Agenda of Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

Unconfirmed

A black text on a white background

Description automatically generated

Waipapa

Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

Open Minutes

Date: Wednesday 12 July 2023

Time: 10.06am

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

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Emma Norrish

Simon Britten

Pauline Cotter

Sunita Gautam

Victoria Henstock

Ali Jones

Jake McLellan

John Miller

Emma Twaddell

Emma Pavey

Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes-Central

941 5107

emma.pavey@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Part A Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B Reports for Information

Part C Decisions Under Delegation

Karakia Tīmatanga

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1. Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00046

That the apologies received from Victoria Henstock for early departure, and Pauline Cotter for partial absence, be accepted.

Jake McLellan/Ali Jones Carried

Victoria Henstock did not depart the meeting early.

2. Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

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

Part C

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00047

That the minutes of the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board meeting held on Thursday, 15 June 2023 be confirmed.

Simon Britten/Sunita Gautam Carried

4. Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

4.1 Public Forum - Mark Wilson

Mark Wilson addressed the Board regarding the engagement process on the future of Shirley Community Reserve.

5. Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

5.1

Lucy Forrester

Lucy Forrester did not speak.

5.2

Storm McVay

Storm McVay did not speak.

5.3

Ray Edwards

Ray Edwards did not speak.

5.4

Antony Gough

Antony Gough spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.5

Richard Peebles

Richard Peebles did not speak.

5.6

Stephen Chiles

Stephen Chiles spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.7

Andrew Marsh

Andrew Marsh spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.8

Greg Urquhart

Greg Urquhart spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.9

Rob Woolley

Rob Woolley spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.10

Michelle Leishman

Michelle Leishman spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.11

Mary O’Leary

Mary O’Leary spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.12

John Symon

John Symon spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

The meeting adjourned at 10.54am and reconvened at 11.15am.

5.13

Canterbury/West Coast Automobile Association District Council

John Skevington spoke on behalf of Canterbury/West Coast Automobile Association District Council regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.14

Vanessa Merritt

Vanessa Merritt spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.15

Grace Campbell

Grace Campbell did not speak.

5.16

Susan Thorpe

Susan Thorpe spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, noting the Board had the written copy in advance as attached, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

Attachments

a Susan Thorpe Presentation

5.17

Rosie Fyfe

Rosie Fyfe spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.18

Jack Wright

Jack Wright spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.19

Dianne Downward

Dianne Downward spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.20

Helen Broughton

Helen Broughton spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

The meeting adjourned at 12noon and reconvened at 1pm. Pauline Cotter was not in attendance when the meeting reconvened.

5.21

Clare Sargeant and Florence

Clare Sargeant and her daughter, Florence, spoke via recorded audiovisual link regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes, accompanied by the attached written summary of their presentation.

Attachments

a Clare Sargeant and Florence Presentation

5.22

Spokes

Anne Scott spoke on behalf of Spokes regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, noting the Board had the attached presentation in advance, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

Attachments

a Anne Scott Presentation

5.23

Stephen Wood

Stephen Wood spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, noting the Board had the attached presentation in advance, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

Attachments

a Stephen Wood Presentation

5.24

Teresa Allpress

Teresa Allpress being unexpectedly unable to speak on the day regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes, provided the attached presentation, which was circulated to the Board in advance of her time to speak.

Attachments

a Teresa Allpress Presentation

5.25

Christopher Webster

Christopher Webster spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.26

Matthew Reid

Matthew Reid spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, noting the Board had the attached presentation in advance, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

Attachments

a Matthew Reid Presentation

5.27

Living Streets and the Active Canterbury Network

Meg Christie spoke on behalf of Living Streets and the Active Canterbury Network regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.28

Mike Rowe

Mike Rowe did not speak.

5.29

Elliott Grey

Elliott Grey did not speak.

5.30

Sophie Burtt

Sophie Burtt spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.32	Ian Wells Ian Wells spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.35	Margarita Parra Margarita Parra spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.31

Stu Waddel

Stu Waddel spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.33

Piper Pengelly

Piper Pengelly did not speak.

8. 519 Madras Street - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00048 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. 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 2 below.

2. Approve, pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the west side of Madras Street, commencing at its intersection with Canon Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 26.5 metres.

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

Jake McLellan/Sunita Gautam Carried

11. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report - July 2023

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00049 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part B

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receive the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report for July 2023.

Emma Norrish/John Miller Carried

10. Proposed Road Names - 10 Edron Place

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00050 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Approves the following new lane name for 10 Edron Place (RMA/2021/3843)

a. Lane 1 - Kākāpō Lane

Simon Britten/John Miller Carried

The meeting adjourned at 1.57pm and reconvened at 2.20pm.

5.34

Nathan Dougherty

Nathan Dougherty spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.36

Bridget O’Brien

Bridget O’Brien spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

9. Chester Street East- Barbadoes Street to Fitzgerald Avenue, Proposed Parking & Stopping Restrictions

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00051 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Approves that any previous resolutions pertaining to parking and no stopping restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking and no stopping restrictions described in recommendations 2-6 below, be revoked.

2. Approves, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Chester Street East commencing at its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue, and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 21 metres.

3. Approves, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the parking of all vehicles on the northern side of Chester Street East be restricted to 90˚angle parking relative to the kerb line, commencing at a point 21 metres west of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue, and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 28 metres.

4. Approves, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Chester Street East commencing at a point 49 metres west of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue, and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of seven metres.

5. Approves, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the parking of all vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of 120 minutes on the northern side of Chester Street East commencing at a point 56 metres west of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue, and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 14 metres. These parks are further restricted to 90˚angle parking relative to the kerb line.

6. Approves, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of all vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Chester Street East commencing at a point 70 metres west of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue, and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 29 metres.

7. Approves that these recommendations, if approved, to 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).

John Miller/Sunita Gautam Carried

5.37

Kari Hunter

Kari Hunter spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

Pauline Cotter returned to the meeting at 2.40pm.

5.39

David Skipper

David Skipper spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.38

Fiona Bennetts

Fiona Bennetts spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes; as she had sent through to the Board her attached pre-survey correspondence it was also circulated to the Board in advance of her time to speak. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

Attachments

a Fiona Bennetts Correspondence

5.40

Generation Zero

Nick Reid did not speak. In his place Rosa Shaw spoke on behalf of Generation Zero regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.41

Kevin Searle

Kevin Searle spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.42

Dave Gardner

Dave Gardner spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.43

Sustainable Ōtautahi Christchurch

Colleen Phillip and David Guthrey spoke on behalf of Sustainable Ōtautahi Christchurch regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.44

Rosalind Newman

Rosalind Newman spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

5.45

Robin McCarthy

Robin McCarthy spoke regarding Item 7, Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes. The Chairperson acknowledged the deputation, with thanks for taking the time to speak to the Board.

6. Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

The meeting adjourned at 3.26pm and reconvened at 3.36pm.

7. Rolleston Avenue and Park Terrace changes
	Board Consideration Before considering this item, the Board heard a number of deputations on it from persons and groups as listed earlier in these minutes. The Board considered the views and information from the speakers, the report, and the separately circulated public feedback resulting from the engagement process, before deciding on its recommendations to the Council. The Board accepted the officer recommendations without change in respect of its recommendations to the Council. The Board additionally resolved to request that staff brief the Community Board on an annual basis in relation to 12 monthly reviews of the Temporary Traffic Management Plan to be undertaken if the Council accepts the recommendations.
	Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board: 1. Considers the results of the public engagement process on the changes to Park Terrace (Attachment A), and in doing so hear any deputations. That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board recommends that the Council: 2. Approves the changes to Rolleston Avenue (Attachment B) for a five year period, which is the expected duration of the Canterbury Museum redevelopment project, and will be given effect through a Temporary Traffic Management Plan; 3. Notes that the Temporary Traffic Management Plan for the changes to Rolleston Avenue is required to be reviewed on a 12-monthly basis. 4. Approves the changes to Park Terrace (Attachment C) for a further trial period of five years: a. Retaining the changes to Park Terrace as implemented for the: i. Two-way cycle way on-road ii. Pedestrian refuge crossing north of Armagh Street between two-way cycleway and traffic lanes iii. Speed cushions on southbound lane on approach to the crossing iv. Removal of one northbound traffic lane v. Reconfigured cycle / pedestrian crossing at Salisbury Street b. Changing the layout at the bus stop opposite Peterborough Street to remove the in-lane bus stop and bus border arrangement, and replace it with an indented bus stop. 5. Notes that if the Council agrees to the recommendations in this report, staff will report back to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board with resolutions to change the bus stop resolution under the Community Board delegation.
	Procedural Motion That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board: 1. Lays the report on the table. Ali Jones/Victoria Henstock Lost
	Community Board Decided PCBCC/2023/00052 Part A That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board recommends the Council: 3.b. Changing the layout at the bus stop opposite Peterborough Street to remove the in-lane bus stop and bus border arrangement, and replace it with an indented bus stop. The division was declared carried* by 6 votes to 3 votes the voting being as follows:* *For:* Emma Norrish, Pauline Cotter, Sunita Gautam, Victoria Henstock, Ali Jones and Jake McLellan *Against:* Simon Britten, John Miller and Emma Twaddell Emma Norrish/Pauline Cotter Carried
	Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2023/00053 Part C That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board: 1. Notes it has considered the results of the public engagement process on the changes to Park Terrace (Attachment A), and the deputations heard on the report. 2. Requests that staff brief the Community Board on an annual basis in relation to 12 monthly reviews of the Temporary Traffic Management Plan to be undertaken if the Council accepts the recommendations. Emma Norrish/Pauline Cotter Carried

Community Board Decided PCBCC/2023/00054 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part A

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board recommends that the Council:

1. Approves the changes to Rolleston Avenue (Attachment B) for a five year period, which is the expected duration of the Canterbury Museum redevelopment project, and will be given effect through a Temporary Traffic Management Plan.

2. Notes that the Temporary Traffic Management Plan for the changes to Rolleston Avenue is required to be reviewed on a 12-monthly basis.

3. Approves the changes to Park Terrace (Attachment C) for a further trial period of five years:

a. Retaining the changes to Park Terrace as implemented for the:

i. Two-way cycle way on-road

ii. Pedestrian refuge crossing north of Armagh Street between two-way cycleway and traffic lanes

iii. Speed cushions on southbound lane on approach to the crossing

iv. Removal of one northbound traffic lane

v. Reconfigured cycle / pedestrian crossing at Salisbury Street

4. Notes that if the Council agrees to the recommendations in this report, staff will report back to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board with resolutions to change the bus stop resolution under the Community Board delegation.

Emma Norrish/Pauline Cotter Carried

Ali Jones and Victoria Henstock requested that their votes against the recommendations be recorded.

Secretarial note: Recommendation 3.b. was, upon request, voted on separately first so as to establish whether this vote was for Option 1 or 2 in the report. As recommendation 3.b. was carried by division as shown further above, it forms part of these carried recommendations to the Council, which accordingly reflect the Board recommending Option 2 in the report.

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

Part B

Board members exchanged information on matters of interest, including in relation to:

· Stakeholder hui regarding engagement on the future of Shirley Community Reserve.

Karakia Whakamutunga

Meeting concluded at 5.37pm.

CONFIRMED THIS 10^th DAY OF AUGUST 2023

Emma Norrish

Chairperson

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

8. Community Parks Urban Forest Planting Plan
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1093000
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Richard Gibbs (Senior project manager), Toby Chapman, City Arborist (toby.chapman@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 By making a decision the Community Board will be exercising their delegation to approve and adopt any new landscape development plan for Parks and Reserves provided the design is within the policy and budget set by the Council.

1.2 Following the adoption of the citywide Urban Forest Plan, Staff have produced the first set of planting schemes for the city. One plan has been completed for each Community Board area with low canopy Wards having additional plans proposed.

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 assessing the impact that planting these parks would have on the city. Staff have also taken steps to minimise the impact of this planting through the use of species selection and tree placement.

1.4 For any planting to occur this planting season a decision of the Board is required.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Approve the urban forest planting plan for Lancaster Park.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Staff have produced a plan for Lancaster Park to provide for a significant increase in tree planting. This plan has been designed in alignment with the Urban Forest Plan, with a focus on increasing the city’s canopy cover, in particular within the open space environment.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Plan is not approved.

4.1.1 Advantage:

4.1.2 If Community board have significant concerns with the plans they would have the opportunity make changes.

4.1.3 Disadvantage:

4.1.4 Staff have a limited tree planting season (ending in September). If plans are not approved, no planting will be able to occur this year.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Between 30 June and 17 July we released 14 tree planting plans for public consultation. To help raise awareness of the consultations, we emailed some key stakeholders, promoted the consultation via a story on Newsline, and put up signage at key points in each park with a link to the Have Your Say page.

5.2 We received 145 submissions during the consultation period. Some of the submissions were general and related to all of the plans, while others were specific to a park or parks.

5.3 Of the general submissions (36), a significant proportion were related to species selection, or indicating a preference for a greater representation of native trees. Staff have taken this onboard and will be adjusting the tree species for each park accordingly.

5.4 Some submissions also highlighted concerns around ongoing maintenance of the trees. As part of the parks planting programme, all trees will be maintained for the first seven years before being included in our normal tree maintenance programme.

5.5 We received three submissions specifically relating to Lancaster Park.

5.5.1 Two of the submissions (Mainland Football and Cashmere Technical Football Club) relate to concerns about potential damage to playing fields.

5.5.2 ChristchurchNZ also provided a submission that was supportive in principle but wanted to ensure that the height and type of trees along the boundaries are appropriate for the future built form aspirations for the area (e.g. potentially 4-6 storey apartment living).

5.6 A planting plan was also produced for Redwood Park. This received a high number of submissions from local residents and sporting groups. Staff are working through this feedback and are looking to engage with the relevant groups before returning to the Community Board for a decision.

5.7 The decision affects the following areas:

5.7.1 This decision will affect the immediate communities and stakeholders such as sport groups and community groups who use the park.

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):

6.2 Parks, Heritage and Coastal Environment

6.2.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.8.2.1 Increasing tree canopy in Parks - A net increase in total number of trees is achieved (1:2 replacement policy), with a minimum of 50% of the trees being medium to very large species.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.3 The decision is consistent with Council’s Urban Forest Plan and other relevant Policies.

6.4 All planting will be in alignment with the Tree Policy, Infrastructure Design Standards and Construction Standard Specification.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 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.

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

6.7 Mana Whenua values, as expressed in the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan, have been incorporated into the Urban Forest Plan. These planting plans are part of the implementation of this plan.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 The decisions in this report are likely to:

6.8.1 Contribute positively to adaptation to the impacts of climate change.

6.8.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

6.9 The plans will result in an increase in canopy cover across the city. As trees sequester carbon, this will have a positive impact on the Councils emissions reduction.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.10 The trees have been planted with a setback from paths to avoid issues relating to roots and adjacent infrastructure.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – $150,000

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - $nil (included in the implementation costs)

7.3 Funding Source – currently funded under Lancaster Park Redevelopment

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Council has the delegation to plant trees within the Park.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 The greatest risk to this project is the availability of trees and the ability to plant the trees before the end of the planting season.

9.2 If trees are not available or planting is not able to be completed, these parks will be completed during the next planting season.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Lancaster Park	23/1192322	29
b ⇩	Submission Table	23/1195325	41

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

Natasha di Michele - Personal Assistant

Toby Chapman - City Arborist

Katy McRae - Head of Communications & Engagement

Richard Gibbs - Senior Project Manager

Approved By

Al Hardy - Manager Community Parks

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

9. Pavitt Street - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/925935
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 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board to consider options to improve access along Pavitt Street. This report has been written following concerns raised about the function of the street by residents, due to its very narrow width.

1.2 The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the low level of impact and low number of people affected by the recommended decision.

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

1.4 The recommended option is to install No Stopping restrictions and remove existing parking restrictions in accordance with Attachment A.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Revoke any previous resolutions pertaining to Parking and Stopping Restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw:

a. On the south side of London Street commencing at its intersection with Pavitt Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 9m.

b. On the south side of London Street commencing at its intersection with Pavitt Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 11m.

c. On both sides of Pavitt Street commencing at its intersection with London Street and extending in a southerly direction to its intersection with Alexandra Street.

2. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time as detailed in Resolutions 2a-2g below:

a. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the west side of Pavitt Street commencing at its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 150.5 metres.

b. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the west side of Pavitt Street commencing at its intersection with London Street and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

c. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of London Street, commencing at its intersection with Pavitt Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of nine metres.

d. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of London Street commencing at its intersection with Pavitt Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 11 metres.

e. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the east side of Pavitt Street commencing at its intersection with London Street and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 141.5 metres.

f. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the east side of Pavitt Street commencing at its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 37 metres.

g. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the east side of Pavitt Street commencing at a point 44.5 metres north of its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of four metres.

3. Approves that these Resolutions 1a to c and 2a to g 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).

4. Notes that some of the above recommendations effectively reinstate some sections of existing No Stopping restrictions.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Pavitt Street is a narrow, two-way, local street. We have received four safety related service requests from residents and a local councillor to assess the current parking arrangement. The main concern is when vehicles are parked on both sides of the street, this can affect through access. This is particularly relevant to larger vehicles, such as emergency and refuse vehicles. A number of residents, particularly at the northern end of Pavitt Street, are also finding that access to their driveways is compromised.

3.2 Implementing the No Stopping restriction recommendations will improve safety by allowing improved access for larger i.e. emergency vehicles and will improve the driveway access for residents.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Do nothing:

4.1 The advantages of this option include:

· Retains approximately 28 P5 time restricted on-street parking spaces.

· Retains 2 unrestricted on-street parking spaces. Although currently there are no parking restrictions opposite the remaining P5 spaces, motorists may consider that the ability to park unrestricted on the west side of Pavitt Street is being removed by the installation of the No Stopping lines however these spaces are not currently legally viable if vehicles are parked in the P5 spaces opposite. This is because they would then restrict the available road width between parked vehicles to around 2.3 metres, which could be considered contrary to Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 Clause 6.1 Vehicles must be parked with due care and consideration).

· Does not displace parking to other locations.

4.2 The disadvantages of the option include:

· Does not address the safety concerns relating to through access of large vehicles, including emergency vehicles, when vehicles are parked on both sides.

· Does not address the issues residents are having with access to and from their driveways caused by the current parking provisions and demand.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Pavitt Street is classified as a Local Road in the Councils Road Classification System. These roads function almost entirely for access purposes and are not intended to act as through routes.

5.2 Pavitt Street is a two-way, narrow street at 6.3 metres wide. It is a mix of residential and commercial property. The street is also fronted by Richmond Cottage Reserve and Park and Kingslea School (which does not have the same morning and afternoon drop off requirements associated with most other schools). The Seabrook McKenzie Centre has an access onto Pavitt Street at the northern end, opposite Richmond Cottage.

5.3 The existing parking situation is as follows:

Pavitt Street – West Side

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing at its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for 23.5 metres.

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing 46 metres north of its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for 15 metres.

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing 147 metres north of its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for three metres.

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing four metres south of its intersection with London Street and extending in a southerly direction for twelve metres.

· There are approximately 28 existing unrestricted parking spaces on the west side of Pavitt Street.

Pavitt Street – East Side

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing three metres south of its intersection with London Street and extending in a southerly direction for 13 metres.

· Timed “P5 At Any Time” Parking restriction commencing 16 metres south of its intersection with London Street and extending in a southerly direction for 218 metres. Note that there are currently some consistency issues with existing signage, in that some of the P5 parking signs do not include the text “At any time”.

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing 44.5 metres north of its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for four metres.

· No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) commencing at its intersection with Alexandra Street and extending in a northerly direction for 37 metres.

· There are approximately 28 existing “P5 At Any Time” restricted parking spaces and one unrestricted space (outside #8).

5.4 This proposal will remove the 28 “P5 At Any Time” restricted on-street parking spaces however it retains approximately 27 unrestricted parking spaces.

5.5 The existing “P5 at any time” restriction is not being adhered to by motorists and vehicles are parking for considerably longer than the allowable 5 minutes. This, combined with the narrow width of Pavitt Street, is restricting through access. We are therefore proposing to remove the “P5 At Any Time” and replace a portion of it with a No Stopping restriction, leaving the remainder available for unrestricted parking.

5.6 The current speed limit is 50km/hour, however Pavitt Street and London Street are local streets that have recently had speed limit reduction to 30km/hour approved as part of Councils Safe Speed Neighbourhood project.

5.7 The Christchurch Suburban Parking Policy (2019) Policy 10 provides guidance for reviewing the allocation of parking in circumstances where the street is less than seven metres wide and there are recognised parking issues “If the carriageway of a street is less than 7 metres in width and there are known access problems (i.e. there are limited places for vehicles to pass and/or emergency access may be compromised), Council will propose to remove parking on one side of the street.” There is a link to the Suburban Parking Policy in Section 6.4 of this report.

There can also be issues with people parking on the footpath of these narrow streets, degrading pedestrian accessibility, safety and amenity of the street.

When removing parking on one side of a street, engineering best practice is to alternate the parking from one side to another. This has a traffic calming effect on speed which is especially desirable our neighbourhood streets. Our proposal therefore alternates the No Stopping restriction as shown on Attachment A.

5.8 We are also proposing to install a No Stopping restriction outside #5 Pavitt Street which removes two unrestricted parking spaces. It is good engineering practice for any No Stopping restriction adjacent to a road centreline to extend beyond this. This is a safety issue and prevents vehicles having to manoeuvre around parked cars, crossing the centreline as they transit through the intersection.

5.9 The parking compliance team have issued eleven infringement notices in the past two years; six for parking in the P5 outside #31 Pavitt Street, two for parking on broken yellow lines, three for parking on the footpath and one for no WOF.

5.10 The parking compliance team leader supports these proposals.

5.11 There was one reported crash on Pavitt Street in the last five years which was unrelated to the current parking layout. This street has no risk classification under Council’s high risk intersection mapping system.

5.12 Approval is required by the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

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

Community Views and Preferences

5.14 Summary of feedback

A consultation letter and plan showing the proposals was sent to all residents and property owners. The first consultation plan is shown in Attachment B. Our original proposals were to install a No Stopping Restriction on the east side at the north end of the street, then alternate to the west side approximately opposite Kingslea School. We also proposed to extend the broken yellow lines at the south end of Pavitt Street for the reason explained in Section 5.6 of this report.

We received six responses to our original consultation:

· One resident in full support of the proposals.

· Three from residents and the Seabrook McKenzie Centre, located at northern end of Pavitt Street opposite the park, who were generally supportive. All expressed however that they currently have difficulties entering and exiting their driveways when vehicles are parked on the east side of the street.

· Two residents expressed their objection to our original proposal. Both residents are at south end of the street and did not want to lose the on-street parking spaces outside their properties. One of the respondents also commented that the lighting outside the school is inadequate and they felt that parking on the opposite side to the school would be safer.

Taking into account residents’ comments, staff amended the proposals to those shown on Attachment A. This included mirroring the broken yellow lines, and removing the section previously proposed outside #8. The broken yellow lines on the west side outside #5 are however necessary to keep the approach to and from the intersection clear; these are the only two unrestricted, parking space to be removed as part of these proposals. Residents were informed by letter of the subsequent changes to our initial consultation, which included a plan of the updated proposals. We received two responses to this, both from previous submitters, who expressed their gratitude for taking into account their opinions and supported the new proposal.

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):

6.3 Transport

6.3.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.0.6.1 Reduce the number of death and serious injury crashes on the local road network - ≤ 105 crashes (Year 3, 2023/24 target)

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7 This proposal improves accessibility for pedestrians/cyclists/drivers, by providing a safer means of both transiting through Pavitt Street and accessing properties.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – approximately $800 for the new road markings, $400 to remove the existing signage and $750 for producing the report.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – approximately $200 a year.

7.3 Funding Source - Traffic Operations Signs and Markings budget (installation)/existing Transport maintenance budgets for ongoing maintenance.

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 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.

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

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Not applicable.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Pavitt Street, Proposed No Stopping Restrictions, For Board Approval	23/1049682	86
b ⇩	Attachment B - Pavitt Street, Proposed No Stopping Restrictions, Consultation Plan	23/1049684	87

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name	Location / File Link
Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Sally-Ann Marshall - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Katie Smith - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

10. Moa Place - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/472448
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 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board to consider options to improve access along Moa Place. This report has been written following concerns raised about the function of the street by residents, due to its very narrow width.

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

1.4 The recommended option is to install No Stopping restrictions and parking lines in accordance with Attachment A.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Revoke any previous resolutions pertaining to parking and stopping restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking and stopping restrictions described in Resolutions 2a to c below.

2. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on Moa Place as detailed in Resolutions 2a-2c below:

a. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Moa Place, commencing at its intersection with Madras Street and extending in an easterly direction following the kerb around the eastern end of Moa Place in a clockwise direction then extending in a westerly direction on the southern side of Moa Place to a point 89 metres east of its intersection with Madras Street.

b. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Moa Place commencing at a point 53.5 metres east of its intersection with Madras Street, and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 4.5 metres.

c. the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Moa Place commencing at its intersection with Madras Street, and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 9.5 metres.

3. Approves that these Resolutions 1 and 2a to c 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 Moa Place is a narrow, two-way, no exit street. We have received two safety related service requests from residents who are finding that the current parking arrangement is affecting access to a number of private driveways. Also, through access along Moa Place can be compromised when there are vehicles parked on both sides of the road. This is particularly relevant to larger vehicles, such as emergency and refuse vehicles.

3.2 Implementing the No Parking restriction recommendations will improve the driveway access for residents and improve safety by allowing unimpeded emergency access.

3.3 The preferred option is to install No Stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Do nothing:

4.1 The advantages of this option include:

· Retains three on-street parking spaces.

· Does not displace parking to other locations.

4.2 The disadvantages of the option include:

· Does not address the safety concerns relating to through access of large vehicles, including emergency vehicle access when vehicles are parked on both sides.

· Does not address the issues residents are having with impeded access to and from their driveways caused by the current parking layout.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Moa Place is classified as a Local Road in the Councils roading hierarchy.

5.2 Moa Place is a two-way, no-exit residential street. It is also a narrow street at 6.2 metres wide.

5.3 New townhouse properties have been constructed recently at #11 and 13 Moa Place. This has increased the number of properties on these plots from two to five and decreased available off-street parking by one space (BCN/2021/6606 – refer Attachment B).

5.4 The existing parking situation is as follows:

· 43 metres of No Stopping restriction (broken yellow lines) on the north side of Moa Place, commencing at its intersection with Madras Street.

· Three marked parking bays outside properties #9, 11 and 13 Moa Place.

· No Stopping restriction around the turning head.

· Unrestricted parking along the south side of the street, with the exception of the Residents Only space outside #6 Moa Place and near the intersection Madras Street.

5.5 We are proposing to extend the No Stopping restriction on the north side of Moa Place. This will remove the three existing marked (by parking ticks), unrestricted parking spaces.

5.6 While Moa Place is within the central area, it is similar in function and form to narrow suburban streets.

The Christchurch Suburban Parking Policy (2019) Policy 10 provides guidance for reviewing the allocation of parking in circumstances where the street is less than seven metres wide and there are recognised parking issues “If the carriageway of a street is less than 7 metres in width and there are known access problems (i.e. there are limited places for vehicles to pass and/or emergency access may be compromised), Council will propose to remove parking on one side of the street.”

There are also issues with people sometimes parking on the footpath of these narrow streets, degrading pedestrian accessibility, safety and amenity of the street.

Considering this guidance, we are therefore proposing to extend the existing no stopping restriction along the entire length of the north side of the street.

5.7 We are also proposing to install a No Stopping restriction outside #12 Moa Place.

The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, Section 6.9 Obstructing vehicle entrances and exits, states:

(1) a driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle so as to obstruct entry to or exit from any driveway.”

(2) For the purposes of this clause, a vehicle parked alongside any part of a kerb crossing provided for a driveway or within 1 metre of the prolongation of the side of a driveway must be regarded as obstructing entry and exit.

The Traffic Control Devices Manual, Part 13, Parking Control – Section 6, Markings states that parking bays should be a minimum of 5.4 metres long. Considering the requirement to be one metre back from private driveways, the space outside #12 Moa Place is approximately 4.5 metres and is therefore not long enough for a vehicle to park there without blocking either of the two driveways.

Vehicles that park blocking private driveways is a situation that would normally be managed by parking enforcement. However as we are currently reviewing the No Stopping restrictions for the whole street we have included this minor departure from standards.

5.8 The parking compliance team have received one call-out for a blocked vehicle entrance outside #12 Moa Place in the last 12 months. This resulted in a vehicle being towed.

5.9 There is an existing “Residents Only” parking space outside #6 Moa Place. When staff initially reviewed the parking on Moa Place, we identified that the permit for use of this Residents Only car park had lapsed some time ago. In addition, it has been observed that this space has been occupied by various parked vehicles at different times.

We therefore concluded that this dedicated park was now effectively redundant, and removal of the space would result in the space being available for any motorist to park in - ideally any resident of Moa Place.

When a recent notice was issued to all owners/occupiers of Moa Place, proposing to remove the remaining parking on the north side to assist with traffic movements, staff also identified the removal of the residents’ park for the reasons mentioned above.

The notice prompted the immediately affected resident (who had previously held a permit for the Residents Only space) to inform us that they still used it and to request that it be retained. The result is that they then applied for, and were granted, a new permit.

Retaining this parking space complies with Policy 6 of the Central City Parking Policy (2021), which states Council will generally retain existing resident-only parking areas but will not permit new resident-only areas (refer Section 6.3 of this report for a link to the Central City Parking Policy).

To replace these spaces, Council is currently working on a Policy where, subject to meeting various conditions, a street block can be assessed for parking demand. If the demand meets a threshold, then Council can consider installation of time limited parking – usually P120, but with the opportunity for residents to apply for an exemption from the timed parking restriction.

5.10 The parking compliance team leader supports these proposals.

5.11 There have been no reported crashes on Moa Place in the last five years. This street has no risk classification under Council’s high risk intersection mapping system.

5.12 Approval is required by the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

Community Views and Preferences

5.14 Summary of feedback

We sent out two consultation letters and plans.

The first of these was sent out on 2 March 2023. We received four responses out of a possible 39 owners/occupiers. The proposals included the No Stopping on the north side of Moa Place and the “Residents Only” space removal as discussed in 5.7.

One respondent was the former permit holder for the “Resident Only” parking space. His query related to the retention of the parking space and he did not express an opinion either for or against the No Stopping proposals.

Of the other three respondents, two were for the proposal. One of these would like to see the street restricted to residents only.

The points raised by the one respondent against the proposal were:

· The aerial image used on the plan is out of date, so does not reflect the new townhouse properties on the North side at 11 and 13 Moa Place. A plan of the new properties is therefore included in Attachment B.

· That the increased number of townhouses has increased the number of vehicles using the available on-street parking (from two to five).

· Suggested that the north side parking spaces were left available, and that this would not have an impact on access to the driveways on the south side. We have run CAD autotracking which does indicate that turning in and out of these driveways is very tight when vehicles are parked in the current marked spaces on the north side. There is also the safety issue, in that currently large vehicles would have impeded through access.

· Suggested that all car parks are clearly outlined with road markings. We are therefore proposing to mark the unrestricted spaces with parking ticks.

The second consultation letter/plan was sent out on 23 March 2023. This was to inform residents that the existing “Residents Only” space was going to remain. We received one reply from the same respondent who made the previous comments above. They did not think the permit should have been reinstated and questioned our policy on this. They would support the introduction of Residents Exemption permits.

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):

6.3 Transport

6.3.1 Activity: Transport

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The recommendations in this report are consistent with the Christchurch Central City Parking Policy.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7 This proposal improves accessibility for pedestrians/cyclists/drivers, by providing a safer means of both accessing properties and transiting through Moa Place.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – approximately $800 for the new road markings and $750 for producing the report.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – approximately $200 a year.

7.3 Funding Source - Traffic Operations Signs and Markings budget (installation)/existing Transport maintenance budgets for ongoing maintenance.

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 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.

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Not applicable.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Moa Place, Proposed No Stopping Retrictions	23/1124512	95
b ⇩	Attachment B - #11 & 13 Moa Place, Townhouse Layout	23/551597	96

Additional background information may be noted in the below table:

Document Name	Location / File Link
Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Sally-Ann Marshall - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Katie Smith - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

11. Innes Road street renewal (Mersey Street to the shops past Philpotts Road)
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1101176
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Samantha Kelly, Project Manager Transport (Samantha.Kelly@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynette Ellis, Head of Transport & Waste Management (Lynette.Ellis@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board (Board) on the outcome of the engagement undertaken, and to request that the Board approve the proposed scheme design for the Innes Road (Mersey Street to the shops past Philipotts Road) street renewal.

1.2 The report has been written to address the poor condition of transport and three water assets on Innes Road (Mersey Street to the shops past Philpotts Road), including the carriageway, sections of the footpath and kerbs and water main. In addition, this report also includes proposed safety improvements in response to safety concerns raised by the community.

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 low level of impact and low number of people affected by the recommended proposal. The community engagement and consultation outlined in this report reflects the assessment.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Approves the scheme plan for the Innes Road street renewal (Mersey Street to the shops past Philpotts Road) as detailed in Attachment A of this report, including all kerb alignments, traffic islands and road markings on Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Cranford Street, and extending in a north easterly direction to approximately 103m north east of its intersection with Philpotts Road.

2. Approves in accordance with the relevant sections of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004:

a. That a zebra pedestrian crossing with a raised safety platform for use by pedestrians, as detailed on Attachment A of this report, be installed on Innes Road at a point approximately 89 metres north east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue.

b. That a zebra pedestrian crossing with a raised safety platform for use by pedestrians, as detailed on Attachment A of this report, be installed on Innes Road at a point approximately 82 metres north east of its intersection with Phillpotts Road.

3. Approves that any previously approved resolutions on Innes Road from its intersection with Cranford Street, and extending in a north easterly direction to 103m past its intersection with Philpotts Road, 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 4a – 4nn and 5a – 5e below, be revoked.

4. Approves pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times:

Innes Road – North Western Side

a. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Cranford Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 111 metres.

b. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 138 metres east of its intersection with Cranford Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

c. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 162 metres east of its intersection with Cranford Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 82 metres.

d. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Jameson Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 24 metres.

e. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 239 metres east of its intersection with Jameson Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 22 metres.

f. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 34 metres.

g. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 48 metres east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

h. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 70 metres east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 35 metres.

i. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 140 metres east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 55 metres.

j. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Philpotts Road and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 54 metres.

k. Along the north western side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 61 metres east of its intersection with Philpotts Road and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 42 metres.

Jameson Avenue, Nancy Avenue and Philpotts Road

l. Along the north eastern side of Jameson Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in an north westerly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

m. Along the south western side of Nancy Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

n. Along the north eastern side of Nancy Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

o. Along the north eastern side of Philpotts Road, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 25 metres.

p. Along the south western side of Philpotts Road, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 25 metres.

Innes Road – South East Side

q. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Cranford Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 100 metres (equivalent to the intersection with Mersey Street).

r. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Mersey Street and extending in an north easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres.

s. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 42 metres east of its intersection with Mersey Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

t. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 68 metres east of its intersection with Mersey Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 36 metres (equivalent to the intersection with Severn Street).

u. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Severn Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 80 metres.

v. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 95 metres east of its intersection with Severn Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 8 metres (equivalent to the intersection with Thames Street).

w. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Thames Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres.

x. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 78 metres north east of its intersection with Thames Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres (equivalent to the intersection with Ethne Street).

y. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Ethne Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres.

z. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 77 metres north east of its intersection with Ethne Street and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres (equivalent to the intersection with Nancy Avenue).

aa. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

bb. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 30 metres east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

cc. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 70 metres east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 52 metres.

dd. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 140 metres east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 23 metres.

ee. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at its intersection with Kensington Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 46 metres.

ff. Along the south eastern side of Innes Road, commencing at a point approximately 106 metres east of its intersection with Kensington Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 28 metres.

Thames Steet, Ethne Street, Nancy Avenue and Kensington Avenue

gg. Along the south western side of Thames Street, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 23 metres.

hh. Along the north eastern side of Thames Street, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 23 metres.

ii. Along the south western side of Ethne Street, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

jj. Along the north eastern side of Ethne Street, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 15 metres.

kk. Along the south western side of Nancy Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

ll. Along the north eastern side of Nancy Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

mm. Along the south western side of Kensington Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 20 metres.

nn. Along the north eastern side of Kensington Avenue, commencing at its intersection with Innes Road and extending in a south easterly direction for a distance of 24 metres.

5. Approves pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the parking of vehicles:

a. Be restricted between 8:00 am – 9:00 am and 2:30 pm – 3:30 pm Monday to Friday to a maximum period of 5 minutes, on the north western side of Innes Road commencing at a point 105 metres north east of its intersection with Nancy Avenue, and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

b. Be restricted to a maximum period of 10 minutes, on the north western side of Innes Road commencing at a point 54 metres north east of its intersection with Philpotts Road, and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 7 metres.

c. Be restricted between 8:00 am – 9:00 am and 2:30 pm – 3:30 pm Monday to Friday to a maximum period of 3 minutes, on the south eastern side of Innes Road commencing at a point 44 metres north east of its intersection with Nancy Ave and extending in an north easterly direction for a distance of 26 metres.

d. Be restricted to a maximum period of 30 minutes, on the south eastern side of Innes Road commencing at a point 46 metres north east of its intersection with Kensington Ave, and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 49 metres.

e. Be restricted to a maximum period of 10 minutes, on the south eastern side of Innes Road commencing at a point 95 metres north east of its intersection with Kensington Ave and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 11 metres.

6. Revoke any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls and bus stops made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in sections 7 and 8.

7. Approves that the following side road approaches to Innes Road be controlled by a Stop control in accordance with Section 4 and Section 10.2 of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004:

a. The north west bound approach of Mersey Street at its intersection with Innes Road.

b. The north west bound approach of Severn Street at its intersection with Innes Road.

c. The north west bound approach of Thames Street at its intersection with Innes Road.

d. The north west bound approach of Ethne Street at its intersection with Innes Road.

e. The north west bound approach of Nancy Avenue at its intersection with Innes Road.

f. The north west bound approach of Kensington Avenue at its intersection with Innes Road.

g. The south east bound approach of Jameson Avenue at its intersection with Innes Road.

h. The south east bound approach of Nancy Avenue at its intersection with Innes Road.

i. The south east bound approach of Kensington Avenue at its intersection with Innes Road.

8. Approves that Bus Stops be installed, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on

a. the north western side of Innes Road commencing at a point 34 metres (north easterly direction) of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

b. the south eastern side of Innes Road commencing at a point 16 metres (south westerly direction) of its intersection with Nancy Avenue and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

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

10. Notes that the existing special vehicle lane for cyclists as identified in Attachment A of this report, was previously resolved by the Council on 24 September 2019.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The condition of transport assets within the project area, including the road carriageway and some sections of footpath and kerbs have been assessed as being in poor condition and have deteriorated. This has led to long term increased costs associated with maintenance repairs.

3.2 In addition, the water main from Mersey Street to Philpotts Road has also reached its end of life and requires replacing. Therefore, this project includes delivering the water main replacement works at the same time to minimise disruption for residents.

3.3 Innes Road is a busy route with approximately 15,000 vehicles travelling per day and is highly used by many people travelling to school, work or across the community. There are two schools within the project area, and it is important that people travelling along this road on foot, by bicycle, by bus or driving, should be able to do so safely. Therefore, as well as improving the condition of the assets, this report also looks to improve safety focussing on the existing pedestrian crossings and side road treatments.

3.4 To improve safety and accessibility for the community it is proposed to upgrade the two existing zebra crossings to include raised safety platforms. Raised safety platforms are part of the Safe System approach to road safety. They are a vertical deflection device increasingly used to reduce the maximum comfortable operating speed for vehicles to Safe System collision speeds, particularly at intersections and crossing points. This will therefore reduce both the likelihood of a collision, and the severity should one occur.

3.5 The proposed zebra crossings with raised safety platforms incorporate a priority crossing, featuring white striped bars on a platform raised above the road carriageway and red surfacing. The platform and coloured marking highlights the pedestrians priority, making it safer to cross, and helps to reinforce slower vehicle speeds and opportunities to give way.

3.6 Other safety improvements proposed within the project include:

3.6.1 Introducing traffic calming measures at five side road intersections to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles by reducing crossing distances, reducing vehicle speeds, and discouraging non-local traffic.

3.6.2 The preferred treatment for each side road was assessed and recommended to maximise drainage flow paths whilst still providing safety improvements. The proposed treatments include:

· Introducing a central island at Thames Street.

· Upgrading the existing central island at Philpotts Road.

· Introducing kerb buildouts on both sides of the road at Nancy Avenue (north and south).

· Introducing kerb buildouts on one side of the road at Ethne Street and Kensington Avenue.

3.6.3 Introducing stop control signs at Thames Street, Philpotts Road, Nancy Avenue (north and south) and Ethne Street, due to the lack of approach visibility which seeks to improve visibility of pedestrians and cyclists for stopped vehicles at the intersection.

3.6.4 Installing tactile pavers at pedestrian crossing locations to improve accessibility.

3.6.5 Retaining the existing pedestrian refuge islands located between Severn Street and Jameson Avenue and between Kensington Avenue and Philpotts Road, as both islands meet Waka Kotahi standards and provide safe ways for pedestrians to cross.

3.6.6 Removing 20 existing car parks to accommodate the proposed side road intersection safety improvements, improve bus manoeuvrability at existing bus stops and improve sightlines at side roads. The proposal also allows for one car park to be reinstated.

3.6.7 Revising the cross-section layout to provide more consistent lane widths for vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians.

3.7 Other benefits of the proposal include:

3.7.1 Introducing low-lying landscaping where opportunities allow.

3.7.2 Renewal of the road carriageway including some sections of new kerb and channel and footpaths where required.

3.7.3 Widening some sections of footpaths to 1.8 meters where footpaths or kerbs require renewing.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Maintain status quo: Complete the carriageway renewal and retain existing layout

4.1 Option to maintain status quo: This option would involve completing the renewal of the carriageway and water main assets.

4.2 It is likely that the upgrade of the existing zebra crossings to raised safety platforms would also be included as the crossings do not currently comply with current Waka Kotahi guidelines.

4.3 The advantages of this option include:

4.3.1 Improved safety for school children and other pedestrians crossing the road with the upgrade of the two existing zebra crossings to raised safety platforms.

4.3.2 Cost savings as a result of the reduced scope of works.

4.4 The disadvantages of this option include:

4.4.1 Missed long term safety benefits and improvements for pedestrians and cyclists within the project area. A safe systems assessment was undertaken which compared the existing layout against the proposed safety improvements. The assessment concluded that the proposed scheme was preferred resulting in improving safety for users. Therefore, it is recommended to proceed with the additional safety improvements.

4.4.2 Missing the opportunity to realise the long-term maintenance cost benefits such as integrating the upgrade of sections of deep-dish channel with the new carriageway.

4.4.3 Kerbs and footpaths that require upgrading being delayed.

Option to install raised signalised crossings

4.5 An options assessment was carried out on the two existing zebra crossings located outside of St Francis of Assisi and in front of Mairehau Primary School using the Waka Kotahi mid-block crossing selection guidelines. The options included retaining the existing treatments, raised signalised crossings, signalised crossings, raised zebra crossing and pedestrian refuge islands.

4.6 The options assessment identified that raised signalised crossings would provide the best level of service. Raised zebra crossing platforms were the next recommended option which also provide improved safety benefits, achieves safe speed systems and will provide an improved level of service. The new reduced variable speed to 30km/h will also improve safety for pedestrians when crossing. Signalised crossings have not been recommended as part of this scheme design as they are out of scope for this primarily renewal project.

4.7 Advantages of this option include:

4.7.1 High level of safety improvements for users of the crossings.

4.8 Disadvantages of this option include:

4.8.1 Potential impacts on the network.

4.8.2 Installing signals at both locations would exceed project budget.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Innes Road is a collector road with approximately 15,000 vehicles per day travelling along the route. This proposal looks to improve assets and safety for the section of Innes Road from Mersey Street to the shops past Philpotts Road which is approximately 800 metres in length.

5.2 The speed limit along Innes Road is 50km/h with a new variable speed limit of 30km/h during school hours, between Mahars Road and Nancy Avenue. This was approved by the Council on 5 July 2023 as part of the Safe Speed Neighbourhood programme.

5.3 There are a high portion of pedestrians which are expected to be school-aged children due to the two schools within the project area, St Francis of Assisi School and Mairehau Primary School. In addition, there is customer foot traffic expected at the shops past Philpotts Road. The remaining surrounding area is largely residential.

5.4 An on road-cycle lane marked on both sides of the road is in operation. The width of the cycle lane varies between 1.6m to 1.8m and there is currently no green coloured surface.

5.5 Innes Road has two key bus routes that service the immediate project area, the Orbiter which travels along Innes Road, and the Number 44 (Shirley/Westmorland) which travels along Innes Road and Kensington Avenue.

5.6 The crash history for the corridor was extracted in March 2023 from the Waka Kotahi Crash Analysis. The data shows that from Mersey Street to 420 Innes Road, between 2018 and 2023 there have been nine crashes. Of these crashes one was serious, six were minor-injury and two were non-injury.

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

5.7.1 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.0 Early engagement with St Francis of Assisi school and Mairehau Primary commenced in early June 2023. Staff met with both school principals.

6.1 At early meetings with schools, staff discussed the impacts on parking requirements for parents and staff, as well as potential impacts on event buses, pedestrians and access during construction. This feedback was taken on board when reviewing the on-street car parking requirements and upgrading the two existing pedestrian crossings with raised safety platforms.

6.2 Consultation started on Wednesday 28 June 2023 and ran until Wednesday 12 July 2023. An email was sent to 64 key stakeholders, including Fire and Emergency NZ, Environment Canterbury, Spokes, St John and the NZ Police, as well as accessibility reference groups and local residents’ associations. The consultation was posted on the Council’s Facebook page, and a number of community pages on Facebook including the St Albans, Edgeware, Mairehau and Merivale area Community Group, the Papanui/Redwood Community page, and the Bishopdale/Papanui/Bryndwr and Surroundings Community page, inviting submissions on the Have Your Say webpage.

6.3 Consultation documents and flyers were delivered to St Francis of Assisi School, Mairehau Primary, and local businesses including BP, and the local café, Michael’s Espresso. Consultation information was also made available at the Mairehau Library and Civic Offices.

6.4 Two A3 signs were installed in the project area, one outside St. Francis of Assisi School, and one outside of the shops near Philpotts Road, close to the entrance of Mairehau Primary.

6.5 All local businesses were doorknocked to ensure they understood the proposed changes, were given consultation letters, had an opportunity to express concerns, and understood the submission process.

6.6 Any residents with an immediate impact outside of their house were door knocked, such as for parking changes, and kerb buildouts. If residents were not home, they were given a consultation letter with the scheme plan and a ‘sorry we missed you’ flyer.

6.7 Flyers were also dispersed to parents on the first day of consultation, at school pick up time outside of St. Francis of Assisi school, given their front entrance is directly impacted.

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

6.8 A total of 46 submissions were made by three recognised organisations and 43 individuals. All submissions are available on the Have Your Say webpage and are provided in Attachment B.

6.9 The majority of submitters (58.7%, 27 submitters) agreed that this proposal would improve safety:

A blue circle with text

Description automatically generated

6.10 The majority of submitters (71.7%, 33 submitters) agreed that raised safety platforms at the existing zebra crossing will improve safety:

A pie chart with different colored triangles

Description automatically generated

1.13 Key issues raised by submitters can be broken down into the following themes:

· Concerns about road design and safety (37 submitters), which represents concerns such as the need for improved road infrastructure beyond this plan, addressing congestion, and sharing the road more safely via signage and lane markings, as well as addressing potential hazards such as poor visibility at intersections, inadequate signage or road markings, and further investment for pedestrian facilities for accessibility such as speed humps or raised crossings at side roads and tactile pavers.

· Ideas for better pedestrian facilities and accessibility (33 submitters), such as suggestions for wider footpaths, improved crossing points, and better accommodations for individuals with accessibility requirements, or those using motorised postal vehicles or mobility trikes.

· Support for road design improvements (30 submitters), which reflected submitters expressing their endorsement of the efforts to enhance road design. They recognised the importance of well-planned and executed road infrastructure that prioritises safety, efficiency, and a positive user experience.

· Support for raised safety platforms (20 submitters), which reflects submitters recognising the potential benefits in improving road safety, reducing vehicle speeds, and enhancing the overall traffic environment.

· Concerns about visibility and safety at intersections (16 submitters), such as concerns around inadequate signage or road markings, poor visibility for drivers, and the need for improved traffic control measures at intersections.

· Concerns about cycling safety (15 submitters), which included the request for some dedicated cycling infrastructure, protection for cyclists from other traffic, protection around the bus stop near St. Francis of Assisi school, and education and awareness around sharing the road between cyclists and motorists.

· Support for lower speed limits and traffic calming measures (15 submitters), which reflects the recognition of potential benefits of reducing vehicle speeds to improve safety and create a more pedestrian-friendly environment.

· Concerns about parking availability and management (11 submitters), which reflects concerns such as insufficient parking spaces, challenges with enforcement, and the impact of parking on road safety and congestion.

· Ideas for improving cycling infrastructure (8 submitters), which included proposals to expand bike lanes, creating dedicated cycling paths, and improving the overall connectivity and safety for cyclists.

2.13 Submitter questions and staff responses are summarised as per the below table:

Submitter ID	Question	Staff response
51675	I have a question about the flow of cycling traffic heading north - let's say people want to get to Queen Elizabeth II Drive (SH-74) or say to the Papanui Parallel. I suggest some may use Philpotts Road to get on to Queen Elizabeth II Drive or may want to use McFaddens Road to use the crossing point on Cranford Street, from there use the shared path and come out by Paparoa Street School. So just wondering which of the northbound streets off Innes Road people riding their bikes may use. Maybe some examination of that could be useful to further examine the intersections. Sometimes a little shared path area can be helpful. e.g. near the existing island crossings, a little bit of bridging shared path could allow a person riding a bike to avoid negotiating the intersections, and instead use a shared path to run up to the island crossing.	Feedback regarding cycle monitoring will be referred to our cycle team for consideration.
51515	What data about current injury rates have you got?	Paragraph 5.6 of the staff report refers to the crash history data was extracted in March 2023 from the Waka Kotahi Crash Analysis. The data shows that from Mersey Street to 420 Innes Road, between 2018 and 2023 there have been nine crashes. Of these crashes one was serious, six were minor-injury and two were non-injury.
51507	Will this whole section of road have new asphalt?	It is proposed to resurface all of the road carriageway, the final surface whether chipseal or asphalt is yet to be confirmed as this forms part of the detailed design process.
51507	Will there be night works, as a resident this has a high impact.	We’ll work with our contractors to minimise disruption as much as possible. Night works are not currently planned, however, if required in some areas, these will be clearly communicated with affected residents in advance.
51507	Will the whole footpath pavement be re-laid?	Some sections of the footpath will not be replaced as there are some sections of which look to be in good condition. The areas for renewal will be refined during detailed design. The proposal also looks to widen footpaths to a minimum of 1.8 meters in locations where there is new kerb and channel replacement or where the condition of the footpath has deteriorated.
51507	Has a separated cycle lane been considered along the length?	This project is primarily for renewal due to the poor condition of some assets and therefore a separated cycle facility is not proposed. The proposal does provide safety improvements for cyclists as the existing cycle lane will provide a consistent 1.8m or greater cycle lane along the length of the route. Furthermore, the application of green paint and the proposed stop controls at side streets is aimed at improving safety and visibility of cyclists to other road users.

6.11 There were a number of suggestions raised in submissions which were assessed against the viability, affordability, scope of the project and safety in design. As a result, the following elements can be reviewed during the detailed design phase:

6.11.1 Including tactile pavers at Mersey Street and Severn Street to provide a consistent treatment along the route.

6.11.2 Including cycle stands in locations such as outside local businesses, if budget is available.

6.11.3 Reviewing the width of the two existing pedestrian refuges.

6.12 There were also a number of suggestions raised in submissions which are out of scope for this primarily renewal project and would likely require additional budget and/or further investigations, such as:

6.12.1 Further cycling infrastructure – It is proposed to retain the existing kerb to kerb width, which does not allow for further widening of the existing cycle lane or other cycle infrastructure improvements. If an increased cycle lane width was desired this would likely require car parking removal, additional budget and would likely impact on footpath width.

6.12.2 Further pedestrian crossing infrastructure at side roads - Further safety improvements such as speed humps or raised crossings at side roads have not been considered further due to the need to maintain existing stormwater flow paths and minimise flood risks, as well as affordability.

6.12.3 Further speed reductions - The Council recently approved a reduced variable speed limit from 40km/h to 30km/h speed between Nancy Avenue and Mahars Road as part of the Safer Neighbourhoods. In addition, the proposed raised safety platforms and side road treatments also support slower speeds within the project area resulting in improved safety for pedestrians and cyclists. A further speed limit reduction is out of scope for this project.

6.12.4 Bus stop relocations – Changes to bus stop locations would require separate consultation and will be dependent on the proximity to other bus stop locations. The feedback received will be provided to our Public Transport Advisor for consideration.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

7.2 Transport

7.2.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 16.0.3 Improve resident satisfaction with road condition - >=25% resident satisfaction

· Level of Service: 16.0.20 Maintain the condition of road carriageways - <=5,000 customer service requests

· 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 not 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 as the proposal involves minor works within the existing carriageway.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.7 The decisions in this report are likely to:

7.7.1 Contribute positively to adaptation to the impacts of climate change.

7.7.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

7.8 The proposal is likely to contribute positively to adaption to the impacts of climate change as improvements include measures to encourage walking, cycling and use of public transport. These changes will help achieve the desired community outcome of a safe and accessible city through improved road safety and improved pedestrian crossing locations, which facilitates better access to public transport.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.9 This proposal improves accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists by providing safer crossing points and tactile pavers. Furthermore, there is potential for kerbs at two bus stops to be upgraded to accessible kerbs. These upgrades will be dependent on the existing kerb conditions and will be defined during detailed design.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement:

8.1.1 The total project budget for the transport street renewal project is $4,600,000.

8.1.2 The estimated construction cost for the transport assets shows a budget shortfall; however, this is subject to further site investigations and a review of the estimate. Should further funding be required, this can be funded out of the programme.

8.1.3 The total project budget for the three water project is $800,000 and is within budget.

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – There will be an increased operational cost of approximately $62,000 per annum for the maintenance works associated with landscaping and surface paint for the cycle lane and at the raised crossings. These works will be covered under the area maintenance contract.

8.3 The proposal will reduce the amount of unplanned repairs that are currently taking place due to the current condition of the assets.

8.4 Funding Source – The street renewal project (CPMS 70742) and water main renewal project (CPMS 70659) are budgeted for in the Long Term Plan.

Other He mea anō

8.5 Not applicable.

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 the 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, pedestrian improvements and changes to layouts.

9.3 The existing special vehicle lane for cyclists as identified in Attachment A of this report is proposed to be retained and was previously resolved by the Council on 24 September 2019.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 Due to the current condition of the assets the proposed renewal has been fast tracked to complete construction before the end of the sealing period (approximately March 2024). Therefore, any delays to the project will have potential impacts on the construction period. This will also impact the delivery of the water main renewal which is included as part of these works.

10.2 Delivering the street renewal and water main renewal works together as a one pass approach will minimise disruption for residents and has cost saving benefits, such as with temporary traffic management costs.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Innes Road (Mersey to the shops past Philpotts) Scheme Design for Community Board Approval	23/1001268	112
b ⇩	Innes Road - Submission Table (Public)	23/1128217	114

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

Samantha Kelly - Project Manager Transport

Samantha Smith - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Oscar Larson - Team Leader Transport Project Management

Tony Richardson - Finance Business Partner

Jacob Bradbury - Manager Planning & Delivery Transport

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

12. Road Stopping at 39 Hendon Street, St Albans
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1007883
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Raymond Qu - Property Consultant (raymond.qu@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizen & Community (mary.richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 This report seeks a decision of the Community Board under delegated authority from the Council to this road-stopping application under the Council's Road Stopping Policy 2020.

1.2 An application has been received by the owner of 39 Hendon Street, St Albans, to purchase an area of the road (40 m2) at the front of their property and amalgamate it with the applicant's property.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance concerning the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy for the following reasons:

· Staff completed the Significance and Engagement Assessment. The assessment result shows a low significance.

· The Transport Unit reviewed infrastructure plans, including Council Three-Waters, Orion, Enable and Chorus, and confirmed no easement is required to protect the infrastructure within the proposed road-stopping area.

· The road stopping will not affect the existing road space or pedestrian footpath.

· The road stopping will not cause health, safety, or accessibility issues for road users or footpath users.

· The only affected parties are neighbours at 37 and 41 Hendon Road. The road stopping is not controversial and will have little impact on the local community.

1.4 Under the 2020 Council Road Stopping Policy, this application is compliant. However, the delegated authority to approve sits with the Community Board because there is future potential for subdivision.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Notes that the proposed road stopping has been assessed by staff in accordance with the Council’s Road Stopping Policy 2020 and following that assessment staff recommend that the application be approved.

2. Resolve pursuant to Sections 116(1), 117(3), and 120(3) of the Public Works Act 1981 to stop and sell to the adjoining owner that parcel of land shown as Proposed Section 1 in Attachment A to this report containing 40m² subject to survey and the amalgamation of that land with the adjoining land held in Record of Title CB536/233.

3. Approves that the Manager Property Consultancy is delegated the authority to undertake all actions, negotiate and conclude all the agreements necessary to facilitate the above in general accordance with this report and on terms and conditions acceptable to him at his sole discretion, 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 subject "road” already appears as part of the adjacent property as it is fenced and maintained by the Owner. This process will formalise the current occupation and use of the land.

3.2 Transport confirmed there is no intention to widen the road in the foreseeable future.

3.3 The adjoining properties affected by this road stopping at 37 and 41 Hendon Street have approved this road stopping and amalgamation.

3.4 Staff investigation confirmed there is no known infrastructure within the proposed road-stopping area; therefore, no easement would be required.

3.5 33 and 35 Hendon Street (SO 19688), and 37 and 37A Hendon Street (SO 19689), had previously completed a road stopping and amalgamation in 1997. Approving the application is consistent with previous actions taken by the Council.

3.6 39 Hendon Street will align with the property boundaries mentioned in 3.5 once the road is stopped.

3.7 The road stopping will not affect the existing road space or pedestrian footpath. The road stopping will not cause health, safety, or accessibility issues for road users or footpath users.

3.8 While the road stopping and amalgamation will create an opportunity for some form of intensification that is not considered to be at the sacrifice of other strategic objectives e.g. amenity, adaptation planning, and tree canopy.

A aerial view of a neighborhood

Description automatically generated

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The alternative option would be not stopping the road.

4.2 There is little advantage in the alternative option. Even though the Council can legitimately decline the road-stopping application, this alternative would be inconsistent with previous Council decisions on road-stopping applications on the same street.

4.3 There is a reputational risk if the Council is inconsistent in how it deals with similar requests. In addition, this application has been considered and in process for some time. Although unlikely, these issues create risk and opportunity for the applicant to judicially review the decision.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Staff have approved the application using the criteria outlined in the Council’s Road Stopping Policy 2020 under the Public Works Act 1981, subject to the appropriate delegated decision of the Community Board, now sought by this report.

5.2 The road stopping and amalgamation would increase the chance of a two-lot subdivision. 39 Hendon Street is 751 m² and zoned Residential Suburban Density Transition Zone. The minimum net area for the subdivision is 400 m². The new area of 39 Hendon Street would be 791 m² but still under 800 m² for a two-lot subdivision, which is not a complaint activity under the District Plan. The applicant has previously applied to subdivide the 751 m² site into two lots (RMA2021/103); the applicant, however, withdrew the application as Planning decided they would need more information to accept it. Based on the site density rules, although the 791 m² is still undersized for a two 400 m² lots subdivision, the chance of a successful application to subdivide would be increased.

5.3 A valuation report had been commissioned to assess the value of the stopped portion and compensation the applicant will pay for the extra 40m² (Section 1) at current market value, contemporaneously with the amalgamation with their site. This valuation takes into account the extra land area and that it increases the possibilities of enabling subdivision and development potential for this site.

5.4 The community's views have not been sought as this is not a controversial project, and there is no impact other than to adjoining neighbours. There are many similar subdivisions on the same street.

5.5 The adjoining owners have both approved the Road Stopping.

5.6 The decision affects the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board area.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 The proposed road-stopping fits within the Council’s Strategic Framework as it transfers rights to enable further development.

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

· Activity: Facilities, Property and Planning.

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

6.4 Road stoppings have been temporarily halted where there is potential for conflict between strategic objectives.

6.5 This arose out of feedback from several community boards suggesting that the current Road Stopping Policy may no longer be fit for purpose. The current policy is primarily written from a transport planning and network perspective. The issues that are now being raised focus more about intensification, amenity, adaptation planning, and tree canopy. These matters may not be sufficiently addressed in the policy. Accordingly, a review of the policy has been initiated. This road stopping was underway prior to this temporary halt and there is furthermore no conflict between strategic objectives.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.6 The decision does not involve a significant decision concerning ancestral land, 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 our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga

6.8 The road-stopping area is not identified in the Christchurch District Plan as being culturally sensitive.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.9 The decision in this report will have no impact on climate change.

6.10 This decision supports the status quo and is merely formalising the occupation of berm land for residential use.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.11 The decisions in this report will not impact public accessibility to the existing road and footpath.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – Nil, as the applicant bears all costs.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Nil

7.3 Funding Source – Transport and Asset Planning.

Other He mea anō

7.4 Not Applicable.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The Council’s decision-making is in accordance with the general powers of competence set out in Section 12(2), “Status and Powers” of the Local Government Act.

8.2 This road-stopping is under the Public Works Act 1981, and the reasons and decision-making process is set out in the next section.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.3 Council’s solicitors have drafted a standard Sale and Purchase Agreement and signed by both parties. One of these conditions is obtaining consent by the Council under delegation or by Council resolution, which is the purpose of this report.

8.4 When adopting the Road Stopping Policy in 2020, the Council established a set of related delegations. The delegation to approve or decline a road stopping of this nature sits with the Community Board as set out below. The applicable section is that with this application

· Subdivision potential exists.

The Council’s power to accept or decline an application from either a Council Business Unit or from any other person to stop legal road provided that the application meets the following criteria: *

· The area of the road to be stopped will not constitute a complying lot under the District Plan on its own account, nor will its amalgamation with the adjoining lot create a new potential for the adjoining lot to be subdivided; and

· It will be necessary for the stopped road to be amalgamated with the certificate of title to the adjoining property; and

· The owner of the adjoining property is the logical purchaser of the stopped road; and

· That the proposed road-stopping complies with the Council’s Road Stopping Policy, and

· The road area to be stopped is not adjoining a reserve or waterway.

*Where the application does not fit within the above criteria, the Council has delegated to the Community Board for the ward within which the legal road proposed to be stopped situated the power to accept or decline the application. (refer to Part D, Sub-part 1, Roads and Traffic Management Controls).

There are two statutory processes under which road stoppings can be enacted. The authority “to determine which statutory procedure should be employed to undertake a particular road stopping (either under the Local Government Act 1974 or under the Public Works Act 1981) is delegated to staff”. The Policy establishes:

4.5 The following criteria have been established to ensure that the appropriate statutory procedure is consistently adopted by the Council and to avoid, as much as is practicable, such decisions being successfully contested by any party.

Local Government Act 1974 process

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

a. 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

b. 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

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

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

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

Public Works Act 1981 process

4.7 The Public Works Act 1981 road-stopping procedure may be adopted only if all of the following circumstances apply:

a. Where there are no more than two properties, other than the applicant’s property, adjoining the road proposed to be stopped.

b. Where the written consent to the proposed road stopping of all adjoining landowners (other than the applicant) to the proposed road-stopping is obtained.

c. Where no other persons, including the public generally, are considered by the Council in its judgment to be adversely affected by the proposed road stopping.

d. Where the road proposed to be stopped to be amalgamated with the adjoining property or properties (as appropriate); and

e. Where other reasonable access exists or will be provided to replace the access previously provided by the road proposed to be stopped (i.e. by the construction of a new road); and

f. Where the use of the Public Works Act 1981 road-stopping procedure is approved by the relevant Government department or Minister.

4.8 If any one of the circumstances referred to in clause 4.7 does not apply, then the Local

Government Act 1974 process must be used.

8.5 Staff have determined that the proposed road stopping meets the Public Works Act criteria.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 The Transport Unit has considered risk and mitigations against the criteria in the Council’s Road Stopping Policy; these criteria consider the City Plan, the current level of use, future use, alternative uses, road adjoining any water body, encumbrances, traffic safety and infrastructure. The Transport Unit concluded there was no reason not to stop the road.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	304/6400 Road-stopping plan	21/757459	133

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

Raymond Qu - Property Consultant

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Bruce Rendall - Head of City Growth & Property

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

13. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund Report
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/797429
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Stacey Holbrough, Community Development Adviser Stacey.holbrough@ccc.govt.nz Trevor Cattermole Community Development Adviser trevor.cattermole@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board to consider applications for funding from their 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund.

2. Staff Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Notes the following two resolutions carried over from the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board for grants of $40,000 to Avebury House Community Trust and $2,000 to the Community Focus Trust respectively:

No	Organisation Name	Project	Resolution
65622	Avebury House Community Trust	Avebury House	That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board makes a grant to Avebury House Community Trust from its Strengthening Communities Fund for 2021/22 of $37,000, 2022/2023 of $40,000, 2023/2024 of $40,000 towards staff wages and administration.
64551	Community Focus Trust	Community Development for the Trust Manager Wages.	That the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board approves a grant $2,000 from its 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund to Community Focus Trust towards their Community Development for the Trust Manager Wages.

2. Approves the 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund grants outlined in the following schedule:

3. Decline the 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund applications outlined in the following schedule:

No	Organisation Name	Project	Recommendation
65931	HCC Barbell Club Trust	Whakapakari Oranga Whānau.	That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board declines a grant to the HCC Barbell Club Trust towards Whakapakari Oranga Whānau.

4. Approve the transfer of any unspent from the 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund.

5. Establish the 2023-24 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Discretionary Response Fund.

3. Key Points Ngā Take Matua

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

3.1 The recommendations above are aligned to the Council's Strategic Framework and in particular the strategic priorities of a Collaborative and Confident City and A Cultural Powerhouse City. The projects also align with the Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy.

Decision Making Authority Te Mana Whakatau

3.2 Approve the allocation of the local Strengthening Communities Fund for each Community Board area.

3.3 Allocations must be consistent with any policies, standards or criteria adopted by the Council.

Assessment of Significance and Engagement Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

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

3.5 The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and/or with an interest.

3.6 Due to the assessment of low significance, no further community engagement and consultation is required.

Discussion Kōrerorero

3.7 The 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund opened on 6 March 2023 and closed on 14 April 2023.

3.8 A total of 40 applications were received, requesting a total of $1,436,722.

3.9 The Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board has a total funding pool of $657,718.

3.10 Staff have recommended a total of $553,300 for the 2023-24 Strengthening Communities Fund (this includes $42,000 of pre-committed multi-year funding), which would result in $104,418 remaining for the 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund (plus any carry-forward from the 2022-23 year which is currently being finalised).

3.11 In the 2022-23 funding round, the Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Board approved multi-year funding to the following organisations:

· Avebury House - $40,000 (Yr3 of 3)

· Community Focus Trust $2,000 - $ (Yr3 of 3)

3.12 Staff are recommending 15 applications this year for multi-year funding, totalling $372,800:

· Belfast Community Network - $15,000 (for 3 years)

· Canterbury Cricket Association - $15,000 (for 3 years)

· Neighbourhood Trust - $52,000 (for 3 years)

· Papanui Baptist Church Community Service Freedom Trust - $25,000 (for 3 years)

· Papanui Youth Development Trust (Te Koru Pou Iho) - $39,000 (for 3 years)

· Phillipstown Community Centre Charitable Trust - $45,000 (for 3 years)

· Shirley Community Trust - $44,000 (for 3 years)

· Te Ora Hou Otautahi Inc - $23,000 (for 3 years)

· Te Whare Roimata Trust - $52,000 (for 3 years)

· Anglican Diocese of Christchurch -Parish of Merivale St Albans - $5,000 (for 3 years)

· Christchurch North Community Patrol Incorporated - $3,000 (for 3 years)

· Eastern Community Sport and Recreation Incorporated - $7,000 (for 3 years)

· Northgate Community Services Trust - $19,000 (for 3 years)

· Papanui Community Toy Library - $3,800 (for 3 years)

· St Albans Residents Association Inc - $25,000 (for 3 years)

3.13 Staff have assessed all applications received and made recommendations. Attached is a decision matrix, which includes organisational details, project details, financial information, a staff assessment, and a priority ranking (refer Attachment A).

3.14 The Criteria and Outcomes and Priorities for the Strengthening Communities Fund are also attached (refer Attachment B).

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central SCF 2023-24 Decision Matrices	23/999797	145
b ⇩	Strengthening Communities Fund Critera and Funding Outcomes	23/963387	185

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

Stacey Holbrough - Community Development Advisor

Approved By

Emma Pavey - Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes-Central

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

Matthew Pratt - Acting Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

14. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Summer with your Neighbours, Youth Recreation Project, Community Liaison, Community Pride Garden Awards, Positive Youth Development Fund, Community Service Awards, Predator Free St Albans (Umbrellaed by SARA)
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/947752
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Trevor Cattermole, Community Development Advisor (Trevor.Cattermole@ccc.govt.nz) Stacey Holbrough, Community Development Advisor (Stacey.Holbrough@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board to consider an application for funding from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund from the organisation(s) listed below.

Funding Request Number	Organisation	Project Name	Amount Requested	Amount Recommended
00066192	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board	Summer with your Neighbours	$4,500	$4,500
00066194	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board	Youth Recreation Events Project	$9,000	$9,000
00066195	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board	Community Liaison Project	$4,000	$4,000
00066196	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board	Community Pride Garden Awards	$700	$700
00066197	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board	Positive Youth Development Fund	$7,500	$7,500
00066198	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board	Community Service Awards	$2,500	$2,500
00066174	Predator Free St Albans (umbrellaed by SARA)	Rat Trap Project – Predator Free St Albans	$781	$781

1.2 There is currently a balance of $0 in the fund. It is envisaged that the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund will be established at this, the August 10^th Community Board Meeting.

2. Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Approves a grant of $4,500 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund towards the Summer with your Neighbours.

2. Approves a grant of $9,000 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund towards the Youth Recreation Events Project.

3. Approves a grant of $4,000 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund towards the Community Liaison Project.

4. Approves a grant of $700 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund towards the Community Pride Garden Awards.

5. Approves a grant of $7,500 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund towards Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Positive Youth Development Fund.

6. Approves the establishment of the 2023-24 Positive Youth Development Fund.

7. Approves to move the delegation from the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board to the Community Governance Manager for the approval of grants from the 2023-24 Positive Youth Development Fund of up to $350.

8. Approves the current criteria for the 2023-24 Positive Youth Development Fund.

9. Approves a grant of $2,500 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund towards the Community Service Awards.

10. Approves a grant of $781 from its 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund to St Albans Residents Association (SARA) Inc towards the Rat Trap Project - Predator Free St Albans.

3. Key Points Ngā Take Matua

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

Decision Making Authority Te Mana Whakatau

3.2 The Community Board has the delegated authority to determine the allocation of the Discretionary Response Fund for each community.

3.2.1 Allocations must be consistent with any policies, standards or criteria adopted by the Council.

3.2.2 The Fund does not cover:

· Legal challenges or Environment Court challenges against the Council, Council Controlled organisations or Community Board decisions

· Projects or initiatives that change the scope of a Council project or that will lead to ongoing operational costs to the Council (though Community Boards can recommend to the Council that it consider a grant for this purpose).

Assessment of Significance and Engagement Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

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

3.4 The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and/or with an interest.

3.5 Due to the assessment of low significance, no further community engagement and consultation is required.

Discussion Kōrerorero

3.6 At the time of writing, the balance of the 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund is yet to be established. It is envisaged that the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund will be established at this, the August 10th Community Board Meeting.

Total Budget 2023/24	Granted To Date	Available for allocation	Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted
Yet to be established.	$0	Yet to be established.	-$28,981

3.7 Based on the current Discretionary Response Fund criteria, the applications listed above are eligible for funding.

3.8 The attached Decision Matrix provides detailed information for the applications. This includes organisational details, project details, financial information and a staff assessment.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Decision Matrix - Summer with your neighbours	23/964157	191
b ⇩	Decision Matrix - Youth Recreation Project	23/1211493	192
c ⇩	Decision Matrix - Community Liaison	23/964161	193
d ⇩	Decision Matrix - Community Pride Garden Awards	23/964164	194
e ⇩	Decision Matrix - Positive Youth Development Fund	23/964165	195
f ⇩	Decision Matrix - Community Service Awards	23/964167	196
g ⇩	Decision Matrix - Predator Free St Albans	23/964169	197

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	Trevor Cattermole - Community Development Advisor
Approved By	Emma Pavey - Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes-Central

Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

10 August 2023

17. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report - August 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/980327
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Emma Pavey, Community Governance Manager Papanui-Innes-Central (Emma.Pavey@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

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

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receive the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report for August 2023.

3. Community Support, Governance and Partnership Activity

3.1 Community Governance Projects

Activity	Detail	Timeline	Strategic Alignment
Board Plan - Shirley Community Reserve	Engagement with the community to determine a vision for the future of Shirley Community Reserve. Consultation has opened as detailed further below.	Ongoing	Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy
Board Plan -Implementation of Safety Initiatives	Includes advocacy for short and medium-term solutions to address youth safety issues at Northlands Shopping Centre and the surrounding area. Collaborative work being explored for youth workers in the Papanui ward to make connections, be present after school at the mall, and potentially to develop a youth health and wellbeing space.	Ongoing	Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy
Board Plan -Downstream Effects Management Plan (DEMP)	Since the opening of the Christchurch Northern Corridor (CNC), the Council has monitored the impact of the works as part of the DEMP Stage 2. The St Albans, Edgeware and Mairehau transport projects site details traffic improvements made in these areas aimed at managing the traffic from the CNC and improving pedestrian and cycle connections.	Ongoing	Liveable city
2023-24 Strengthening Communities Funding	The Strengthening Communities Fund supports community-focused organisations whose projects contribute to the strengthening of community wellbeing. The Board’s Discretionary Response Fund, from which the Board funds its own projects, as well as those of community organisations will also be refreshed in the funding round.	The Board will consider funding recommendations at this meeting.	Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy
Summer with your neighbours (SWYN)	SWYN applications have opened for the 2023-24 summer season. To date we have received six applications with the closure date being Friday, 11 August 2023.	Applications will be presented to the September Board meeting for decision.	Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy
Edible and Sustainable Garden Awards 2023	A partnership between the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board and the Canterbury Horticultural Society provides an opportunity to celebrate all types of food gardens. Photos are included below from the Board member’s visit to MacFarlane Park Community Garden to present the certificate to the Children’s Gardening Club.	Certificates have been presented by Board members to recipient in the community	Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy Resilient Communities

A group of children standing around a picnic table

Description automatically generated

3.2 Upcoming Community Events and Activities

· FRESH Events 2023

Information on events from Youth & Cultural Development (YCD) is available at this link.

· Volunteer Events

Visit this link for the variety of volunteer events held around the city. Activities vary, but may involve general clean ups, planting, weeding and mulching. Some planting events are family-friendly and eligible for Children's University (CU) credits.

Also visit this link to volunteer at a Council-produced event.

· Other upcoming community events and festivals in the city

Visit this link for the variety of community events and festivals held around the city. This also links to the What’s On site, where can found one-off and regular events like:

· The Vegan Night Mākete – Christchurch’s regular Vegan Night Mākete (market) showcases the best local plant-based foods and goods, raises awareness of the environmental/animal welfare and health benefits of veganism, and brings the community together. Held on the last Saturday of the month at the Phillipstown Community Hub – 39 Nursery Road.

· Smart Christchurch Innovation Expo 2023 – To be held 10-11 Septembers 2023 at Te Pae – Ōtautahi Christchurch's world-class convention and exhibition centre – showcasing the latest breakthroughs in technology and cutting-edge ideas.

· Evening with the Park Rangers – An opportunity on 15 August 2023, from 4.30pm, to get to know some of the Park Rangers and learn about the work they do in Ōtautahi Christchurch. This event is held at the Climate Action Campus, 180 Avonside Drive. Enjoy good food, good company, and an educational evening learning about local conservation.

· Christchurch City Council Libraries Events

Christchurch City Libraries run a wide range of classes and programmes both in libraries and through its learning centres for everyone from babies to seniors, with information at this link.

The Libraries’ Events Calendar can be found here, and there are dedicated pages for significant events like Christchurch Family History Expo - Friday 18 to Sunday 20 August 2023, Uike Kātoanga’i ‘o e Lea Faka-Tonga - Tonga Language Week Sunday 3 to Saturday 9 September 2023, and the WORD Christchurch Festival.

3.3 Participation in and Contribution to Decision Making

3.3.1 Report back on other Activities contributing to Community Board Plan

· Matariki in the Zone

Richmond Community Gardens hosted an amazing turnout for Matariki in the Zone on the evening of 15 July, with an awesome hāngī being unearthed to the delight of all.

· Kadavu Community Garden

The good work of Vaka Tautua in the Pacifika community came to light in the connections made when the special award within the Edible and Sustainable Garden Awards (results at this link) for beginner gardener in the Board area was presented for Kadavu Community Gardens.

· Northwest Sports Recreation Community Hub

The Northwest Sports Recreation Community Hub successfully convened a community meeting on the evening of 31 July 2023, hosted at Morrison Ave Bowling Club. The purpose of this gathering was to inform the development of a strategic plan to enhance and advance opportunities for increased sports and recreation participation within the Northwest community.

The meeting garnered a commendable turnout, with approximately 60 attendees, signifying community members' significant interest and support. This event provided a valuable platform for engaging in constructive dialogue and gathering crucial insights and ideas from participants. The contributions made during this and the next two meetings will be pivotal in shaping the forthcoming strategic plan to create a dynamic and inclusive sports and recreation environment within the Northwest area.

3.3.2 Council Engagement and Consultation

· Pūharakekenui Styx Stormwater Management Plan (consultation closes 4 September 2023)

Feedback is being sought on the Draft Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan, which has three key purposes: proposing targets for lowering stormwater contaminants; describing the ways stormwater discharges will be improved over time to meet environmental objectives; and discussing how flooding risks will be dealt with, if there are any. The draft plan and portal for making a submission can be found at the Kōrero mai | Let’s talk webpage: https://letstalk.ccc.govt.nz/puharakekenui-styx-SMP.

· Shirley Community Reserve (consultation closes 14 August 2023)

Shirley Community Reserve is a key priority for the Community Board, and the consultation on its future is currently open on the Kōrero mai | Let’s talk webpage: https://letstalk.ccc.govt.nz/SCR.

Residents are being given the opportunity to rank which option best captures their ideal community reserve. An overview of facilities in the area, the history of the reserve and a summary of the early feedback from the schools is also included.

A screenshot of a group of people in a park

Description automatically generated

· What Matters Most (early feedback closes 13 August 2023)

Early engagement for the Long Term Plan is being helped with this new online tool: www.ccc.govt.nz/whatmattersmost. The key activity of the campaign is a participatory budgeting exercise where people have 100 points they can attribute to 17 core services. They are invited to put those points on as many or as few services as they like – there is no right or wrong answer. The invitation is to help sort the must-haves from the nice-to-haves, for the development of the Council’s next Long Term Plan.

3.4 Governance Advice

3.4.1 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Submissions

Since the last Area Report, Board submissions on ‘Way Safer Streets’ projects in the area (Attachment A), and on the Draft Greater Christchurch Spatial Plan (Attachments B), have been approved.

3.4.2 Plan Change 4 – Short Term Accommodation

The previous Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board nominated Tim Lindley and Sunita Gautam to act as the Board’s representatives at the Plan Change 4 – Short Term Accommodation appeal mediation. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board is one of the successors to that disestablished board to which the latter nominee has been elected, and can now report that the Environment Court has released the final rules for Plan Change 4 subsequent to the appeal mediation as detailed in Attachment C.

3.4.3 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Plan 2023-25 – Monitoring as at July 2023

Refer to Attachment D for a summary of occurrences to July 2023 relevant to the advancement of the Board’s priorities.

3.4.4 Customer Service Request (CSR) Report for the Papanui-Innes-Central Wards

Reporting on the 1 July – 31 July 2023 statistics will be available in next month’s report, providing an overview of the number of CSRs that have been received, including the types of requests being received and a breakdown of how they are being reported. The Snap Send Solve promotion in the last month may have helped contribute to increased ticket volumes for graffiti in the Central Ward.

Snap Send Solve is the smartphone app the Council offers to help make reporting issues easy, and it is still possible to report issues online, by calling Council on 03 941 8999 or visiting one of the Council’s Service centres.

3.4.5 Planned roadworks and closures

Planned roadworks and closures are indicated on the map at this link, which includes those related to contractors as well, while Start Work Notices (SWN) as noted in the following section relate to work being carried out by the Council.

3.4.6 Traffic count data

Vehicle traffic count data collected by the Council for some key locations is displayed at these links for signalised intersections and link roads.

4. Advice Provided to the Community Board

4.1 Start Work Notices (SWN)

SWN relating to the Board area are separately circulated to the Board. All Board area and city-wide start work notices can be found at this link. Recent SWN relating to the Board area are:

· Hutcheson Street - water supply mains renewal

· Whiti-reia Cathedral Square - upgrade work and safety improvement (updated)

4.2 Graffiti Snapshot

The Graffiti Snapshot for June 2023 can be found as Attachment E to this report. The Council also provides information on graffiti, including tips to prevent it, and about becoming a Graffiti Programme volunteer, at this link.

4.3 Memoranda

Memoranda related to matters of relevance to the Board have been separately circulated for the Board’s information and are listed below.

· CCC: Outdoor dining policy consultation to begin (circulated 3 August 2023)

· CCC: Tūranga ground-source remediation works (circulated 2 August 2023)

· CCC: Update on CRAF Speed Restriction in Richmond (circulated 26 July 2023)

· CCC: Environment Court releases final rules for Plan Change 4 (short-term accommodation) (circulated 26 July 2023)

· CCC: Options for increasing on-street parking around Christchurch Hospital (circulated 14 July 2023)

· CCC: Richmond Neighbourhood Greenway Metropolitan (circulated 12 July 2023)

· CCC: Multicultural Recreation and Community Centre update (circulated 11 July 2023)

· CCC: Tsunami Warning System Update (circulated 11 July 2023)

· CCC: Severn Street Trees (circulated 10 July 2023)

· CCC: Linwood Ave Street Trees (circulated 10 July 2023)

· Orion: Orion strengthening our network update - works on MacKenzie Avenue and Ensors Road (circulated 7 July 2023)

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Board Submission on Way Safer Streets	23/1149559	216
b ⇩	Board Submission on Draft Greater Christchurch Spatial Plan	23/1149560	219
c ⇩	Memo - Environment Court releases final rules for Plan Change 4 (short-term accommodation)	23/1180904	225
d ⇩	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Plan 2023-25 – Monitoring as at July 2023	23/1205114	229
e ⇩	Graffiti Snapshot - June 2023	23/1141832	239

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Mark Saunders - Community Board Advisor

Lyssa Aves - Support Officer

Trevor Cattermole - Community Development Advisor

Stacey Holbrough - Community Development Advisor

Approved By

Emma Pavey - Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes-Central

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

Matthew Pratt - Acting Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Name	Subject
Brian Hays	Lane containing 56-70 Langdons Road

EXPENSES	Cost ($)
Airfares	$3,500
Accommodation	$1,710
Transport	$250
Tournament costs	$500
Medical	$300
Team Fund	$325
Uniforms	$746
Total	$7,331

7. Correspondence
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1195362
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Mark Saunders, Kaitohutohu Hāpori – Community Board Advisor (Mark.Saunders@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

15. Application to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund - Patch 'n Judy (known as Material Girls)
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1176549
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Trevor Cattermole – Community Development Advisor Trevor.Cattermole@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

16. Application to the 2023-24 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Youth Development Fund - Max Haines
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1177028
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Trevor Cattermole -Community Development Advisor Trevor.Cattermole@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)