009. It is situated in a partly fenced off area to the east of the Woodham Road entrance to Woodham Park at 157 Woodham Road.

Location of house at Woodham Park (Source Canterbury Maps)

5.5       The land is vested in the Council as public reserve. Gazette Notice 1944 p1363, New Zealand Gazette.

5.6       Woodham Park is zoned as Open Space Community Park in the District Plan. The Park is managed as a Garden and Heritage Park.

5.7       Woodham Park has been identified as a High Risk Archaeological Area. This is due to the site being associated with pre-1900 human activity.

5.8       The proposed works at Woodham Park have been appraised, and an archaeological authority from Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga is not required. The possibility that unexpected archaeological material could be found during works cannot be discounted, though it is considered unlikely, and work would be carried out following Archaeological Discovery Protocols.

5.9       The house is currently unoccupied and boarded up. It is increasingly deteriorating. Security patrols, due to unauthorised occupancy, vandalism, graffiti and rubbish dumping, are in place.

5.10    A neighbour has raised concerns about the undesirable behaviour on the site and the impact it is having on their family.

5.11    The perimeter fence is missing in sections, the garden requires renovation/ restoration and would benefit from enhancement. The missing fence on the boundary with 169 Woodham Road has been replaced.

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

5.12.1 Waikura Linwood - Central-Heathcote Community Board

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

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1       This report supports the :

6.1.1   Activity: Parks & Foreshore

·     Level of Service: 6.0.1 Parks are provided managed and maintained in a clean, tidy, safe, functional and equitable manner (Maintenance). - Maintenance plan Key performance indicators  >= 90% achieved.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2       The decision is consistent with the following Council Policy.

·      Physical Recreation and Sport Strategy 2002 goal for a safe physical environment that encourages participation in recreation and sport.

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.

6.4       The proposal to demolish the house was forwarded to Mahaanui Kurataio Limited for comment. They have responded stating ‘rūnanga do not consider this to be relevant to them'.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.5       Consideration will be given to recycling and ethically disposing of building materials.

6.6       The removal of the buildings will increase the vegetative area of the site.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7       The preferred option provides an increased publically accessible road frontage to Woodham Park.

7.   Resource Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1       The house is clad with weatherboard and roofed with corrugated iron. It has three bedrooms and is of original design internally, having a kitchen/dining room and separate lounge.  It is typical of dwellings built at that time.  There is also a separate garage and shed situated upon the site.  On the basis of replacement cost, less depreciation and obsolescence, our current book value of the house is $0.00.  The garage and sheds are in a poor state of repair and are at the end of their life, and therefore considered to have no value. 

7.2       Cost to Implement - To demolish the buildings has been quoted at $28,000. Development of the site to allow access to the Park will be undertaken within the current Parks development and maintenance work programme.

7.3       Maintenance/Ongoing costs - it is anticipated an increase in resources will be required to tidy the site and plantings. To begin with the Parks Unit will aim to find the resources within existing budgets. The previous maintenance budget of the property would be transferred for grounds maintenance, any additional resource required will be identified in a future Annual Plan/ Long Term Plan.

7.4       To gain the full potential of this proposal, the Parks Unit will develop a landscape plan to incorporate the site and plantings fully into Woodham Park. Funding will be through the Long Term Plan as a capital project.

7.5       The building removal and maintenance costs can be accommodated in the Parks operating budget for 2021/22.

Other / He mea anō

7.6       There are no other considerations.

8.   Legal Implications / Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1       Woodham Park does not have a Management Plan.

8.2       As there is no specific delegation in the delegations register the Council has delegated authority to make a decision.

8.3       There are no legal impediments to this option.

8.4       The house is not scheduled as a heritage item or in a heritage setting. Resource consent for demolition or redevelopment is not required.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9.   Risk Management Implications / Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1       An Asbestos Demolition Survey has been undertaken.  The small amount of asbestos found will be professionally removed.

9.2       This is a high risk site for non-Maori artefacts.  Work has been assessed and is permitted to progress under Archaeological Discovery Protocols.

 

 

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments for this report.

 

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

Document Name

Location / File Link

Section 44 Reserves Act

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1977/0066/latest/DLM444305.html

 

 

 

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

Maria Adamski - Asset Engineer - Buildings and Heritage

Approved By

Wolfgang Bopp - Director Botanic Gardens & Garden Parks

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

12.   Avebury House Heritage Park - Management of Park Bookings

Reference Te Tohutoro:

21/1636951

Report of Te Pou Matua:

Kathy Jarden, Team Leader Leasing; kathy.jarden@ccc.govt.com

General Manager Pouwhakarae:

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

 

 

1.   Brief Summary

1.1       The purpose of this report is to update the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.  The report has been written as a reply to the Board’s 31 August 2020 request:

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

1.      Grants a lease to Avebury House Community Trust to manage Avebury House and adjacent grounds as a community building for a period of up to 20 years with annual rental based on a return of operating surplus income as prescribed in the agenda report.

2.      Authorises the Property Consultancy Manager to conclude and administer the terms and conditions of the lease.

Part B

3.      Requests staff advice on how to make heritage parks more user-friendly for the community.

Note: The advice is to include the ability to use larger numbers of furniture, marques and gazebos on heritage parks for weddings or other large community gatherings than is currently permitted.

1.2       The lease with Avebury House Community Trust was entered into effective 1 October 2020 having a final expiry date of 30 September 2040.

1.3       With regard to Part B item 3, the Heritage Gardens team together with Avebury House Community Trust have entered into an agreement for the management of the Lawn Area at Avebury House (shown Green on the plan below).

1.4       The Council has appointed the Trust, as manager, to:

1.4.1   promote the use of the Lawn Area

1.4.2   arrange and manage bookings for hire of the Lawn Area

1.4.3   retain 25% of income from hire of the Lawn Area as a management fee.

1.5       The initial term is for one (1) year commencing 1 October 2021 and may be renewed on a yearly basis by mutual agreement of both parties.

1.6       In managing the bookings, the Trust is able to offer one point of contact for members of the public who hire Avebury House and the gardens, for example weddings, birthdays and celebrations.

1.7       Both parties have agreed to the terms and conditions which sets out the requirements for such things as the number of occasions permitted each calendar year, permitted furniture, marquees, sound equipment, etc.

1.8       The Council's website has been updated to direct the public to contact the Trust for bookings.

1.9       The Heritage Garden and Leasing Team Leaders will meet with the Trust as required throughout the year to review any concerns and assess the success of the bookings of the Lawn Area.

1.10    The successful implementation of this park management agreement will then be considered as a model going forward for activation by other community groups with an interest in their neighbouring Heritage Gardens.

2.   Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receive the information in the Avebury House Heritage Park - Management of Park Bookings Report.

 

 

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name

Location / File Link

 

 

 

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

 

 

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Kathy Jarden - Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Approved By

Wolfgang Bopp - Director Botanic Gardens & Garden Parks

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

13.   Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Plan: Monitoring Report July to December 2021

Reference Te Tohutoro:

21/922639

Report of Te Pou Matua:

Liz Beaven
Community Board Advisor Linwood-Central-Heathcote
Liz.Beaven@ccc.govt.nz

General Manager Pouwhakarae:

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

 

 

1.   Brief Summary

1.1       The purpose of this report is to update on progress to achieve the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board's 2020-22 Board Plan Priorities. 

1.2       The Board Plan Monitoring Report is presented to the Board bi-annually.

2.   Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Receives the information in the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board's 2020-22 Board Plan Monitoring Report for July to December 2021.

 

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Plan Monitoring Report July to December 2021

57

 

 

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name

Location / File Link

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

Arohanui Grace - Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

Liz Beaven - Community Board Advisor

Approved By

Arohanui Grace - Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 











Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

14.   Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board Area Report - March 2022

Reference Te Tohutoro:

21/1756246

Report of Te Pou Matua:

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

General Manager Pouwhakarae:

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

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

This report provides the Board with an overview on initiatives and issues current within the Community Board area.

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 March 2022.

3.   Community Support, Governance and Partnership Activity

3.1       Community Governance Projects

Activity

Detail

Timeline

Strategic Alignment

Project Title

As much detail as required or entered previously. Length will change depending on current status of the activity

Ongoing, Completed, or Date

Board Priority

Community Outcome

Te Pou Toetoe Linwood Pool Community Celebration Event

Community Celebration was been cancelled as a result of the move to the Red Covid-19 response Level. Discussion from the steering group was to look into either a 1st Birthday Celebration or an end of year holidays on the park style event. Group will meet again once the Covid-19 Response level drops.

Year end 2022

Development of Linwood Park and Te Pou Toetoe: Linwood Pool are aligned.

 

3.2       Community Funding Summary

3.2.1   Community Board Discretionary Response Fund 2020-21 – as at 28 February 2022:

·    Discretionary Response Fund unallocated balance for 2021/22 is $20,113.62

·    Youth Achievement and Development Fund unallocated balance for 2021/22 is $1,600.

·    Light Bulb Moments Fund unallocated balance for 2021/22 is $10,926.

·    The 2021/22Discretionary Response Funding Spreadsheet is attached. (Attachment A).

3.2.2   2022/23 Strengthening Community Fund - Applications for the 2022/23 Strengthening Communities Fund will be opening on 21 March 2022 and will close on 26 April 2022.

3.3       Participation in and Contribution to Decision Making

3.3.1   Report back on other Activities contributing to Community Board Plan [for items not included in the above table but are included in Community Board Plan]

·     Lancaster Park – The Community Consultation is well underway with all events continuing to operate under the Red Alert Setting. Current responses are at over 110 with the consultation closing on 9 March 2022.

·     Phillipstown Hub – Staff are assisting the Phillipstown Hub Trust with future planning for the hub when the lease expires. 

·     Linwood Village Streetscape plan – The Community Consultation is underway, with a drop-in session held at the Linwood Community Arts Centre on 17 February 2022. This was well attended by the community.

3.3.2   Council Engagement and Consultation.

·     Have your Say – at the time of writing the report the following consultations were open within the Community Board Area and city-wide consultation:

Topic

Closing Date

Link

Linwood Village Streetscape plan

2 March 2022

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/486

Lancaster Park Community Spaces

9 March 2022

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/478

Worcester Street Cycleway Connection

15 March 2022

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/488

Antigua Street cycle improvements

15 March 2022

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/487

Ferry Road cycleway trial

1 April 2022

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/379

Christchurch Gondola Top Terminal Building – New Lease

27 April 2022

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/485

·     Council’s Annual Plan2022-23 – The Council approved the Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2022-23 to go out for consultation from 11 March 2022 to 18 April 2022.  The Board is asked to consider if the Board will make a submission.

·     Start Work Notices – Various Start Work Notices have been sent to the Board throughout the month.  All Board area and city-wide start work notices can be found at: https://ccc.govt.nz/transport/works.

3.4       Governance Advice

3.4.1   Public Forum – The Board received the following public forum presentation at its 16 February 2022 meeting:

·     Hereford Street (Fitzgerald Avenue to Stanmore Road) Road Surface.

3.4.2   Board Requests – The Board made the following requests at its 16 February 2022 meeting:

·     Requests staff advice on the timeline for resurfacing Dawson Street.   Note: The Board wishes to have the information well ahead of the planned resurfacing.

·     Requests staff advice to look at an appropriate procurement options for smaller works by using other contractors than the Council’s current contractors.

·     Requests staff advice on amending the Council’s Infrastructure Design Standards to accommodate the special characteristics of a woonerf street (pedestrian focussed street) in the street/pavement renewal programme.

·     Requests that the matters regarding Dawson Street be raised at the Board’s monthly report and presentation to the Council, after the Board has received the advice from staff.

·     Requests a report on changing the name of Dawson Street to Carters Lane.

·     Requests staff advice on the installation of no stopping restrictions and use of street furniture in lieu of no stopping restrictions at the entrance of Dawson Street (Kilmore Street end).

·     The Board agreed to request staff advice on the reasons for the decrease of security at Whakawhitinga Pahi Bus Interchange.

·     The Board agreed to write a letter to the Chairperson of Environment Canterbury advising Environment Canterbury on the matters raised in Ms McConchie’s public forum presentation to the Board’s 16 February 2022 meeting regarding behaviour on the city’s public transport buses.

·     Requests staff advice on the Council Community Computer Scheme: on how the computers are allocated what is provided with the computers and how do community organisations apply to the scheme.

·     Agrees that the Edible and Sustainable and the Garden Pride Awards certificates be posted out to recipients.

·     Requests that the matter of Strengthening Community Funding Allocation 2022-23 be raised at the Board’s monthly report and presentation to the Council asking the Council to provide community groups certainty on how  funding will be allocated for the remainder of the current Community  Boards’ term and at the start of the new Community Boards’ term.

·     The Board agreed to request staff to erect simpler signage around the Estuary to advise that dogs are not permitted.

·     The Board agreed to request staff advice on additional signage for Sumner that acknowledges the issue of the swimming beaches and encourages dog owners to be mindful that the beaches are now swimming beaches and not to let their dogs run free.

·     The Board agreed to request staff advice on undertaking a small review on the Dog Control Bylaw (like the Freedom Camping Bylaw recently) to update the Sumner Beach dog control areas and for staff to include Sumner Beach areas when the Dog Control Bylaw is reviewed.

·     The Board agreed to request staff advice on the timeline of the Greening the East Development Plan progress report.

·     The Board agreed to request staff advice on progressing the installation of a tree and plaque in remembrance of Sally Buck, former City Councillor and Community Board member before the disestablishment of the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board.

3.4.3   Briefings - The Board received briefings during February 2022 about the following:

·     Scheme Designs for Four Central Business District Cycles Safety Projects.

·     Service Request Reporting.

·     Ihutai-Estuary and Coastal Draft Stormwater Management Plan.

·     Slow Neighbourhood Programme – Ōpāwa.

·     Slow Neighbourhoods Programme (Future Projects).

3.4.4   The Board held a workshop on 9 February 2022 on the year’s upcoming Board and Governance Team work programme.

4.   Advice Provided to the Community Board  

4.1       Central City Cycling Accessibility and Parking Projects – Memorandum advising of previously Central Business District Cycling Accessibility and Parking Projects update. (Attachment B).

4.2       Worcester Street – Linwood Avenue to England Street – Memorandum in reply to the Board’s 20 October 2021 request: The Board discussed residents’ concerns about vehicle speed on Worcester Street between Linwood Avenue and England Street.  Board members were advised that residents should report speeding to the Police (phone 105) as motorists behaviour and speed is a police matter.  The Board agreed to request staff advice on ways to reduce traffic speed on Worcester Street between Linwood Avenue and England Street. (Attachment C)

4.3       Rapaki Track – Provision of Toilets – Memorandum in reply to the Board’s 20 October 2021 request: The Board agreed to seek staff advice to the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote and Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere Community Boards on the possible provision and funding of a public toilet at Rapaki Track. (Attachment D).

4.4       Boulder Bay Sanitation – Memorandum in reply to the Board’s 6 October 2021 request: The Board agreed to request staff advice on the use of the fund that has been set up to provide for amenity, environmental and heritage enhancements in the local area including potential purchase of baches, a public toilet at Boulder Bay, track signage and interpretation boards, predator control and native plantings (Council Report: Hearings Panel Report on the Proposal for the Baches on Unformed Legal Road at Taylors Mistake April 2019) to progress the installation of a public toilet in Boulder Bay.  (Attachment E).

4.5       Graffiti Report – the Graffiti Snapshot report for January 2022 is attached.  (Attachment F)

4.6       Customer Service Requests Board Area Report - providing an overview of the number of Customer Service Requests that have been received over the past month, including the types of requests being received and a breakdown of how they are being reported from 1 January 2022– 31 January 2022 and 1 February to 28 February 2022 are attached.  (Attachment G).

 

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.

Title

Page

a

Discretionary Response Fund Allocations March 2022

72

b

Memorandum: Central City Cycling Accessibility and Parking Project Elements for Consultation - 26 January 2022

73

c

Memorandum: Worcester Street Linwood Avenue to England Street - 26 January 2022

89

d

Memorandum: Rapaki Track - Provision of Toilets - 21 February 2022

91

e

Memorandum: Boulder Bay Sanitation - 22 February 2022

93

f

Graffiti Snapshot Report - January 2022

95

g

Customer Service Requests Report - 1 January - 31 January & 1 February to 28 February 2022

97

 

 

 

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Bipul Adhikari - Support Officer

Liz Beaven - Community Board Advisor

Arohanui Grace - Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

Jae Youn Lee - Community Recreation Advisor

Jules Lee - Community Development Advisor

Jane Walders - Support Officer

Approved By

Arohanui Grace - Manager Community Governance, Linwood-Central-Heathcote

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

  


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 


Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

















Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 



Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 



Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 



Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 



Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 



Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board

16 March 2022

 

 

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

16 March 2022

 

 

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

16 March 2022

 

 

 

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

9.

Hagley Park North - Tennis Court New Floodlights

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment b - Hagley Park North Tennis Court New Floodlights - Christchurch Civic Trust Comments - March 2022

s7(2)(a)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons

To protect the privacy of staff.

Can be released, with redactions where necessary, once the final decision has been made.

 

Attachment c - Hagley Park North Tennis Court New Floodlights - Staff Advice in reply to Christchurch Civic Trust Comments - March 2022

s7(2)(a)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons

To protect the privacy of staff

Can be released, with redactions where necessary, once the final decision has been made.