Agenda of Council - Tuesday, 14 March 2023

Council

14 March 2023

6. Ōtautahi Christchurch Organics Processing Plant Solutions (Public Update)
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/233406
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Lynette Ellis, Head of Transport & Waste Management (Lynette.ellis@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Information Update and Report Origin

1.1 Update to the Public on the Ōtautahi Christchurch Organics Processing Plant Solutions Procurement.

1.2 On 28 April 2022, the Finance and Performance Committee Resolved in part to, in principle, relocate the Organics Processing Facility to an alternative site, and requested that staff:
- approach the market for options for location, partnerships, joint ventures, commercial opportunities [FPCO 2022/00019].

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receive the information in the Ōtautahi Christchurch Organics Processing Plant Solutions (Public Update) Report.

3. Brief Summary

3.1 The Council is seeking a solution to address the processing of the city’s organic waste, with the primary objective being to manage the household organics generated in the city. The solution must be able to work reliably and efficiently with feedstock received from current kerbside Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) collection along with garden waste from our city transfer stations. In addition, the ability to accept kerbside organics from other Territorial Authorities is also a consideration.

3.2 Solutions must meet a minimum standard of sustainability, our levels of service, organisational strategic objectives and be consistent with government policy. Further to this, solutions that also recognise the potential value in a facility or facilities of a suitable scale to manage additional organic waste sources from the wider region, including commercial waste, are desired.

3.3 There are four key elements that make up the complete solution that all need to be brought together to deliver the best outcome. The four key elements are:

3.3.1 Suitable site and location, including access to utilities and consented for a period not less than 15-years;

3.3.2 Selection of the most appropriate technology, including full odour containment and treatment;

3.3.3 Secure end markets for all finished products;

3.3.4 Selection of a suitably qualified and experienced operator.

3.4 Following the Finance and Performance Committee meeting on 28 April 2022, where it was Resolved, in part, that the Committee:

1. Agree in principle the relocation of the Organics Processing Facility to an alternative site

2. Request staff to:

a) approach the market for options for location, partnerships, joint ventures, commercial opportunities, and

b) report to Council on short listed relocation options with a comparison to redevelopment of the current site by end February 2023.

3.5 A confidential Procurement Strategy was presented to the Finance and Performance Committee on 30 June 2022 in relation to the Resolution noted under 3.4.

3.5.1 A two-stage procurement strategy was recommended and the Finance and Performance Committee Resolved that staff proceed to market with an Expression of Interest (EOI).

3.6 Due to the wide range of organics processing options, it was not possible to fully define the latter phase of the procurement process without knowing what the market response would be to the initial phase. Accordingly, staff developed a multi-phase procurement process with a two-stage procurement plan. The outcome of the first stage has informed the strategy of the second stage.

3.7 Stage 1 was approved by the Finance and Performance Committee on 30 June 2022 and in August 2022 Council released a request for Expressions of Interest.

3.8 Prior to commencing the EOI, Council undertook a soft market engagement approach including a request for information (RFI) process with the objective of:

· maximising participation in this process, including overseas suppliers; and

· generating new ideas, solutions and feedback that will be used to help develop and inform the stage two of the procurement plan.

3.9 The responses from the soft market engagement and subsequent RFI were considered and helped to shape the EOI.

3.10 Council received a total of 15 responses to the EOI and has short-listed this to 6 prospective suppliers who will be invited to submit a competitive bid through a closed Request for Proposal process.

3.10.1 Six EOI respondents have been shortlisted on the basis that these are the solutions that provide a wide range of potential technology options which have been proposed for specific sites in the wider Canterbury region and demonstrate alignment with Council’s objectives to at least an adequate level without any deficiencies

3.11 The EOI process has now been concluded and Stage 2 of the Procurement process will be presented to Council on 14 March 2023, to seek approval to proceed with a Request for Proposal (RFP) to the shortlisted Respondents from the EOI.

3.12 Details of the six suppliers, the locations of the sites and the process solutions offered are commercially sensitive for the following reasons:

3.12.1 Risk that premature bias is created

3.12.2 Risk that solutions could be undermined

3.12.3 Risk that the process is compromised and the outcome is challenged

3.12.4 Potential to compromise the ability to secure the best processing solution and outcome for Christchurch.

3.13 We can confirm that none of the proposed processing locations are on Council owned land.

3.14 The Procurement Strategy for both Stage 1 and Stage 2 is required to be conducted in a Public Excluded (PX) session due to the sensitivity of the commercial information contained in both the Procurement Plan and responses received to the EOI. This is in accordance with:

3.14.1 The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

c) s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information.

d) s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

e) s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

f) s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.

3.15 We will continue to keep the public updated on the procurement process, as staff provide updates to Elected Members. PX reports will be released following award of a contract on conclusion of entire procurement process and on review and approval from the Head of Procurement and Contracts.

3.16 Our current indicative procurement timeline includes the following key milestones in the next procurement stage:

3.16.1 RFP advertised on GETS - 14 April 2023

3.16.2 RFP Closing Date - 29 August 2023

3.16.3 Evaluation & negotiation complete - 31 October 2023

3.16.4 Award Date - 22 February 2024

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

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

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

Lynne Armitage - Senior Project Manager

Jo van den Heever - Head of Procurement & Contracts

Luke Stevens - Manager Procurement – Infrastructure & Operations

Approved By

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

14 March 2023

7. Council Donation Towards Cyclone Gabrielle Relief
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/313483
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	John Filsell, Community Support & Partnerships Manager; john.filsell@ccc.govt.nz
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is for Council to consider making a donation of $100,000 from the Mayors Welfare Fund to assist Cyclone Gabrielle relief efforts.

1.2 On 21 Febuary 2023 Council asked for advice on making a donation of $100,000 from the Mayors Welfare Fund (MWF), toward Gyclone Gabrielle relief to the East Coast of the North Island, at an informal discussion preceeding the February Finance and Performance Committee meeting scheduled on 22 February 2023.

1.3 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 considering the nature of the decision and those impacted. This decision involves the allocation of an existing fund in a manner consistent with its purpose, it is an existing level of service in the 2021/31 LTP. The proposed donation has been discussed with Mayors Welfare Trust members who are supportive.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve a grant from the Mayors Welfare Fund of $100,000 to support relief efforts in the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle, as follows:

a. $33,000 to the Hawkes Bay Disaster Relief Trust.

b. $34,000 to the Wairoa Flood Mayoral Relief Fund

c. $33,000 to the Tairāwhiti Disaster Relief Trust

2. Delegate authority to the Team Leader Community Funding to implement Council’s decision.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 To enable a meaningful financial contribution on behalf of the people of Christchurch to the Cyclone Gabrielle relief effort to be made promptly and effectively.

3.2 After consulting with the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) a donation split between three centres on the east coast will see funds targeted at three areas still under a national State of Emergency (at the time this report was written), all of which have an immediate and pressing need.

3.3 By selecting three localised disaster relief trusts, Council’s donation will be used to help a wide range of people in need in the areas of Council’s choosing.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Not to offer a financial donation at this time. The disadvantage of this option is that it will delay any donation that Council may wish to offer when the funds are needed now to support relief efforts.

4.2 Sourcing the donation from another Council fund. The advantage of using the MWF is that it has a wide scope to assist people with various different needs. The MWF has sufficient resources to accommodate a donation of $100,000 and still meet historic and anticipated need in Christchurch.

4.3 Make Council’s donation to an alternative fund. After consulting NEMA there is no suitable national fund other than the Red Cross. A donation split between three local relief trusts will see Council’s donation spent in the area Council intends to support.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Following the devastating effects of Cyclone Gabrielle, Council responded immediately to requests for assistance. Examples of Council support include deploying Building Inspectors, New Zealand Response Teams and Council staff in a variety of roles. This support is ongoing. Council is now considering financial support in addition to support measures already underway.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.1.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

· Level of Service: 2.3.1.1 Provide funding for projects and initiatives that build partnerships; resilient, engaged and stronger communities, empowered at a local or community of interest level. - 95% or more of reports presented demonstrate benefits that align to CCC community outcomes, Council's strategic priorities and, where appropriate Community Board plans

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

6.3 The purpose of the MWF provides assistance to families and individuals in our community who are in extreme financial distress. The purpose of the proposed donation is to provide assistance to families and individuals who are in extreme financial distress. In this case the scope of the phrase “in our community” applies to New Zealanders in need due to the effects of Cyclone Gabrielle.

6.4 Grants from the MWF usually range between $300 and $1,000. Three donations of between $33,000 and $34,000 to relief trusts are consistent with the use of the MWF as it is anticipated that each donation will be used to support many people in need.

6.5 One of the eligibility criteria of the MWF states that it is only available for Christchurch residents. A donation to three communities in the North Island is inconsistent with this policy.

6.5.1 Under S80 LGA (2002) if a decision of a local authority is significantly inconsistent with any policy adopted by the local authority, the local authority, must, when making the decision clearly identify:

a) The inconsistency,

b) The reasons for the inconsistency; and

c) Any intention of the local authority to amend the policy to accommodate the decision.

6.5.2 In this instance:

a) The inconsistency is the proposal to make a donation from the MWF to people outside Christchurch.

b) The reason for the inconsistency is to allow the MWF to benefit people outside Christchurch under exceptional circumstances supporting relief efforts to three communities currently covered by a national state of emergency as a result of Cyclone Gabrielle.

c) There is no intention to amend the criteria of the MWF as this proposed donation is regarded as a one-off as a result of exceptional circumstances.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.6 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.

6.7 The decision does not involve a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga. This is primarily because the decision involves the allocation of an existing fund in a manner consistent with its purpose, it is an existing level of service in the 2021/31 LTP. Additionally there will be sufficient resources left in the Fund to meet historical and anticipated demand.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 There are no climate change considerations primarily because the decision involves the allocation of an existing fund in a manner consistent with its purpose, it is an existing level of service in the 2021/31 LTP.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9 There are no accessibility considerations primarily because the decision involves the allocation of an existing fund in a manner consistent with its purpose, it is an existing level of service in the 2021/31 LTP.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - $100,000.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – None.

7.3 Funding Source – Mayors Welfare Fund.

Other He mea anō

7.4 The current balance of the MWF is $534,233.13. A donation of $100,000 will result in a remaining balance of $434,233.13 until 30 August 2023 (when additional funding from Council’s Strengthening Communities Fund is received). Anticipated demand on the MWF until 30 August 2023, based on historical demand is approximately $189,861. This leaves $244,371.63 for unanticipated expenditure and the capacity to assist Christchurch residents in need as a result of an unanticipated event.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The statutory power to consider and adopt the recommendation derives from Council’s status and powers in S12 (2) of the LGA 2002.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 Recommendation 1. of this report is inconsistent with one of the eligibility criteria of the MWF. Legal advice has been sought and this is discussed in section 6.5 of this report above.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There are no risk management implications other than those discussed in section 6.5 of this report above.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

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

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

Author	John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships
Approved By	Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

14 March 2023

8. Parking changes on Gloucester Street & Hereford Street
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/99539
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Gemma Dioni, Senior Transportation Engineer (gemma.dioni@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is for Council to approve a proposal for parking restrictions on Hereford Street and Gloucester Street.

1.2 This report has been written in response to proposed traffic management changes and through stakeholder engagement on the proposed Rolleston Avenue/Park Terrace scheme to support the Museum redevelopment works.

1.3 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.

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

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

Gloucester Street

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

a. Approves under Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the parking of motor vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of three minutes between the times of 8:15am and 9:15am, and between 2:30pm and 3:30pm, on school days on the north side of Gloucester Street commencing a point 30 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 25 metres.

b. Approves under Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the parking of motor vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of three minutes between the times of 8:15am and 9:15am, and between 2:30pm and 3:30pm, on school days on the south side of Gloucester Street commencing a point 42 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 50 metres.

c. Approves that the parking of vehicles be restricted to Large Passenger Service Vehicles (School buses) only in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the south side of Gloucester Street commencing a point 42 metres east of its intersection with Rolleston Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 50 metres. This restriction is to apply between the times of 8am and 6pm, Monday to Friday.

Hereford Street

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

a. Approves that the parking of vehicles be restricted to Large Passenger Service Vehicles only, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the north side of Hereford Street commencing at a point 36 metres west of its intersection with Hereford Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 68 metres. This restriction is to apply from 8am to 6pm.

3. Revoke any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in resolution 1, 2 & 3 above.

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

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Canterbury Museum is planning a multimillion-dollar redevelopment of its Rolleston Avenue buildings. The museum applied for permanent and temporary easements for this work. These have now been approved by Council.

3.2 As a result of the work, the shared path along the museum frontage will be reduced in width and will not be able to cater for the current demands to use the path safely. There are ongoing capacity and safety issues on the existing shared path along Rolleston Avenue. Previous signage and marking projects have not changed behaviours and the path can sometimes be unpleasant for pedestrians to use, especially when there is fast cycle or scooter traffic. This gives an opportunity to trial an alternative layout and improve safety for all users during the time required for the Museum re-development.

3.3 The proposed layout for the temporary installation is shown on Attachment C. The pilot project involves limited construction and is being implemented using bollards and paint (colours that reflect the heritage setting along Rolleston Avenue) rather than using orange temporary traffic management materials, so the street doesn’t appear as a large construction zone for the life of the museum works.

3.4 The proposed changes to parking on Gloucester Street were as a result of engagement with Christ College.

3.5 The proposed changes to parking on Hereford Street were to provide an alternative location for coaches and tours. This allows the current stops on Rolleston Avenue to be converted to parking spaces.

3.6 Two memos have been provided to Elected Members and the Executive Leadership Team to update them on the project since inception. Inception was at the time the Easements were approved to be consulted on for the Museum works.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 There are no alternative options for the parking changes on Gloucester Street and Hereford Street.

4.2 The alternative option for Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace would be to implement a standard traffic management plan requiring the use of standard traffic management materials (such as orange cones) for a long period of time.

4.3 Under the temporary plan, all users of the shared path would be required to travel through a corridor of containers creating congestion and resulting safety concerns. Alternatively, people riding bicycles use the carriageway, where traffic volumes and speeds are higher than desirable for shared lanes, resulting in less safe outcomes.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 To support the closure of the museum, and the reduced space available outside the museum on Rolleston Avenue due to construction requirements, it is proposed to introduce a number of changes for people travelling on Rolleston Avenue, which will extend north on Park Terrace to the intersection of Salisbury Street. These include:

· Moving cyclists from the existing shared path to a two-way on-road cycleway on the western side of Rolleston Avenue to reduce the demands on the remaining path width for pedestrian safety. It is proposed to extend the cycleway to Salisbury Street and the bridge into Hagley Park, this provided an opportunity to improve the crossing point on Park Terrace at Salisbury Street. Groups of school children have been observed crossing at this point where there are two lanes of northbound traffic travelling at speed making it difficult to judge a safe crossing opportunity.

· Providing a new crossing point south of the museum as the existing zebra crossing will be closed and the pedestrian crossing markings will be removed.

· Traffic calming to support lower speeds in locations where there are lots of people travelling on many different modes.

· Changes to the Salisbury Street intersection to improve safety for the large number of active users that cross the road at this point by removing a northbound lane. The temporary lane reduction requires amendments on Kilmore Street at the intersection with Park Terrace.

· Relocating tour coaches from outside the museum and botanic gardens to the north side of Hereford Street. The current tour coach parking on Rolleston Avenue will be converted to parking spaces.

· Creating P3 school parking on the south side of Gloucester Street to increase the number of spaces available for pick-up and drop-off. This was requested by Christ’s College through stakeholder engagement.

5.2 It is proposed to install the works initially under a temporary traffic management plan in April 2023 prior to the closure of the shared path at the Museum. Once the temporary works are in place a report will go to the Council in mid-2023 to seek approval and confirm resolutions for the remaining period of the museum works, which is approximately 5 years.

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

6.1 Early engagement with stakeholders along Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace has been undertaken. Staff visited 11 directly affected businesses and spoke to them about the proposed changes to Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace including:

· YMCA

· Observatory Hotel

· Cellar Door

· Lumiere Cinemas

· Bunsen Café

· The Arts Centre Management

· Curators House

· Christs College

· The George Hotel

· Cathedral Grammar School

· Christchurch Attractions - Tram Operator

6.2 The plans were also shared with:

· Te Whatu Ora and Te Mana Ora

· Spokes

· Boatshed Café

· Environment Canterbury as public transport operator

6.3 The plans were shared with emergency services (with an offer of a face-to-face meeting), with St Johns most affected as this route is used to transport spinal patients from Christchurch Hospital. No feedback has been received.

6.4 Feedback from stakeholders was supportive of the changes and most appreciated the effort to retain most of the on-street parking. Based on feedback about upcoming events meant we were able to schedule the construction so there are no conflicts.

6.5 We also received feedback on the visual impacts of the upcoming Museum works and the possibility of directional signage. This request has been passed on to Council staff who will follow up on this request.

6.6 Christchurch Trams raised how these changes will provide a significant safety improvement at the Rolleston Avenue/Armagh Street intersection where the tram turns to head east and where there is a pedestrian crossing located. With the current situation, while trams are waiting to turn or for a pedestrian to cross, a car will come around the inside and risk hitting a pedestrian on the crossing. With the changes cars will now need to stop behind the tram before continuing along Park Terrace.

6.7 Letters regarding the changes to parking on the side streets were delivered/posted to all resident owners and occupiers on Hereford Street (between Montreal Street and Rolleston Avenue) and one property on Gloucester Street where the school bus parking and P3 parking is being installed outside the Otago School of Medicine.

6.8 Christ’s College were supportive of the changes on Gloucester Street and no other feedback was received.

6.9 Stakeholders on Hereford Street were also supportive of the parking changes.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

7.1 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. The temporary solution will not affect the Long-Term Plan project for Rolleston Avenue.

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

7.2.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.3.3 Maintain customer perception of the ease of use of Council on- street parking facilities - >=50% resident satisfaction

· Level of Service: 10.0.6.1 Reduce the number of death and serious injury crashes on the local road network - <=100 crashes

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

7.5 The decision does not involve a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.7 The parking proposal does not contribute to reducing carbon emissions, however the changes are supporting the Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace proposal, which includes measures to encourage walking/cycling/public transport and therefore will result in positive changes to reduce carbon emissions and the effects of Climate Change.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.8 This proposal improves accessibility for pedestrians/drivers/cyclists, by providing a safer means of travel along Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement – Approximately $400,000.

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - To be covered under the area maintenance contract, the effects will be minimal to the overall asset.

8.3 Funding Source – ID# 41650 Programme - Minor Road Safety Improvements.

Other He mea anō

8.4 None identified.

9. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

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

9.2 The Council has delegated authority to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations.

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9.5 This specific report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit however the report has been written using a general approach previously approved of by the Legal Services Unit, and the recommendations are consistent with the policy and legislative framework outlined in sections 9.1 – 9.3.

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 None identified.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Plan for Approval - Gloucester Street Parking TG144330	23/127223	41
b ⇩	Plan for Approval - Hereford St Parking TG144329 (Rolleston Ave)	23/127216	42
c ⇩	Plan for information - Rolleston Avenue Temporary Works TP361301	23/127253	43

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

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

Gemma Dioni - Senior Transportation Engineer

Ann Tomlinson - Senior Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Katie Smith - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Tony Richardson - Finance Business Partner

Jane Davis - General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

14 March 2023

9. City Mission, 272 to 298 Hereford Street - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions
Reference Te Tohutoro:	22/1440354
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Sally-Ann Marshall, Traffic Engineer (SallyAnn.Marshall@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider approval of P60 parking restrictions outside the City Mission, #272 to #288 Hereford Street.

1.2 This report has been written in response a request from the City Mission manager. They are currently constructing a café, supermarket and op-shop across the road from the City Mission and have asked that Council provide further on-street P60 restricted parking to increase vehicle turnover for these facilities.

1.3 The request has been assessed against the Central City Parking Policy (2021) which provides a framework to manage and address parking-related issues in the central city.

1.4 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.

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

1.6 The recommended option is to install P60 parking restrictions in accordance with Attachment A to this report.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Revoke any previous restrictions pertaining to parking restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking restrictions described in recommendations 2 to 4 below.

2. Approve that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Hereford Street commencing at its intersection with Barbadoes Street, and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 39.5 metres.

3. Approve, pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the parking of vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of 60 minutes on the south side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 39.5 metres east of its intersection with Barbadoes Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 82 metres.

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

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The City Mission are currently constructing a café, supermarket and op-shop at #269 to #275 Hereford Street. They have asked that we provide approximately 11 P60 restricted parking spaces on the street outside the Mission to increase vehicle turnover for these facilities.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Do Nothing

4.1 The advantages of this option include:

4.1.1 Does not remove 11 unrestricted parking for residents, staff and commuters.

4.2 The disadvantages of this option include:

4.2.1 Does not accommodate for the customers of the Missions community facilities and services.

4.2.2 Does not address the request from the City Mission to provide more time restricted parking at this location.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The City Mission are located at #272 to 276 Hereford Street. They are currently implementing a number of community initiatives that include a café, supermarket and op-shop on the opposite side of Hereford Street at #269 to #275. They are supplying 15 off-street car parks, including two mobility parks as part of these works (a ground floor plan of the facilities is provided in Attachment B).

These facilities would however benefit from the implementation of approximately 11 P60 timed restricted parking spaces along the Mission frontage. This would allow customers sufficient time to use the available services and facilities whilst also increasing turnover.

5.2 The Central City Parking Policy seeks to promote 85% occupancy of parking spaces in the central city at peak times. A target of 85% occupancy (international good practice) provides a balance of good usage with maintaining available parking spaces close to where people want them. By supporting higher turnover, more people can benefit from the spaces, with different people using the space at different times of the day, and on different days of the week. This is generally preferable to a single vehicle using a single space all day to the exclusion of everyone else.

For reference, the Central City Parking Policy can be found here: Christchurch central city and suburban parking policies : Christchurch City Council (ccc.govt.nz)

5.3 The Central City Parking Policy - Policy 1 provides a general framework for prioritising on-street space in the central city. This policy defines this section of Hereford Street as Commercial Central City Mixed Use.

Policy 1 also provides a general prioritisation order given to on-street parking space use for Commercial Central City Streets, shown in Table 1 below, with short term parking being priority order 9.

The general framework provided in Policy 1 is not however intended to give priority to any single use and must therefore be read alongside Policy 2.

Table 1 – Central City Parking Policy Prioritisation Table

5.4 Policy 2 outlines eight considerations to guide a departure from prioritisation under Policy 1.

A number of these considerations are relevant to the City Missions request for P60 time restricted parking along their frontage:

5.4.1 Existing number, mix and usage of car parks

At present the south side of this section of Hereford Street is unrestricted, and these spaces are taken up for the majority of week days by commuters, as well as local residents and staff of the City Mission. Staff have visited on several occasions during the day in the week and note that the available parking spaces were at capacity.

There are also approximately 14 existing P30 timed parking restrictions between #4/265 and #285 on the north side of Hereford Street. At the time this report was prepared construction on the supermarket was ongoing and these spaces were also at capacity.

As well as the new community facilities, the City Mission also provides a number of other valuable services and has clients that have appointments for social work, financial mentoring, alcohol and drug services, counselling and community connectors. Their appointments are no longer than an hour, but are longer than the available existing P30, therefore the turnover of cars through the P60 would also be incredibly beneficial to these clients.

Unless stated otherwise, timed parking restrictions are enforceable between 8am and 6pm, excluding public holidays. The Mission have confirmed that these times are when the spaces are most needed, and the restrictions we are proposing will apply at these times only.

These spaces will therefore be available for unrestricted parking out of these hours ie. overnight on public holidays, for residents.

The remaining on-street parking along this section of Hereford Street, between Barbadoes Street and Fitzgerald Avenue, is unrestricted and provides approximately 50 parking spaces over 200 metres.

5.4.2 Need for proximity parking

There are a high number of people using the City Mission facilities and services, and it can be expected that a proportion of these will have mobility issues.

It would therefore be preferential for there to be available short term parking options for these people outside the City Mission.

5.4.3 Goals for parking policy

This proposal contributes to the following goals in the Central City Parking Policy:

· Promote 85 percent occupancy of parking spaces in the central city at peak times

· Supports high-amenity on street parking that makes efficient use of space

· Supports a vibrant, people friendly, central city

5.4.4 Value of space

Having the proposed P60 parking restriction allows the community to better use the City Mission services. The new community café has been exceptionally busy since opening and having a P60 outside would allow customers to find parks during café hours. The P60 will also benefit the new Social Supermarket due to open in April 2023.

5.4.5 Place function

Having the proposed P60 parking restriction will reduce congestion around the City Mission and also lend itself towards the vibrant community they are establishing on Hereford Street. The café has completely changed the feel of this section of Hereford Street with corporate, community, staff and City Mission clients all using the café on a daily basis.

5.4.6 Opportunity for variable restrictions

Demand from commuters for these spaces is at its highest Monday to Friday between the hours of 8am and 6pm. This reduces the turnover for these community facilities during these hours.

As previously stated, the proposed time restriction will only apply when demand is highest, with residents having unrestricted access in the evenings and on public holidays.

Community Views and Preferences

5.5 Eleven affected property owners and residents were advised of the initial proposal by letter, including the City Central Motel on the corner of Hereford Street / Barbadoes Street. The initial proposal included a P60 restricted space outside #290 Hereford Street.

5.6 The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports the preferred option.

5.7 The do nothing option is inconsistent with community requests to provide more time restricted parking in this location.

5.8 Five submissions were received from residents against the proposal. They all preferred the do nothing option because unrestricted on-street parking is retained.

5.9 Based on the feedback we received, the initial proposal has been amended to not include the space outside #290 Hereford Street and therefore retain one unrestricted parking space.

5.10 Staff have discussed the revised proposal with the City Mission who are fully in support of the proposed plans.

5.11 Taking into account the Central City Parking Policy, the residents’ views and the needs of the community that visit the facility the staff recommendation gives the best outcome in terms of parking turnover during business hours whilst still providing 16 hours unrestricted parking for residents (who can park there between the hours of 5pm and 9am) and on public holidays.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

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

6.2.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.3.1 Provide an optimised balance of Council operated parking spaces in the central city - 60-85% average occupancy

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6 This proposal improves accessibility for customers of the City Mission and associated enterprises by enabling a higher turnover of parking at this location.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – approximately $500 for the installation of new signs and $750 for producing the report.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Will be covered under the area maintenance contract.

7.3 Funding Source – Traffic Operations Signs and Markings budget 2022/23

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

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.3 There is no other 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.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There are no identified risks associated with the recommendations in this report.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	City Mission, 272 to 288 Hereford Street - Proposed P60 Parking Restriction	23/89317	51
b ⇩	City Mission, New Facilities Floor Plan	23/89320	52

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

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

Author

Sally-Ann Marshall - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Katie Smith - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

14 March 2023

10. Southwark Street Tree Plantings and Parking Changes
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/84210
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Corrine Early Senior Project Coordinator, Vertical Capital Delivery (corrine.early@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is for Council to approve the planting of trees along Southwark Street as per the attached Concept Plan (Attachment A).

1.2 This report updates Council on the project and recommends Option 1 as the preferred option.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approves the planting of 1 x Magnolia Kay Parris or Flowering Cherry within an existing tree berm, on the South Side of Southwark Street as detailed on plan LP401202, dated 9/2/2023 and included in this report as Attachment A.

2. Approves the planting of 1 x Acer Bowhall within an existing tree berm, on the North Side of Southwark Street as detailed on plan LP401202, dated 9/2/2023 and included in this report as Attachment A.

3. Approves the planting of 4 x Acer Bowhall within tree pit build outs into the road, 2 on the North Side of Southwark Street and 2 on the South Side of Southwark Street as detailed on plan LP401202, dated 9/2/2023 and included in this report as Attachment A.

4. Approves the removal of 2 x P60 car park spaces on the North Side of Southwark Street and 2 x P15 car park spaces on the South Side of Southwark Street.

5. Approves that any previous resolutions pertaining to parking or stopping restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking or stopping restriction described in recommendation 6 below, be revoked.

6. Approves that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, where the proposed trees will be planted into tree pit build outs in the road on Southwark Street as detailed on plan LP401201, dated 24/11/2023 and included in this report as Attachment A.

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

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 A briefing of this project was provided to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board on 15 December. Advice was given to report to Council on the project as a Part A decision. This report now also contains information on community consultation and a car parking survey completed for the street (Appendix B).

3.2 Southwark Street is home to a wide range of businesses and new residential developments. The area is transitioning from commercial and industrial to more residential. Southwark Street currently has low amenity with very little landscaping. To make this street more pleasant for residents, visitors and workers we are proposing to implement improvements to the public realm.

3.3 There is existing residential development underway with the potential for further growth.

3.4 The south of the Central City has low tree canopy cover and low access to green space.

3.5 Feedback from residents during Central City Residential Programme (Project 8011) engagement indicated that the low amenity and lack of greenery would deter them from living in this neighbourhood.

3.6 CCC Tree Policy states that ‘We will actively seek and create new tree planting opportunities in suitable locations to maximise canopy cover and deliver ongoing environmental, economic and social benefits’.

3.7 The street currently has no improvements scheduled through the LTP.

3.8 The proposed Concept Plan (Attachment A) has identified 4 locations where large street trees can be planted into tree pit build outs into the road and 2 locations where smaller street trees can be planted into existing berms. The locations have been chosen due to the location of both underground and overground infrastructure and sightline distances from intersections and businesses.

3.9 A summary of the car parking street analysis can be found in section 5. Full data can be found in Appendix B.

3.10 It is proposed that the tree pits be built, and all planting is completed April – June 2023.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The following feasible options have been considered:

· Option 1 – Approve the planting of all trees proposed as per the Concept Plan (Attachment A) – Preferred Option

· Option 2 – Approve the planting of all trees, except those where community members have provided negative feedback

· Option 3 – Do nothing

4.2 Option Summary – Advantages and Disadvantages:

4.2.1 Option 1 – Preferred Option: Approve the planting of all trees as per the Concept Plan (Attachment A)

The advantages of this option include:

· Provides tree canopy cover in a new residential area of the city.

· Improves greenery and encourages people to want to live in the area.

· Is unlikely to affect residents as the 4 x car parking spaces proposed to be removed are for very short-term parking only.

· Is unlikely to affect businesses given car parking capacity remains at 60% or less according to the car parking spaces survey analysis, refer 5.1.

· Meets the CCC Tree Policy, refer to 3.5.

· Provides positive impact to the CCC proposed Urban Forest Plan (in draft and out for consultation at time of writing this report) which states on page 17 , Goal 1: Plant - A sustained increase in planting over the long-term will increase our urban forest while maintaining age diversity of trees.

Map

Description automatically generated

The disadvantages of this option include:

· Removes 4 parking spaces (2 x P60 on the North Side of the Street and 2 x P15 on the South Side of the Street)

· Displaces short term car parking to other areas for both those people using local businesses and employees of local businesses on Southwark Street.

4.2.2 Option 2 – Approve the planting of all trees, except those where the business owner has provided negative feedback. Affects the proposed 2 trees on the North Side of the street where the 2 x P60 car parks are.

The advantages of this option include:

· Business owner will have had their concern met

· Two x P60 on-street car parking spaces will be retained along Southwark Street.

· Provides some tree canopy cover in a new residential area of the city.

· Improves some greenery and encourages people to want to live in the area.

· Is unlikely to affect residents as the car parking spaces proposed to be removed are for very short-term parking only.

· Is unlikely to affect businesses given car parking capacity remains at 60% or less according to the car parking spaces survey analysis, refer 5.1.

· To a lesser extent, meets the CCC Tree Policy, refer to 3.5.

· To a lesser extent, provides some positive impact to the CCC proposed Urban Forest Plan, refer 4.2.1

The disadvantages of this option include:

· The trees will not be able to be planted in alternative locations along this street as the proposed locations are based on the existing underground and overground infrastructure in place and sightline distances from intersections and businesses.

· Without new trees being planted, future residents could be deterred from living in the neighbourhood

· Provides future tree canopy cover in regards to the CCC Tree Policy but to a lesser extent.

· Minimises the impact of the CCC proposed Urban Forest Plan.

Option 3 – Do Nothing

The advantages of this option include:

· Retains 2 x P60 car parking spaces and 2 x P15 car parking spaces along Southwark Street

· Does not displace short term car parking to other locations.

· The disadvantages of this option include:

· Does not make Southwark Street more pleasant for residents, visitors and workers and implement improvements to the public realm.

· Does not address the CCC tree policy for canopy cover

· Minimises the impact of the CCC proposed Urban Forest Plan.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Staff carried out a parking survey which highlighted that the average uptake of the street space for parking has not exceeded 60% so there is unlikely to be an impact for nearby businesses

5.2 Overall, the average parking occupancy rate for the area surveyed around Southwark Street was 39% (weekday and weekend). The average weekday occupancy rate was around 32%, while the weekend average was 39%. The area with the highest demand tended to be Madras Street between Allen Street and Southwark Street. During the weekend there was more demand in Southwark Street (Manchester Street to Madras Street) than during the week.

5.3 On average, occupancy rates varied across the day, with demand peaking between 11am – 12:30pm (average occupancy of 53%). Demand decreased significantly after 4:00pm, averaging an 18% occupancy rate. Occupancy across the day was similar when comparing weekdays and weekends, however occupancy was higher in the weekend between 11am – 2pm (averaging 52% in the weekend compared to 43% during the week).

5.4 The decision affects the following wards/Community Board areas: Waipapa Papanui-Innes Central Community Board.

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.1 Letters were hand delivered to local businesses on 21 December 2022 and they were able to provide feedback to staff until 16 January 2023. All feedback received from submitters is detailed below in 6.4.

6.2 We received feedback from Duns Accountants and Business Advisors expressing concern around the leaves littering his property and questioning how large the trees would grow. Staff responded by explaining the trees will be maintained by Council to make sure leaves aren’t an inconvenience. Because of the nature of the area, the trees would not reach full height but would grow large enough to provide adequate canopy cover.

6.3 Staff also received informal feedback when visiting businesses. Three businesses expressed they were happy with the proposed plantings and one business expressed concerns about parking removal.

6.4 Submitter issues and staff responses

Issue

Response provided to submitter

Accumulation of leaves across the entire street.

Leaves blocking drains and clearing the street of leaves will be an additional cost to the Council.

Leaves will blow into our carpark and the building entrance and become our problem to clear up at our cost.

Leaves will make their way into our building when the entrance doors are opened.

The Acer Rubrum Bowhall (Upright red maples) are a deciduous tree so will drop leaves during autumn and winter but will provide some shade throughout the summer months. The trees are spaced out, so there won’t be an inundation of leaves. All trees have an establishment cost included within the project budget. This is followed by an ongoing maintenance plan which is managed by Council, this includes clearing any leaf drop. Any issues with heavy rains will be managed appropriately as per any other street by Council.

These trees have been chosen as are hardy in the urban environment so will have good rates of establishment. As they are being planted into a restricted space, they might not reach their full height potential; however, selecting smaller species would not provide the desired amount of canopy cover that we aim to achieve. We have canopy cover targets for the city which will be coming into effect the first half of next year.

The Council tree policy states the following:

1.0 Tree Planting

1.1 We will actively seek and create new planting opportunities in suitable locations to maximise canopy cover and deliver ongoing environmental, economic and social benefits.

1.3 We will endeavour to plant the most appropriate tree species based on site suitability, rooting habits, functional and biological attributes, performance, longevity and the potential to contribute to landscape character and the Council’s other plans and strategic objectives.

Planting smaller growing trees wouldn’t be maximising canopy cover and wouldn’t maximise potential to contribute to the landscape character.

Apologies but as I am sure you will see, there is nothing we can do about the leaves blowing into your car park and/or clients bringing leaves inside your building.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

7.1 Accelerating the momentum the city needs – Investing in improved public realm can attract high quality investment and improved amenity can help aid the evolution of this area into a vibrant and thriving neighbourhood.

7.2 Meeting the challenge of climate change through every means available – In intensifying areas it is important to increase tree canopy cover to reduce the impacts of climate change.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

7.4 Project 8011 - The Residential Programme aims to grow the Central City population to 20,000 residents by 2028. One method of achieving this is to improve liveability in Central City neighbourhoods through improved amenity.

7.5 Has a positive impact on the Urban Forest Plan.– increase tree canopy cover

7.6 Has a positive impact on the CCC tree policy for canopy cover

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.8 This decision has an impact on both carbon emissions and Climate change through the planting of trees.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.9 This decision could affect those with accessibility needs accessing businesses on Southwark Street through the removal of short-term car parking spaces, however we are not proposing to remove accessibility car parking spaces.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement - $80,000 has been allocated to the project from the Enliven Places Programme

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – approximately $12,000 for a two-year period has been incorporated into the project budget allocation. After 24 months the trees will be established and able to be included in the wider street tree maintenance programme for the Central City. This cost has not been included in this budget.

8.3 Funding Source – Sustainable City Growth and Property, Enliven spaces programme 36874.

9. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 Not applicable

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Southwark Street - Trees Concept Plan	23/181992	62
b ⇩	Southwark Street Parking Survey Analysis	23/162754	63

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

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

Corrine Early - Senior Project Coordinator

Kiran Skelton - Engagement Assistant

Laura Quaid - Planner Urban Regeneration

Approved By

Brent Smith - Acting Head of Three Waters

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Bruce Rendall - Head of City Growth & Property

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

14 March 2023

11. Amendments to Delegations
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1397011
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Maryem Al Samer, Legal Counsel (maryem.alsamer@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide for some amendments to delegations from the Council to staff.

1.2 This report has been written because only the Council can resolve to provide for these delegation changes.

1.3 The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by considering the criteria in the Significance and Engagement Policy.

2. Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Relying on clause 32 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 and for the purposes of efficiency and effectiveness in the conduct of the Council’s business and any other applicable statutory authority:

a. Delegate the responsibilities, duties and powers in relation to the Resource Management Act 1991 to the persons as set out in Attachment A; and

b. Revoke the delegations set out in Part B, Sub-part 2 of the Delegations Register in relation to the Enliven Places Project Fund and the Creative Industries Support Fund as set out in Attachment B.

2. Notes that these delegation changes take effect on the date of this resolution, and that Legal and Democracy Services will update the Delegations Register accordingly.

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

3.1 Part A of the Council’s Delegations Register contains the Council’s delegations to the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is then able to sub-delegate those responsibilities, duties and functions to staff as she sees fit. These sub-delegations are set out in Part C of the Delegations Register.

3.2 Part B of the Council’s Delegations Register contains the Council’s delegations in respect of the Resource Management Act 1991 as well as other matters where the Council delegates directly to staff and other persons because, for the most part, the law does not allow for sub-delegations of these matters.

3.3 Part D of the Delegations Register contains the delegations from the Council to community boards, committees, and other subordinate decision-making bodies.

3.4 The proposed additional delegations under the Resource Management Act 1991 are sought so as to improve efficiency of Council process and to better comply with the expectations of the Environment Court Practice Note.

3.5 The proposed deletion of the delegation concerning the Enliven Places Project Fund and the Creative Industries Support Fund is sought because the funds no longer exists.

4. Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The other alternative option that was considered, but not selected as the preferred option, is not making any changes to the delegations. This is not a reasonably practicable option. This would not promote efficiency and effectiveness in Council decision-making.

5. Detail / Te Whakamahuki

Resource Management Act 1991

5.1 The Resource Management Act 1991 avoids long delays in the changes to District Plans by requiring Council to issue decisions on the plan change no later than two years after notifying the proposed change; and it requires Councils to apply to the Minister seeking more time if they are not going to meet that two-year deadline (Schedule 1 clauses 10 and 10A).

5.2 Council has not delegated authority to staff to apply to the Minister. A new delegation will provide for the General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services, Head of Planning and Consents and Manager Resources Consents to apply to the Minister for an extension of time. In order to promote efficiency and effectiveness of Council, it would be desirable to grant staff the authority to write to the Minister when an extension of time is needed.

5.3 A new delegation to the General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services, Head of Planning and Consents and Manager Resources Consents would enable staff to agree in mediation to resolution of an appeal to the Environment Court about a proposed change to the District Plan. There is currently an express delegation from Council to staff to agree to resolve appeals in mediation in the Environment Court, but that delegation does not extend to Plan Change appeals. It is desirable to grant staff the authority to resolve this type of appeal to improve the efficiency of Council.

5.4 The current lack of delegated authority to settle does not meet the expectations of the Environment Court. The Environment Court Practice Note 2023 states that “Each party in an ADR process must have at least one representative participating in person who has authority to make decisions in that process on behalf of that party”, and “The attendance by any person representing a party at an ADR event is normally on the basis that the person has full authority from that party to settle” (part 7.2 (e) and (f).

Enliven Place Project Fund etc

5.5 Both the Enliven Places Fund Project fund and the Creative Industries Support Fund were transitional funds that supported individuals, communities, and business to contribute to Christchurch’s regeneration and rebuild following the 2010/11 earthquakes.

5.6 The Enliven Fund was wound up on 30 June 2021 and the Creative Industries Fund was wound up in 2017. It is desirable to have this change captured in the delegations register.

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: Governance and decision-making

· Level of Service: 4.1.28.3 Establish and maintain documented governance processes that ensure compliance with the local government legislation - Governance processes are maintained and published on council's website.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

6.4 The decision does not involve a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.5 The decisions in this report do not create a climate change impact.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6 The decisions in this report do not raise accessibility considerations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – The Changes to the Delegations will be entered in the Delegations Register by the Legal and Democratic Services

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – There are no outgoing costs from making these changes to delegations. There also anticipated savings in staff time in having delegations sit at the appropriate level in the organisation.

7.3 Funding Source – Staff time in implementing the changes to the Delegations Register is met out of the Legal and Democratic Services’ budget.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Clause 31 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 provides that

Unless expressly provided otherwise in this Act, or in any other Act, for the purposes of efficiency and effectiveness in the conduct of a local authority’s business, a local authority may delegate to a committee or other subordinate decision-making body, community board, or member or officer of the local authority any of its responsibilities, duties, or powers except—

(a) the power to make a rate; or

(b) the power to make a bylaw; or

(c) the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the long-term plan; or

(d) the power to adopt a long-term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

(e) the power to appoint a chief executive; or

(f) the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under this Act in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement; or

(g) [Repealed]

(h) the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

8.2 The proposed changes to the delegation also do not infringe the restrictions in the Local Government Act 2002.

8.3 This report has been written by Legal Services.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.4 There are no other legal issues or implications relevant to this decision.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There are no identified risks caused by the proposed changes in delegations.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A	23/250046	72
b ⇩	Attachment B	23/247013	81

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

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

Maryem Al Samer - Legal Counsel

Brent Pizzey - Senior Legal Counsel

Approved By

Helen White - Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

5. Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee Minutes - 20 September 2022
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/298093
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Katie Matheis, Team Leader Hearings & Committee Support (Katie.Matheis@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive (Dawn.Baxendale@ccc.govt.nz)

12. Mayor's Monthly Report
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/246907
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Phil Mauger, Mayor
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive (Dawn.Baxendale@ccc.govt.nz)