Agenda of Council - Wednesday, 3 May 2023

Council

03 May 2023

Proposed Unsolicited Property Acquisition by the Crown - Part 502 Ferry Road
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/200272
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Barry Woodland, Property Consultant, Sustainable City Growth & Development (barry.woodland@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 to consider the potential acquisition of land at 502 Ferry Road from the Council by the Crown/ Ministry of Education (the Crown). The land (Part 502 Ferry Road) has been leased to the Te Waka Unua School (formerly Woolston School) for school grounds purposes since 2010. The Crown now wish to purchase the land for the Te Waka Unua School (the School) to future proof its ability to respond to future roll growth predictions and to ensure the provision of quality educational services and activities to the local school community. This report has been written to seek a recommendation from the Waitai Coastal-Burwood- Linwood Community Board to the Council that it agrees to deal unilaterally with the Crown, and agrees to the sale of the land to the Crown at market value subject to public consultation.

1.2 The report is staff generated and originates from a formal unsolicited request from the Crown to the Council to purchase the land for educational purposes for Te Waka Unua School.

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 an assessment determining that the matter is of a local nature, the land has been leased to the School for school grounds use for over 10 years and supports the School contributing to the continued educational empowerment and strengthening of the local Woolston community. The land is not categorised as a strategic asset. Its disposal will not affect current levels of service.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board recommends that the Council:

1. Approves the acquisition by the Crown of approximately 950m² of land at 502 Ferry Road (described as Pt RS 32 and held in Record of Title CB204/99 and shown as Section 1 on the plan at paragraph 5.3) for educational purposes, subject to;

a. Public consultation in accordance with Section 138 Local Government Act 2002,

b. The sale to be at market value as determined by an independent registered valuer,

c. The Crown being responsible for securing any and all required resource, building or other statutory consents required to operate from the Land.

2. Resolves to depart from policy and deal unilaterally with the Crown.

3. Authorises the Manager Property Consultancy to negotiate, conclude and administer all the agreements necessary to facilitate the recommendations above on terms and conditions acceptable to him, and in doing so make any decisions necessary to give effect to this.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The parcel of land has been leased to, and developed by, the School since 2010. Acquisition of the land by the Crown will transfer full responsibility and cost liability for maintenance, rates and other outgoings to the Crown.

3.2 Given the land’s extended and established use for school ground purposes and its landlocked nature, its acquisition by the Crown, as incumbent occupier, represents an appropriate, effective and efficient use of a Council asset which is no longer required for operational purposes.

3.3 Advantages:

· Transfers ownership of an under-utilised (by Council) asset to the Crown where it will be valued.

· Enables and contributes to the ongoing educational empowerment and strengthening of the local Woolston community.

· Enhances the partnership relationship between the Council and the Crown.

· Builds on the Council’s recent initiative to transfer ownership of the adjacent former Woolston community building to the School.

· Provides greater certainty and autonomy for the School.

· Provides greater flexibility for the School to develop appropriate facilities in response to roll-growth projections.

· Ownership of the land provides improved access for programme delivery and funding sources.

3.4 Disadvantages:

· Loss of potential public open space.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Retain the Status Quo: The land will continue to be leased to and occupied by the School for school grounds purposes. The Council would retain ownership of the land asset. The Parks Unit do not have an operational use for the land as the balance of Woolston Park and other nearby parks adequately service public parks provision in the immediate area.

As there is no Council operational use for the land the option to dispose of the land for a valuable educational/community purpose is considered a more effective and efficient use of an under-utilised Council asset.

4.2 Council declares the land surplus for sale: In the unlikely event of the existing ground lease to the School being terminated (either by default or at the request of the School) the Council could declare the land surplus for sale (subject to public consultation and offer-back to the Crown). Potential uses for the site (aside from Council / open space park / school use) would be limited given its proximity to the park and the former Woolston Community Centre building and restricted access to Ferry Road.

Not considered a practical option.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

The Land

5.1 502 Ferry Road comprises ten separate parcels which collectively form Woolston Park, outlined in red below.

Map

Description automatically generated

5.2 The parcel which is the subject of this report is referred to as Pt RS 32 in the plan above. It is held in Record of Title CB204/99, extends to some 1392m2, is administered as a park pursuant to Section 138 Local Government Act (LGA) 2002, and is currently leased to the School.

5.3 That part of Pt RS 32 which is subject to the proposed acquisition by the Crown is referred to as Section 1 in the plan below and has an area of around 950m2 (“the Land”).

Map

Description automatically generated

5.4 Section 1 is essentially landlocked by the school to the west and south and Woolston Park to the east and north. The existing pedestrian access (for the school) from the northern end of the Land across Woolston Park to Ferry Road is preserved as is access around the perimeter of the former Woolston Community Centre building (located to the north-east of Section 1 in the plan above).

5.5 The Land has been occupied and developed by the School for ‘school grounds’ since 2010 on a lease which expires in 2045.

5.6 There are no encumbrances registered against the title and the Land is not subject to the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998.

5.7 The Land is currently zoned Open Space Community Parks which provides for formal and informal recreation activities.

5.8 With regard to the former Woolston Community Centre building, the Council recently resolved to deal unilaterally with the School in gifting them the ownership of this building on the basis that it:

“is better utilised by Te Waka Unua School as a meeting place to support the varied needs and priorities across the local school community by providing a separate space to engage with parents, children, support services, agencies and the wider community and making it available for members of the public to utilise when not in use for school purposes”. A copy of the Council resolution (CNCL/2022/00049) is appended as Attachment A.

5.9 The School’s ownership and use of this building is subject to a ground lease from the Council which expires in 2055. The Council has a first right of refusal to take the building back should the School no longer require it for their services.

Asset – Value and Current Cost to the Council

5.10 The market value of, and purchase price for, the Land will be assessed by an independent registered valuer.

5.11 The current costs to the Council of retaining the Land are nominal as the ground lease provisions require the School to be responsible for the maintenance of the school grounds.

5.12 There are no Council assets or utilities in or on the Land.

The Proposal

5.13 The Council has received an unsolicited proposal from the Crown to acquire that part of the Council owned property referred to above for education purposes associated with Te Waka Unua School (refer Attachment B).

5.14 In support of the proposal the Crown has commented that:

“it is considered that there will be significant roll growth at the school as a result of both anticipated infill / intensification of housing within the local area, along with increases in the share of local students attending the school. There is also a need to expand Bilingual education provision across the network, of which the school is a provider. The additional land is currently already being used by the school as play space and could enable future expansion of classrooms for both English and Maori Medium education at the school”.

5.15 The proposed land acquisition by the Crown does not affect the Council’s level of service in terms of park provision. Woolston Park will still extend to some 3.3 hectares and continue to provide the current recreation opportunities. The proposal promotes the effective and efficient use of Council assets and enhances its relationship with the Crown.

5.16 Dealing unilaterally with the Crown recognises that the Land has been leased and utilised by the School since 2010 and that there are no other practical users of the Land (internal or external) as the Land is effectively landlocked. Provision exists for the Land to be taken back by the Council if the School no longer require it (refer paragraph 8.3).

Disposal of Council Owned Property – Criteria

5.17 Any disposal is to be in a manner as set out in the Council’s policies and normal practices, i.e.:

· Policy: to publicly tender properties for sale unless there is a clear reason for doing otherwise.

· Practice: in an open, transparent, well-advertised and public manner at market value.

Assessed against:

· Is the property still required for the purpose for which it was originally acquired? No

· Does the property have special cultural, heritage or environmental values that can only be protected through public ownership? No

· Is there an immediate alternative public use / work / activity in a policy, plan or strategy? No

· Are there any strategic, non-service delivery needs that the property meets and that can only be met through public ownership? No

· Are there any identified unmet needs, which the Council might normally address, that the property could be used to solve? And is there a reasonable pathway to funding the unmet need? No

Dealing Unilaterally

5.18 The Crown’s proposal is in effect an unsolicited proposal requesting the purchase of a Parks asset.

5.19 Where there is only one logical purchaser of a property the Council may deal unilaterally with that purchaser, subject to undertaking public consultation in accordance with the requirements of Sections 78 and 138 LGA 2002.

5.20 There are a number of factors which need to be considered when contemplating a unilateral dealing. Refer Attachment C.

5.21 The acquisition of the land by the Crown does not affect the Council’s current levels of service given that the Land has been leased to the School since 2010. The Parks Unit, as current internal steward of the Land, fully support the acquisition by the Crown.

5.22 In context, the proposed Crown acquisition is also consistent with, and complements, the previous Council decision to gift ownership of the adjacent former Woolston Community Centre building to the School for education and community purposes.

5.23 This proposal does not depart from the considerations outlined in Attachment C. As such, staff consider it is appropriate for the Community Board to recommend the acquisition of the Land by the Crown from Council.

Community Views and Preferences

5.24 Assuming the Council resolve to accept the Board’s recommendation a subsequent section 138 LGA consultation process will be undertaken to establish the views and preferences of the community. If any sustainable objections to the acquisition by the Crown are received these will be reported back to the Council for consideration and, if necessary, a Hearings process may be convened to consider those objections.

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

Waitai-Coastal-Burwood-Linwood.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This decisions aligns with the Council’s vision to enable active and connected communities to own their future.

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

6.2.1 Activity: Facilities, Property and Planning

· Level of Service: 13.4.10 Acquisition of property right projects, e.g. easements, leases and land assets to meet LTP funded projects and activities. - At least 90% projects delivered to agreed timeframes per annum

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

· Promotes effective and efficient use of Council assets.

· Through the School’s activities, supports active citizenship and connected communities by providing venues to support community engagement with the Council, Community Boards and community organisations in order to grow community participation in civic life.

· Builds community resilience, social capital and community capacity to support a response to major stressors such as climate change, terror attacks and the effects of Covid-19.

· Enables the celebration of local identity and diversity by providing venues for education, arts, culture, heritage, sport and recreation.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

6.5 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.

6.6 Following consultation with the Council’s Principal Advisor Treaty Relationships and Strategic Advisor Te Tiriti Partnership we have been advised that “Ngai Tuahuriri has no interest in this property”.

6.7 As an aside, the Crown has expressed their desire to develop an enduring relationship with local iwi, with particular reference to increasing bilingual development at Te Waka Unua School. With the assistance of the Council’s advisors we have provided the Crown with a contact at Ngāi Tūāhuriri who is keen to facilitate this process.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 Disposal of the land will not require additional resources. The intended use of the Land by the School may involve the development of additional classrooms in the future.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9 The Crown will be responsible for ensuring the Land meets all regulatory requirements for its particular use including any Ministry of Education requirements for use as a school facility. Any subsequent improvements will need to comply with current Resource Management and Building Act regulations and any other relevant statutory / consenting requirements.

6.10 The Crown will also be required, at its cost, to establish an easement over the power line which traverses the north-east corner of the site (providing power to the former Woolston Community Centre building).

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – nil. Purchase price, legal, valuation, survey, subdivision and any other costs related to the disposal will be the responsibility of the Crown.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – nil. Ownership and responsibility transfers to the Crown.

7.3 Funding Source – operational budgets for any nominal incidental Council costs.

Other He mea anō

7.4 The sale of this asset is not contemplated in the current LTP.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The general powers of competence set out in section 12(2) “Status and Powers” of the LGA 2002.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 The legal considerations are the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s Disposal of Council Property’ policy, referred to in paragraph 5.17 above.

8.3 The Council’s Legal Services Unit have been consulted and have confirmed that the acquisition of the land by the Crown from Council should be actioned pursuant to section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981 (PWA) which provides for the disposal of land held for a public work. On this basis the Crown will take on any section 40 PWA obligations and, if they no longer require the land for educational purposes at some stage in the future, will be required to address section 40 PWA offer-back requirements should the Council or the Crown not require the land for any other further public work.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 If the School ceases to operate from this neighbourhood or no longer has a need for the Land, the Council would have an option to resume ownership of the Land. If the Council did resume ownership of the Land, the School would be required to remove any of its improvements from the Land.

9.2 There may be some residual community feedback regarding the Council’s decision to deal unilaterally with the Crown.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Council Resolution CNCL/2022/00049	23/213804
b	Crown's Unsolicited Request to Acquire Land	23/213806
c	Factors to Consider When Dealing Unilaterally	23/315699

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

Barry Woodland - Property Consultant

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Kelly Hansen - Manager Parks Planning & Asset Management

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

03 May 2023

Legal stopping of Avonside Drive between Kerrs Road and Wainoni Road, as well as Kerrs Road north of #144
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/428080
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Rob Shelton, Project Manager Residential Red Zone Angus Smith, Manager Property Consultancy Swantje Bubritzki, Senior Engagement Advisor
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 to update the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board on the results of consultation regarding the partial stopping of Avonside Drive and Kerrs Road, in order to allow the Board to formulate their recommendation to Council on this matter.

1.2 This report has been staff generated.

1.3 The decision in this report is of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined based on the likely high public interest, but moderated by low actual impacts (based on modelling) and broader economic, ecological and cultural benefits.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Commence the road stopping process under the Local Government Act 1974 procedure for:

a. Avonside Drive between Kerrs Road and Wainoni Road, and

b. Kerrs Road north of #144

2. In the event that there are no objections received through the road stopping procedure authorise staff to complete the road stopping.

3. In the event there are objections, authorise staff to manage those in accordance with the Local Government Act procedures.

4. Delegate authority to the Property Consultancy Manager to do all things necessary at his sole discretion to manage and conclude any of the actions required from resolutions 1 to 3 above.

5. Reduce the speed limit to 30km/h along Torlesse Street, Braemar Place and Kerrs Road north of Wainoni Road at the same time (or before) the closure.

6. Install traffic counters on Torlesse Street following the closure.

7. Request that officers re-engage with residents around suitable mitigation measures if traffic counts on Torlesse Street are found to be higher than reasonable for a local road, and report back to the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 This report forms part of the process to implement Council’s resolution below, from the meeting held on 12 October 2021.

Council Resolved CNCL/2021/00160

That the Council:

4. Requests that, as part of the land titles reconfiguration process being undertaken in the Otakaro Avon River Corridor pursuant to the Global Settlement Agreement, Land Information New Zealand use the powers of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act 2016 to legally stop the following portions of the road (thereby revoking the public legal road status) for the following:

a. from 748 Avonside Drive to 836 Avonside Drive (Kerrs Road intersection) as detailed in the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor Regeneration Plan.

b. from 842 Avonside Drive to Bickerton Reserve (Wainoni Road intersection), following appropriate public notice.

c. from 144 Kerrs Road to the intersection Avonside Drive, following appropriate public notice.

5. Request staff report back to Council the outcome of the consultation process for recommendations 4b & 4c before making any requests to Land Information New Zealand seeking the legal stopping of those roads.

3.2 We have now completed consultation on 4b and 4c as above, and are reporting results and recommendations.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Status quo. Due to earthquake subsidence, the portion of Avonside Drive between Kerrs Road and Wainoni cannot drain for portions of the day. This means that flooding is common after rain, presenting a safety hazard and increasing operating costs due to reactive traffic management. Flooding also increases maintenance costs as the surface deteriorates more quickly due to the regular standing water. The road surface is in poor condition, meaning that resurfacing will likely be required soon under the status quo option.

4.2 Lift road to fix drainage issues. To fix the current issues and futureproof for sea level rise, another option would be to lift the road. This would be in the order of one metre if separated from the stopbank, or over two metres if the stopbank were built into the road. High level estimates put the cost of these works (over and above baseline stopbank costs) at around $8-9 million, with more detail in Section 5.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The current status of these roads is shown in Figure 1 overleaf.

Figure 1: Current status of roads affected by this proposal.

5.2 The section of Avonside Drive that runs from 748 Avonside Drive to the Kerrs Road intersection (noted as 4a in the Council Resolution) has been legally stopped.

5.3 This stopping formed part of the Regeneration Plan, and was subsequently reflected in the District Plan, however our experience with its temporary closure for the Snell Bridge construction was that it resulted in detouring traffic from the eastern portion of Avonside Drive along Torlesse Street (a local road).

5.4 This report deals with the proposed stopping of the eastern portion of Avonside Drive out to Wainoni for financial, ecological and cultural reasons, as well as reducing the traffic impacts of a partial closure on Torlesse. It also proposes a stopping of the northern portion of Kerrs Road (beyond the last house) to allow for overnight gating to reduce illegal activity.

Avonside Drive (Kerrs to Wainoni)

5.5 This section of Avonside Drive runs adjacent to the Avon Ōtākaro River, and its stormwater system discharges directly into the waterway, with the outlet pipes below the high tide level.

5.6 When rainfall coincides with mid to high tide levels in the river, the road floods as it cannot drain. This situation will worsen over time as the sea level rises. Due to the regular flooding, the road surface is in poor condition and requires ongoing maintenance.

A car driving through a flooded road

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Figure 2: Avonside Drive. Looking West towards Kerrs Road

5.7 Maintenance and replacement of the road and stopbank are costs that could be either avoided or reduced by removing the road.

5.8 The value of stopbank cost avoidance has been estimated at $5.8 million should this road be stopped and eventually closed, as it is cheaper to build stopbanks further from the river’s edge.

5.9 There would be a further $2-3 million involved in rebuilding the road, although this sum is indicative as work has not been done to accurately determine the required level that this road would need to be build up to and what engineering would be required to achieve this.

5.10 Additionally, removal of the road would allow the stopbanks to be pushed back which would increase space available for the future Stormwater Management Area immediately to the south. The Three Waters team have assessed the broader engineering benefits of this, which is attached as Attachment A.

5.11 Ecological and cultural benefits associated with removing the road and pushing the stopbank back have also been assessed, and they include:

5.11.1 A reduction of road runoff pollutants (oil, heavy metals, brake pad material and the like), improving local water quality.

5.11.2 Ability for the riverbank to be naturalised and planted. As saltwater moves into this reach over time, this would allow inanga habitat along the margin, which would be impossible if the stopbanks were to run along the river’s edge.

5.11.3 Ability for tree planting along the river margin, which would shade the water, lowering its temperature and subsequently increasing ecological habitat.

5.11.4 Resultant improved mahinga kai opportunities, which is the primary cultural driver for the River Corridor. Further detail on this aspect is included in Section 6.

5.12 The Transport team have reviewed the proposal and their advice (including modelling) forms Attachment B. A summary is:

5.12.1 Traffic speeds are high on this portion of the road, but volumes are relatively low.

5.12.2 If this road were to be stopped, traffic would divert down Wainoni Road, which is an arterial and designed to handle high flows. The increase in traffic would not result in significant impacts on travel times.

5.12.3 Changes to traffic on other parts of the road network are not expected to be significant.

5.13 While modelling does not indicate significant increases, staff recommend the following mitigations be implemented to reduce concerns noted by some residents of Torlesse Street:

5.13.1 Reduce speed limit to 30km/h along Torlesse Street, Braemar Place and Kerrs Road north of Wainoni Road. This is already proposed as part of the Safe Speed Neighbourhoods project, but would be brought forward to align with the closure.

5.13.2 Install traffic counters on Torlesse Street following the closure.

5.13.3 If counts are found to be higher than reasonable for a local road, re-engage with residents around further mitigation measures. These could include exploring options for traffic calming or full or partial cul-de-sacs.

Kerrs Road (north of #144)

5.14 Stopping of this portion of road is linked to the Avonside Drive decision, as this would effectively become a long cul-de-sac at night. Our experience is that cul-de-sacs in the red zone attract a range of undesirable activities, many of which incur costs of clean-up to Council.

5.15 Stopping the road would allow a gate to be installed past access to the last house (#144), which would be locked at night to prevent this behaviour. At other times, the road would remain open to service Porritt Park and the flatwater clubs domiciled there.

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.1 Public consultation on this proposal was completed in conjunction with the consultation on the redevelopment of Avon Park. A detailed summary of submissions and staff responses to the issues raised is available in Attachment C, with an overview provided below.

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

6.2 Regarding the legal road stopping, 111 groups and individuals made submissions. The majority of submitters – both local and from the wider community – supported the proposed road stopping (64, 58%). Submitters thought closing the road, would have the following positive outcomes:

· Improved safety and limited speeding/racing (19)

· Protection/restoration of nature and recreational space (17)

6.3 Submitters also felt that there were satisfactory alternative routes (10), that the current use of the road did not warrant it’s staying open (7), and that the road is prone to flooding (6).

6.4 A smaller proportion of submitters expressed neither support nor opposition (24, 21%), but raised issues and concerns.

6.5 The remainder of submitters – again local and from the wider community – did not support the proposed road closure, (23, 21%), for varying reasons. The issues raised were shared among supporters and non-supporters of the road stopping, so the following table outlines issues raised across all submitters, grouped by preference:

Raised issues and concerns	Supportive	Neutral	Opposed	Total
Reducing access/parking for the water sports clubs / Kerrs Reach to daylight hours	6	11	6	23
Increasing traffic on surrounding streets, particularly Torlesse St / Kerrs Rd	3	5	6	15
Losing direct route/thoroughfare for cars and cyclists	1	2	7	10
Management of the gate at Kerrs Rd to prevent access at night	1	1	4	6
Increased risk at intersections, such as Kerrs Rd/Wainoni Rd or Avonside Drive/Gloucester St/Retreat Rd	1	0	4	5

6.6 We have reviewed the issues and concerns with the Transport team.

6.7 The access/gate issues can be dealt with operationally, and previous modelling has checked the intersection safety. While this is a direct route to some locations, there are suitable alternatives available.

6.8 The most salient point identified is the risk of increased traffic on Torlesse Street. Our modelling is not showing significant increases, however to alleviate the concerns raised by respondents, we are recommending the mitigation measures described in 2.5 to 2.7 above.

6.9 A table of all submissions received is available in the second column of Attachment D.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

7.1 :

7.1.1 Activity: Otakaro Avon River Corridor

· Level of Service: 6.8.12.1 Implementation of the Otakaro Avon River Corridor Regeneration Plan (Green Spine). Council-led capital investment - Progress integrated Green Spine programme (Parks, Water and Transport) as per the Implementation Plan.

· Target: 90 % of approved work programmes delivered in the year funded Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

7.1 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, and any stopping process would follow the requirements of the Council’s Road Stopping Policy (The Policy).

7.2 The Policy provides for the stopping of a road initiated by a Council business unit to meet Council policies or strategies.

7.3 Road Stopping is the legal process to change the status of road to fee simple land. Once a road is legally stopped the land can be retained, sold or transferred for an alternative use. The road stopping process is governed by either the Local Government Act 1974 or the Public Works Act 1981. The statutory process used in relation to a particular application is governed by the Policy.

7.4 The Policy provides that The Local Government Act 1974 road-stopping procedure will be adopted if one or more of the following circumstances apply:

7.4.1 Where any public right of access to any public space could be removed or materially limited or extinguished as a result of the road being stopped; or

7.4.2 If it is found through the review process that the road stopping could injuriously affect or have a negative or adverse impact on any other property; or

7.4.3 The road stopping is, in the judgment of the Council, likely to be controversial; or

7.4.4 If there is any doubt or uncertainty as to which procedure should be used to stop the road; or

7.4.5 The Public Works Act 1981 process is not able to be used, or is not used.

7.5 It is considered given the circumstances this road stopping should be undertaken using the Local Government Act 1974 procedure rather than the Public Works Act 1981.

7.6 Section 342 of The Local Government Act 1974 provides the power for councils to stop roads and sets out in schedule 10 of the Act the manner in which that is to be undertaken.

7.7 The process in schedule 10 is prescriptive. In summary that sets out a notification period of 40 days with specific associated undertakings. If no objections are received the council may by public notice declare that the road is stopped. If objections are received those together with the plans and description of the proposed alterations will be referred to the Environment Court for determination.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

7.8 The decision involves 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.

7.9 The decision involves a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and could impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

7.10 Mana Whenua have made it clear that their primary outcome sought for the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor is its return to a viable mahinga kai gathering space. To achieve this, significant ecological improvements to the river margins and waterbody itself are required.

7.11 Removal of this portion of road would reduce pollutants and allow the riverbank to be naturalised, with habitat benefits as noted earlier.

7.12 Accordingly, the Ngāi Tahu rūnanga kaitiaki committee are supportive of removing the road.

7.13 Road stopping in this area was also presented to the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor Co-governance Establishment Committee at workshops in February and March 2023, receiving favourable feedback for the reasons noted above.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.14 Water levels in this portion of the river are influenced by the tide, meaning that over time the drainage issues will become worse. It also means that any lifting of the road will need to be futureproofed for further rises and will require significant fill and engineering.

7.15 With flood events predicted to become more common, the general approach in the corridor is to push the stopbanks away from the river, allowing the greatest possible floodplain. Rebuilding the road and stopbank at the river’s edge here would limit the area’s ability to ‘soak up’ flooding.

7.16 The engineering required to rebuild this road and add a river edge stopbank would have a significant carbon footprint, which could be avoided.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.17 This portion of Avonside Drive is not particularly accessible – with no functional footpaths, and the only ‘non-car’ access being a narrow gravel track at the top of the temporary stopbank.

7.18 Removal of the road would allow space for a walking/cycling connection here out to Wainoni Road.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement. As this report seeks a legal stopping only, there is no specific cost for Council to implement the physical works. There would be relatively minor survey and legal costs.

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs. There are no specific ongoing costs associated with the legal stopping. Closure and removal of the road would save ongoing OPEX, as noted earlier.

8.3 Funding Source. Surveying costs associated with stopping the road would be covered out of Parks Red Zone CAPEX budgets, following the Council resolution to progress this aspect. Future removal costs (and any Environment Court process) would likely be included in the future stopbank and Stormwater Management Area project, as closure of this road benefits that project.

Other He mea anō

8.4 There are no other aspects to consider.

9. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

9.1 In respect of the road stopping the powers and procedures set out Section 342 and schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974 will be used.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

9.2 The legal consideration is referred to above and as set out above in sections 7.1 to 7.7.

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 As this decision relates to the legal road stopping process, there is a risk that if there are objections, thereby having the determination referred to the Environment Court, that the final determination will be out of Council’s control.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Avonside Drive Partial Closure Stopbank Impacts	23/451667
b	Avonside Drive Partial Closure Traffic Modelling	23/451668
c	Avonside Drive Partial Closure Consultation Summary	23/452576
d	Avonside Drive Partial Closure Full Submissions Table	23/483798

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

Rob Shelton - Project Manager, Residential Red Zone

Swantje Bubritzki - Senior Engagement Advisor

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Approved By

David Little - Manager Residential Red Zone

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

03 May 2023

Report from Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board – 13 April 2023

10. Waltham Road Marking of Cycle Lanes Between Moorhouse Avenue and Brougham Street
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/561634
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Michael Ferigo, Transport Planner - Sustainable Transport (michael.ferigo@ccc.govt.nz) Kiran Skelton, Engagement Advisor (kiran.skelton@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board to consider the consulted proposal for cycle improvements, and make recommendations to Council to adopt the supporting lane marking changes.

1.2 The Christchurch Transport Strategic Plan recognises and supports measures to improve cycling within Christchurch. This project is identified as a local cycleway within the Plan and within the Long Term Plan capital programme.

This report arose from a Decision Report to the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board 13 April 2023 meeting.

1. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board recommends to Council that it approves, pursuant to Clause 18 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

1. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the west side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Brougham Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 261 metres to the intersection of Wordsworth Street.

2. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the west side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Wordsworth Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 542 metres to the intersection at Moorhouse Avenue.

3. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Moorhouse Avenue and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 30 metres.

4. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Shakespeare Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 275 metres.

5. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Shakespeare Road and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 235 metres to the intersection of Brougham Street.

That the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board:

6. Approves, pursuant to Section 334 of the Local Government Act 1974, the lane marking changes and road marking changes on Waltham Road as detailed on plan, For Approval - tp356901 in attachment A.

7. Approves that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the west side of Waltham Road commencing at its intersection with Brougham Street, and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 18 metres.

8. Approves that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the west side of Waltham Road commencing at its intersection with Kingsley Street, and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 655 metres.

9. Approves that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the east side of Waltham Road commencing at its intersection with Mowbray Street, and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 427 metres.

10. Approves that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the east side of Waltham Road commencing at its intersection with Brougham Street, and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 118 metres.

11. Approves that any previously approved resolutions on Waltham Road, from its intersection with Brougham Street to its intersection with Moorhouse Avenue, pertaining to parking and /or stopping restrictions, made pursuant to any bylaw or any Land Transport Rule, to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking and /or stopping restrictions described in recommendations 6 to 10 above, be revoked.

2. Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board Decisions Under Delegation Ngā Mana kua Tukuna

Part C

That the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board:

6. Approves, pursuant to Section 334 of the Local Government Act 1974, the lane marking changes and road marking changes on Waltham Road as detailed on plan, For Approval - tp356901 in attachment A.

12. Request that maintenance staff carry-out work at the same time; to paint the old red cycleway markings on Waltham Road in the new green-style, while the Waltham Road Marking of Cycle Lanes between Moorhouse Avenue and Brougham Street project is carried out.

3. Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board Recommendation to Council

Part A

That the Council approve, pursuant to Clause 18 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

3. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Moorhouse Avenue and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 30 metres.

4. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Shakespeare Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 275 metres.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Report Title	Reference	Page
1	Waltham Road Marking of Cycle Lanes Between Moorhouse Avenue and Brougham Street		174

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	For Approval - Waltham Road cycle lanes, Brougham Street to Moorhouse Avenue	23/231142	180

Council

03 May 2023

Waltham Road Marking of Cycle Lanes Between Moorhouse Avenue and Brougham Street
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/184718
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Michael Ferigo, Transport Planner - Sustainable Transport,(michael.ferigo@ccc.govt.nz) Kiran Skelton, Engagement Advisor (kiran.skelton@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

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

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board recommend to Council that it approves, pursuant to Clause 18 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

3. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Moorhouse Avenue and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 30 metres.

4. That Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle Lane) be installed on the east side of Waltham Road from the intersection of Shakespeare Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 275 metres.

That the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board:

6. Approves, pursuant to Section 334 of the Local Government Act 1974, the lane marking changes and road marking changes on Waltham Road as detailed on plan, For Approval - tp356901 in attachment A.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Currently there is a gap in the provision of cycle lanes along Waltham Road. This project proposes to address this gap by providing continuous cycle lanes between the main intersections. The proposal will result in providing a more consistent level of comfort and safety for people when travelling along Waltham Road.

3.2 Better utilisation of the existing road carriageway layout and supporting sustainable transport modes.

3.3 Minimal parking removal that the community has accepted in the interest of improved prioritisation to safe sustainable movement use on the road carriageway.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Maintain the status quo

4.1.1 The advantages of this option include:

· There is no cost to Council.

4.1.2 The disadvantage of this option include:

· Does not support safer outcomes for people using this section of Waltham Road.

· Is inconsistent with the Councils Strategic Framework Priorities of ‘Meeting the challenge of climate change through every means possible’ and its strategies - Christchurch Transport Strategic Plan and the Road to Zero safety targets.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Waltham Road and Wilsons Road South provide a radial commuting route connecting the inner city with the south eastern residential suburbs, schools and recreational port hills cycle trails, the Waltham outdoor pool and the St Martins shopping centre. Throughout the majority of the three kilometres of Waltham Road and Wilsons Road South’s length cycle lanes are provided, however within the 800 metre section of Waltham Road, closest to the inner city, there are sections with no cycle lanes. In these sections there are pinch points and narrow widths that make for uncomfortable and less safe riding conditions within the edge of a shared traffic lane environment.

5.2 This project is part of a programme of funding for works within the 2022/23 year under Local Cycleway Connections, Signs and Markings and also with additional resourcing from the wider traffic markings programme listed in the Long Term Plan.

5.3 The project involves only paint and pavement markings, with no construction, and if approved is scheduled to be implemented within this financial year.

5.4 Waltham Road is identified within the Councils Christchurch Strategic Transport Plan as a local cycleway route. This proposal looks to complete the cycle lane provision within the section from Brougham Street to Moorhouse Avenue. The new cycle lanes will remove pinch points and visually highlight areas where there are higher interactions and potential conflict with other road users, particularly in the approaches and departures at intersections through strategically limited localised use of colour surfacing.

5.5 A significant issue reported from cyclists on this route is of drivers encroaching into the existing cycle lane on the western side of Waltham Road in the approach down the bridge to the Moorhouse Avenue intersection. Whilst the left turn traffic lane adjacent to the kerb side cycle lane is wide enough for motorist to queue within, drivers regularly ‘drift’ into, queue and stop within the existing narrow cycle lane. The main concern - other than the legal issue or convenience - is the lack of safety for cyclists. The bridge, with a built high kerb offers cyclists little option for evasive actions from encroaching motorists. This project applies a series of short blocks of colour surfacing to highlight the existing cycle lane, and where possible slightly widens the narrow cycle lane. The road carriageway width on the bridge is very constrained and this is evidenced in the widths of all the marked lanes, however some marginal gains have been identified by reducing the traffic lane widths to target a cycle lane width of around 1.6 meters. It is expected that these proposed actions will significantly improve this issue.

5.6 To fully address this issue of encroachment a future option could be to widen the footpath along the whole of the bridges western side to create a physically separated shared path. This would be similar to the bridges eastern side constructed layout where cyclists use a shared pathway when southbound. This would result in a physically separated cycle facility but as a current option it is outside the budget scope of this project. The option, if still needed after this projects mitigation, can be put forward for Council consideration within the cycle network future budget improvement programme.

5.7 Improved connections between intersecting cycle route, through the introduction of hook turn markings at the intersection with Wordsworth and Shakespeare Roads.

5.8 The removal of a section of existing unrestricted on-road parking space, on the western side of the departure leg of Waltham Road with Brougham Street. This will provide an improved merge and alignment length at the start of the new cycle lane once crossed from Brougham Street.

5.9 The removal of an 18-metre, five minute on-road loading zone marked on the western side of Waltham Road, immediately in front of the property at number 233, to provide enough width for the new cycle lane. The immediate businesses have expressed that they have adequate parking, customer parking and loading options within their properties. It is evident that the loading zone which dates back twenty years is no longer needed and superfluous to the businesses current needs. It repurpose to support improved provision for cycling is proposed freeing up the complete block to provide a kerb Side cycle lane.

5.10 Reduction of the width of adjacent traffic lanes where needed. This will provide enough width for the cycle lanes, and is required alongside the new cycle lanes, and on the western side of the bridge section, to widen the existing narrow cycle lane.

5.11 The existing bus stop is scheduled to be reviewed as part of a route wide assessment in the near future. As such this project is not proposing any variations to the existing bus stop position and layout.

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

5.12.1 The Whaihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board area

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

6.1 Consultation started on 18 October 2022 and ran until 9 November 2022. During this time 62 businesses along Waltham Road were door knocked by staff with a Project Information leaflet explaining the project and inviting them to give feedback.

6.2 All businesses that staff engaged with along the road expressed support, were happy with the overall plan and what was proposed on the road adjacent to their property and with the removal of parking on the corner of Brougham Street and Waltham Road.

6.3 The business (235 Waltham Road) directly adjacent to the P5 parking, that is proposed to be repurposed into a cycle lane, expressed they were happy with this change as delivery vehicles use their on-site loading bay.

6.4 Businesses that were absent were left with a Project Information Leaflet in their mailbox. Staff did not hear from any businesses who were left a letter.

6.5 One Project Information Leaflet from a member of the public was received – suggesting several alternative cycle improvements that are outside the scope and budget of this project. They were responded to and are to be considered for future planning or were notified to maintenance or forwarded to Public Transport operations.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

7.1 The project is consistent with the Councils Strategic Priorities.

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

7.2.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.0.2 Increase the share of non-car modes in daily trips - >=36% of trips undertaken by non-car modes Level of Service: 10.5.1 Limit deaths and serious injuries per capita for cyclists and pedestrians.

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

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.4 The proposal aims to encourage more trips by cycle resulting in an outcome of minor positive effects when using cycling as an alternative to less polluting forms of transport. This is consistent with the Councils declaration of a Climate and Ecological Emergency and adoption of greenhouse gas emission targets for the district.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.5 The proposal improves accessibility for cyclists, drivers and pedestrians by providing safer means of travel for all users along this section of road corridor.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement - $ 95,000

8.2 The Councils maintenance programme for the city is forecast to cover standard and minor additions to Maintenance/Ongoing costs. Hence the costs are to be covered under the area of maintenance contract and markings programme, the effects of this magnitude and paint will be minimal.

8.3 Funding Source - Local Cycleway Connections, Signs and Markings CPMS # 58545 and the Traffic Road Markings and Signs programme CPMS # 50461.

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

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 legal, issue or implication relevant to this decision.

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 None identified.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	For Approval - Waltham Road cycle lanes, Brougham Street to Moorhouse Avenue	23/231142

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

Michael Ferigo - Transport Planner Sustainable Transport

Kiran Skelton - Engagement Assistant

Approved By

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

03 May 2023

11. Plan Change 5E Noise sensitive activities near roads and rail corridors - Decision
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/406927
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Abby Stowell, Policy Planner, abby.stowell@ccc.govt.nz
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of the report is for Council to consider the recommendations of the Hearing Panel delegated to hear submissions on Plan Change 5E (Noise sensitive activities near roads and rail corridors) and to make a decision on those recommendations.

1.2 Council notified Plan Change 5E in October 2020 which has subsequently been subject to submissions and a hearing.This report details the recommendations on the plan change following consideration by a Hearings Panel.

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: that there is a limited number of people affected; the impact on those affected is a moderate increase in construction costs; the level of interest from the wider community was very limited; and the impact on the current and future social, economic, environmental or cultural wellbeing of the District will be low, albeit positive.

Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receive the report and recommendations of the Hearings Panel on Plan Change 5E attached as Attachment A.

2. Accept, accept in part or reject the submissions on Plan Change 5E as recommended by the Hearings Panel for the reasons set out in Attachment A.

3. Adopt, as the decision of the Council, the recommendations of the Hearings Panel that Plan Change 5E be approved as per the Hearing Panel’s report as Attachment A, under clause 10 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Plan Change 5E addresses issues arising in respect of the interpretation and application of Rule 6.1.7.2.1 – sensitive activities near roads and railways of the District Plan, which requires the insulation of sensitive activities including residential buildings within defined distances of roads and rail corridors.

3.2 The Hearings Panel has considered the evidence presented by Council staff and consultants, alongside submissions from interested parties and has provided its recommendations.

3.3 The staff recommendation is to adopt the recommendations of Commissioners Paul Thomas, Andrew Henderson and Alan Matheson (Referred to hereafter as ‘Hearings Panel’ or ‘Panel’) on proposed Plan Change 5E. This has regard to the statutory process that the plan change has been through to this point and the consideration of the submissions and evidence received by the Hearings Panel.

3.4 The Hearings Panel have determined that the proposed plan change is appropriate with amendments as outlined in their report (Attachment A). A clean version of the plan change is also included (Attachment B).

Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The Council can adopt the Panel’s recommendation as its own decision, but the adoption must be of the recommendations in their entirety.

4.2 The Council cannot reject a recommendation outright or substitute its own decision as it has not heard the submissions and evidence. Legal advice is that natural justice principles would be infringed if the Council were to make a decision on the plan change that differs from the recommendation given by the Panel unless the Council gave the submitter the right to be heard when the Council reconsiders the proposed plan change.

4.3 Accordingly, the options available to the Council, if it does not wish to adopt the Panel’s recommendation as its decision, are to:

4.3.1 Refer the plan change back to the Panel with a direction that they reconsider their recommendation, and then adopt the subsequent recommendation of the Panel – which may be unchanged from the current recommendation. If the Council wishes to refer the matter back to the Panel, it must be satisfied that there are sufficient grounds for doing so. For example, if an issue the plan change is seeking to address has been overlooked. Those grounds do not exist here.

4.3.2 Appoint different commissioners or for Council to consider the plan change and supporting reports itself, ensuring that the new decision makers hear from the submitters.

4.3.3 Withdraw the plan change.

4.4 When considering these options Council should take into account that the plan change has already exceeded the two year limit set under the RMA for issuing a decision. This has been formally extended, through application to the Minister for the Environment, to 31^st March 2023. A further application seeking extension until 21^st June has been sent to the Minister.

Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The proposed plan change, PC5E was publicly notified on 22nd October 2020, as part of a group of plan changes (PC5), following pre-notification consultation in July – August 2020. A summary of submissions was notified for further submissions on 28 January 2020, closing on 12 February 2020.

5.2 The plan change attracted 12 submissions and 3 further submissions. Of the submitters 3 were government agencies, 2 were consultancies which offer acoustic engineering services (Acting for themselves), 1 was a community board and the remaining 6 were other companies generally involved in property management or development. There were no submissions from individuals.

5.3 Kāinga Ora were the only submitter to completely oppose the plan change. Of the other submitters, 8 supported the plan change, 2 supported it with amendments and 1 requested amendments with no indication of overall support or opposition.

5.4 A hearing was conducted and those wishing to speak were heard on 13th February 2023. Those speaking on behalf of council noted that the Kāinga Ora submission proposed a completely new requirement (mitigating road and railway noise at source) and this would not be efficient at protecting people, is not supported by acoustic evidence and would actually raise costs for the wider community instead of reducing them. Kāinga Ora did not attend the hearing.

5.5 The issues addressed at the hearing are summarised as follows:

a. Removal of the current façade reduction method (when the noise level is to be reduced by a set level, irrespective of the resulting internal noise level) which experts representing Council and submitters agreed can lead to over or under engineering. The Council’s planning officer recommended it be removed and the Hearings Panel concur with the evidence supporting this.

b. Scope of rule application. The Hearings Panel concur with the reporting officer’s recommendation that the rule should apply to the conversion of existing buildings and that the other submissions on scope be rejected.

The other submissions on scope proposed that:

i. the rule should not include collector roads with traffic levels under a set average annual daily traffic volume (this was superseded by a meeting between noise experts from the council and submitters where it was determined that exempting low noise environments was more effective);

ii. the rule should include a minimum acoustic standard for heritage buildings (this was deemed to be unworkable);

iii. the list of excluded spaces should be more encompassing (With the agreement of the Hearings Panel, the list was adjusted and clarified in consultation with the submitter);

iv. the increase in distance should be rejected;

v. land owners should not have to insulate for future effects; and

vi. proposed noise levels should not apply in bedrooms during the day time.

c. The location of the noise assessment. Submitters and Council agreed on minor word changes to clarify where measurements of distance between houses and noise sources are to start and end. The Hearings Panel agreed with these changes.

d. Ventilation. Submitters and Council met while the hearing was adjourned to discuss how to require adequate ventilation and thermal control in a building where windows must be closed to meet prescribed noise levels. The agreed outcome was to rely on the standards in the building code and word the rule accordingly. The Hearings Panel concurs with this.

e. Financial burden on landowners to mitigate effects generated by others. The Panel stated that the policy direction of the District Plan is that infrastructure is required to manage effects and land use activities are required to avoid reverse sensitivity effects. The proposal is consistent with this direction and the Panel concurs that this submission be rejected.

f. Consistency with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Kāinga Ora suggested that the proposed plan change was inconsistent with the NPS-UD. The Hearings Panel agrees with the planning analysis in the Council officer’s S42A report that the plan change is consistent with the NPS-UD. They noted that no evidence was given to the contrary.

g. Upper External Noise Limit. A submission seeking an upper external noise limit for application of the rule was given little weight by the Panel, with no evidence given at the hearing. They concluded that this issue does have some merit but raises wider issues than those considered in the plan change and should therefore be considered later as part of a wider review on the Noise Chapter.

5.6 The decision applies across the Christchurch District, excluding the central city. It affects all those intending to develop buildings in which a sensitive activity is to be carried out within 100m of railways and state highways, 40m from the edge of major or minor arterial roads or 20m from the edge of a collector road.

Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

6.1 The decision supports the current policies and objectives of the District Plan and does not depart from them.

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.2.1 Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

· Level of Service: 9.5.1.1 Guidance on where and how the city grows through the District Plan. - Maintain operative District Plan, including monitoring outcomes to inform changes, and giving effect to national and regional policy statements

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.6 This decision has no significant impact on climate change considerations.

6.7 Enabling sensitive activities to occur near roads and railways supports a more dense urban form, which in turn supports a reduction in greenhouse gasemissions as people do not have to travel so far to access shops, places of employment etc.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.8 This decision does not have a significant impact on accessibility beyond what is described above.

Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Adopting the proposed plan change will not result in additional costs to Council beyond what has been budgeted for except for additional costs associated with monitoring and enforcement.

7.2 The costs of staff time on proposed Plan Change 5E have been assumed in the budgets of the Planning and Strategic Transport unit as part of the Annual Plan and Long Term Plan.

Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Sections 74 and 75 of the RMA set out the Council's obligations when preparing a change to its District Plan. The Panel’s report has applied the appropriate considerations under the RMA.

8.2 The legal framework for the Council’s decision on the Panel’s recommendations is set out in Part 4 above.

8.3 Submitters have the right to appeal to the Environment Court against the Council’s decision on PC5E.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Council is statutorily required to have an operative District Plan at all times. Issues have been identified with the District Plan which will be addressed through this Plan Change. Therefore, the risk of not acting is considered greater than the risk of acting.

9.2 Council is required to issue a decision on matters raised in submissions no longer than 2 years after notifying the plan change (RMA Schedule 1, Part 1, clause 10(4(a)). The Minister for Environment extended the timeframe for this plan change from October 2023 to March 31^st 2023. A request for a second extension until 21^st June 2023 has been put to the Minister. With this in mind, and as part of its duty under the RMA, Council is required to avoid unreasonable delay in issuing a decision.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A	23/503919	187
b ⇩	Plan Change 5E clean version of rules	23/553946	227

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Nil

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

Abby Stowell - Policy Planner

Mark Stevenson - Manager Planning

Approved By

Brent Pizzey - Senior Legal Counsel

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

03 May 2023

12. Plan Change 6 Homebase Extension - Final approval
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/416650
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Mark Stevenson, Manager Planning, mark.stevenson@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 Council is being asked to approve that plan change 6 (Homebase extension) is made operative under clause 17 of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act. The Environment Court issued a Consent Order on 21st February 2023 following an appeal by Reefville Properties, which is now resolved.

1.2 The Council's decision of 30 June 2022 to approve Plan Change 6 to the Christchurch District Plan was appealed to the Environment Court by Reefville Properties. Mediation occured in November at which agreement was reached to a revised set of provisions.

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 the low number of affected parties and low costs or risks to the Council, ratepayers and wider community of carrying out the decision.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve the changes to the District Plan as set out in the attached Consent Order of the Environment Court dated 21st February 2023 on Private Plan Change 6 (Homebase Extension), pursuant to Clause 17(2) of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act, to become operative on 13th May 2023.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Plan Change 6 (Homebase extension) is a private plan change request to rezone the adjoining land to the north of the existing Homebase retail centre on Marshland Road from Residential Suburban zone to Commercial Retail Park.

3.2 The staff recommendation is to approve the changes to the District Plan in accordance with the Consent Order issued by the Environment Court dated 21^st February 2023. This has regard to the statutory process that the plan change has been through including the outcome of the appeal process.

3.3 The Consent Order is attached, which orders that “the appeal (on the plan change) is allowed to the extent that the Christchurch City Council is directed to amend Private Plan Change 6 to the Christchurch District Plan by making changes shown in Appendix 1 (forming part of the consent order)”. The order is consistent with what was agreed between Council and Reefville Properties at mediation.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The recommendation in this report is for the Council to take the procedural step to make Plan Change 6 operative. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that, following the end of the appeal period and the resolution of any appeals, a local authority must formally approve the changes to the plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 before the plan change becomes operative on a date that is nominated in a public notice.

4.2 There are no reasonable alternatives, having regard to the Court issuing a Consent Order allowing the appeal and it being consistent with what Council and Reefville Properties agreed at mediation.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The plan change was publicly notified on the 15 October 2020 with the submissions period closing on 16 November 2020. Sixty-eight (68) submissions were received on PC6, comprising 119 submission points. Of these, 11 submission points supported or supported in part PC6, 26 sought amendments to PC6, 3 were neutral, and 79 opposed or opposed in part PC6.

5.2 The main issues raised by the submitters were:

5.2.1 Traffic effects including access from the site to Clearbrook Palms subdivision.

5.2.2 Economic effects on the centres based framework for Christchurch.

5.2.3 Urban Design effects and possible mitigations.

5.2.4 Environmental Health concerns regarding noise and light spill.

5.2.5 The loss of residential zoned land.

5.2.6 Concerns regarding sufficiency of infrastructure.

5.3 Further submissions were sought on 18 January 2021 and closed 1 February 2021.

5.4 Council appointed a Hearings Panel to hear the submissions. The hearing was held in July 2021 and resumed in November 2021 following a request from the Panel for additional planning and economic evidence.

5.5 The Panel’s recommendation was to adopt PC6 and to accept, accept in part or reject the submissions on PC6, which was approved by Council on 30^th June 2022.

5.6 On Wednesday 3 August 2022, Reefville Properties filed an appeal in the Environment Court on Proposed Plan Change 6, seeking to delete policies and rules in the Council’s decision on PC6 that:

5.6.1 restrict store types (i.e. no supermarket, department store, clothing or footwear stores) until 2031; and

5.6.2 require a minimum building setback from road boundaries of 12m. The appeal seeks that this be changed to 6m.

5.7 Submitters on the plan change were provided the opportunity to join the appeal but none chose to join as s274 parties.

5.8 Mediation was held on 2-3 and 24 November 2022 on the appeal, involving the two parties to the appeal, being Council and Reefville Properties. Agreement was reached at mediation on a revised set of provisions, which are included in the Consent Order.

5.9 A key issue that was worked through at mediation was the effects of the rezoning on the Shirley/ Palms Key Activity Centre. As a consequence of mediation, amendments were agreed to the provisions relating to the Northern Homebase Centre, subject to the private plan change request, and the existing Homebase centre to the immediate south.

5.10 It was agreed by economic experts for both parties that it is appropriate to treat the Northern and Southern Homebase centres as a cohesive whole centre when considering potential adverse retail distributional effects on other centres. Further, the experts were satisfied that applying limitations on retail activities across the whole centre, as agreed by the parties, would not increase adverse retail distributional impacts on other retail centres, compared to the status quo as represented by:

5.10.1 the retail and staging limitations imposed on the Northern Homebase centre in the decisions version of PC6; and

5.10.2 the retail activity provisions applying to the area zoned Commercial Retail Park before the decision on PC6, being the Southern Homebase centre.

5.11 As there will be no increase in adverse retail distributional impacts on other retail centres compared to the status quo, there will be no change in terms of the District Plan provisions relating to retail distributional impacts and the centres-based framework for commercial activities.

5.12 Once the resolution is made by the Council, public notice must be given that the change will become operative on a date specified in the notice. This date must be at least 5 working days after the notice is published.

5.13 The decision affects the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board, noting that the the boundary between this Community Board and Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board is Marshland Road. Both Community Boards made submissions on the plan change request, while noting that neither board joined the appeal.

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: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

· Level of Service: 9.5.4 Process private plan change requests. - 100% of any proposed private plan changes comply with statutory processes and timeframes

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

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.6 This decision has no impact on accessibility.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - The cost of amending the District Plan consistent with the decision of the Environment Court is a one-off cost.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – There are ongoing costs to monitor the effectiveness of the District Plan, reflecting our statutory requirement under section 35 of the Resource Management Act.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The recommendation in this report is for the Council to take the procedural step to make Plan Change 6 operative. The Council has no other option. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that, following the end of the appeal period and the resolution of any appeals, a local authority must formally approve the changes to the plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 before the plan change becomes operative on a date that is nominated in a public notice. Approving changes to the District Plan so that they can be made operative is one of the functions that cannot be delegated to staff under the RMA.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 There is no other legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision. The Legal Services Unit has reviewed this report.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Council is statutorily required to have an operative District Plan at all times. The decision to be made is to reflect the Environment Court’s decision to allow the appeal on Plan Change 6. If this is not approved, the Council is in breach of its RMA obligations and there is a risk of further legal challenge.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Environment Court Consent Order	23/480288	236

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

Mark Stevenson - Manager Planning

Approved By

Brent Pizzey - Senior Legal Counsel

John Higgins - Head of Planning & Consents

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

5. Council Minutes - 5 April 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/517147
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)

6. Council Minutes - 19 April 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/574174
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)

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report April 2023	23/492310	34
b ⇩	Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Area Report April 2023	23/492311	46
c ⇩	Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board Area Report April 2023	23/492312	56
d ⇩	Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report April 2023	23/492313	70
e ⇩	Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board Area Report April 2023	23/492314	76
f ⇩	Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board Area Report April 2023	23/492315	82

7. Monthly Report from the Community Boards - April 2023
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/492168
Report of Te Pou Matua:	The Chairpersons of all Community Boards
General Manager Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

8. Proposed Unsolicited Property Acquisition by the Crown - Part 502 Ferry Road
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/541187
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Barry Woodland, Property Consultant, Sustainable City Growth & Development (barry.woodland@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

9. Legal stopping of Avonside Drive between Kerrs Road and Wainoni Road, as well as Kerrs Road north of #144
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/541132
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Rob Shelton, Project Manager Residential Red Zone Angus Smith, Manager Property Consultancy Swantje Bubritzki, Senior Engagement Advisor
General Manager Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)