Agenda of Council - Wednesday, 18 October 2023

Council

18 October 2023

5. Canterbury Cricket Trust Loan
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1464934
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	John Filsell, Head of Community Support and Partnerships (John.Filsell@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	John Filsell, Head of Community Support and Partnerships (John.Filsell@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to allow the Council to consider a request by The Canterbury Cricket Trust (Trust) that the term of their existing loan is extended to allow repayment in full.

1.2 The origin of this report is a request by the Trust.

1.3 The decision is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the fact that the subject matter is an extension in term of an existing loan to ensure payment in full at no additional cost to the Council. Accordingly, this has been discussed with the Trust, Canterbury Cricket Association (Canterbury Cricket) and relevant staff.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Extend the term of the existing $1,000,000 loan in favour of The Canterbury Cricket Trust for a further five years from 28 May 2024 to 29 May 2029 at an interest rate of 5.4% per annum or 20 basis points above Council’s cost of borrowing, whichever is higher, and conditional on:

a. The Canterbury Cricket Trust repaying all outstanding interest owed on the Loan up to 28 May 2024, prior to executing the agreement extending the term of the Loan.

b. The Canterbury Cricket Trust repaying the Loan in equal instalments of outstanding principal and interest on a quarterly basis from May 28 2024, by default; but also making all reasonable endeavours to repay the loan in full at the earliest opportunity.

2. Note:

a. That The Canterbury Cricket Trust has already provided a charge by way of a first-ranking General Security Agreement, for $1 million, in favour of the Council, over all its assets except the Hagley Sports Centre.

b. That the Council will not impose a penalty for early repayment.

c. That the Trust have submitted a financial model which outlines their current position and projected cash flow which demonstrates the ability of the Trust to meet its financial obligations (attached to this report as Public Excluded Attachment A).

3. Delegate authority to the Head of Community Support and Partnerships Unit to make the necessary arrangements to implement the Council’s decision noting that all loan and security agreements will be drafted by the Council’s Legal and Democratic Services Unit.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The report recommendation allows the Trust to repay the Loan and all interest owing, in full, at no additional cost to Council.

3.2 Provides an incentive for the Trust to repay earlier.

3.3 A five-year extension recognises the impact of competing developmental priorities, issues with implementing a player levy, and COVID 19, on the timeframe originally identified by the Trust and Canterbury Cricket, for repayment. It also allows these organisations time and space to collaboratively plan the ongoing direction of cricket.

3.4 Acknowledges that the Trust are best placed to raise the necessary funds to repay, through its fundraising and member activities.

3.5 Retains the obligation on the Trust to pay for, maintain, and renew its infrastructure assets at the Hagley Oval namely the floodlights and pavilion.

3.6 Disadvantages include a risk that the Trust will be unable to repay. This is partially mitigated by:

· The Trust’s track record to date in raising approximately $14,370,000 toward facilities on the Hagley Oval.

· The Trust having paid in advance all interest owing on the Loan up to 28 May 2024 at an interest rate of Council’s cost of borrowing plus 20 basis points.

· Financial modelling provided by the Trust which outlines their current position and projected cash flow, demonstrating the ability of the Trust to meet its financial obligations.

· That the Trust has already provided a charge by way of a first-ranking General Security Agreement, for $1 million, in favour of the Council, over all its assets except the Hagley Sports Centre.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Extend the term of the Loan with an additional higher interest rate of 2% over and above Council’s cost of borrowing.

4.1.1 Advantages include:

· Additional revenue for the Council over and above the cost of borrowing.

· Imposition of an interest rate more consistent with other community providers.

· Provides an incentive for early repayment.

4.1.2 Disadvantages include:

· This is inconsistent with the original purpose of the Loan to assist a community organisation in raising funds to provide a substantial asset for community use, in this case floodlights.

· The additional interest will either prove unaffordable or come from funds otherwise destined for the community side of the game.

4.2 Extend the term of the Loan with an interest rate lower than Council’s cost of borrowing.

4.2.1 Advantages are primarily that cricket would avoid paying a portion of interest ordinarily charged on a loan of this nature.

4.2.2 Disadvantages include:

· There is an additional cost to the Council proportionate to any discounted interest rate agreed. There is no budget provision in the 2021/31 Long Term Plan to support this. There is no current provision for this to be included in the 2024/34 LTP.

· Canterbury Cricket have chosen not to implement a constitutional process to raise a player levy and have prioritised the development of the Hagley Sports Centre over the repayment of the Council’s loan.

· The terms of the loan seeking to be extended clearly state an interest rate of Council’s cost of borrowing plus 20 basis points. There are no surprises or changed expectations.

· The loan and security agreement, along with Councils wider collaborative relationship with Cricket already provide mechanisms for cooperation if the Trust experience difficulties in prepaying.

4.3 Call-in the Loan at the end of the term, May 28 2024, and realise the security offered by the Trust, namely the floodlights, pavilion, and other property.

4.3.1 Disadvantages include:

· There is little cash value in community assets such as floodlights and a pavilion in situ.

· If the Council wishes to retain first class and international cricket in Christchurch then the Council would need to assume responsibility, by default, for the maintenance and renewal of these assets.

· Would result in a substantial degree of financial insecurity for the Trust and Canterbury Cricket.

· Provide a disincentive for community-based organisations to partner with Council over the provision of community assets.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 On 12 March 2020 Council resolved to grant a loan in favour of the Trust of up to $1,500,000 for the installation of floodlights at the Hagley Oval subject to a number of conditions, see below. $1,000,000 was drawn down on 28 May 2020.

5.2 In respect of resolution 2.a., the Chair and deputy Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee agreed on the following terms and conditions as acceptable to Council.

5.2.1 The Canterbury Cricket Trust providing a charge by way of a first-ranking General
Security Agreement, for $1 million, in favour of the Council (noting that the Hagley Sports Centre is subject to the provisions of a bequest).

5.2.2 The Canterbury Cricket Trust demonstrating that it has already secured a minimum of $1,500,000 towards the cost of installing floodlights at Hagley Oval.

5.2.3 Christchurch being awarded the final of the 2021 Women’s Cricket World Cup.

5.2.4 The Canterbury Cricket Trust providing a letter to Council explicitly stating that the Trust will not subsequently seek that any portion of the loan be converted to a grant or written off.

5.2.5 A written commitment by the Canterbury Cricket Association to support a player levy in principle, including a written agreement to undertake the consultative process with its members necessary to secure this, and to use “best endeavours” to raise $500,000 from a player levy to repay the Council loan.

5.3 All the conditions were satisfied, the Loan was drawn down, the lights were installed, and the Women’s Cricket World Cup final was hosted in Christchurch.

5.4 While monitoring the loan it became apparent to the Council’s Funding Team that Canterbury Cricket had not undertaken the process to raise $500,000 from a player levy to repay the loan. Several discussions were undertaken between Council staff, the Trust and Canterbury Cricket in respect of this matter. As a result, on 15 September 2023 the Trust advised Council that Canterbury Cricket would not be undertaking the process to raise $500,000 from a levy.

5.5 The reasons behind this decision by Canterbury Cricket are detailed in a letter from Canterbury Cricket to the Trust dated 6 September 2023, this is attached to this report as Attachment B. The reasons are summarised as follows:

5.5.1 Canterbury Cricked had a particularly negative experience when they attempted to impose a player levy in respect of the Hagley Oval in 2013.

5.5.2 At the time the commitment was made Canterbury Cricket were not aware of the impact COVID-19 would have on the business of cricket at a grass roots level.

5.5.3 Canterbury Cricket have subsequently agreed to make a financial contribution to the operation of the Sir Richard Hadley Sports Centre by way of a licence fee.

5.6 The ability of the Trust to raise sufficient funding to repay the Loan by the due date has also been substantially impacted by COVID-19, as follows:

5.6.1 The number of international fixtures at Hagley was reduced. These events drive the main form of Business-as-Usual revenue from memberships, hosting and sponsorship.

5.6.2 Philanthropic and benefactorial opportunities were substantially curtailed and recovering slowly.

5.6.3 The decision of Canterbury Cricket not to progress the levy.

5.7 As a result, the Trust have reviewed and revised their financial modelling, outlining their current position and projected cash flow (see PX Attachment A). This demonstrates the ability of the Trust to meet its financial obligations, including the repayment of the Loan, with interest, over a further five years.

5.8 Accordingly, the Trust proactively request that Council extend the term of their existing loan of $1,000,000 for a period of five years to allow repayment in full.

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 Communities and Citizens

6.2.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

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

· Te Pou Tua Rua: Te Whenua “We support and help build connections between communities and their places and spaces to foster a sense of local identity, shared experience and stewardship.”

· Te Pou Tua Tahi: Te Tāngata 1.6 “Support groups involved in providing access to arts, culture, heritage, recreation and those who care for the environment”.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.3 The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture, and traditions. This is primarily because the decision is whether to extend an existing loan and not whether the benefited projects proceed or not.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.4 There is no climate change impact because the decision is whether to extend an existing loan and not whether the benefited projects proceed or not.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.5 Accessibility considerations apply to the projects themselves rather than a loan application as such there are no accessibility considerations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - $400 primarily staff time provided for within existing budgets.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - None other than monitoring the loan as interest repayments will cover Council’s cost of borrowing plus 20 basis points.

7.3 Funding Source - This will be funded from continued borrowing and repaid in full plus interest, at no additional cost to rates.

Other He mea anō

7.4 The default quarterly payment due to Council under an extended loan is $57,388.10. Total repayments are $1,147,762 of which $147,762 is interest.

7.5 The Trust have proactively paid all interest owing on the Loan up to 28 May 2024.

7.6 Council staff have reviewed the Trusts financial modelling and believe the Trust can meet its financial obligations without overly relying on philanthropic donations or supportive benefactors; despite the Trust having a historically successful track record in both.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The statutory power to undertake the proposal derives from Council’s Status and Powers in S12 (2) of the LGA 2002.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 The Legal and Democratic Services Unit and will prepare all loan agreement documentation.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 The principal risk to Council is that Christchurch Heritage Ltd fail to repay their loans.

9.1.1 This risk is partially mitigated because:

· The Trust have provided Council a written assurance confirming that the Trust will not seek to convert any portion of Council’s loan into a grant.

· The Trust’s track record to date in raising approximately $14,370,000 toward facilities on the Hagley Oval points to the ability to repay.

· The Trust have proactively pre-paid all outstanding interest on the existing $1,000,000 Loan until the due date of 28 May 2024.

· Financial modelling by the Trust which outlines their current position and projected cash flow which demonstrates the ability of the Trust to meet its financial obligations from business as usual; this does not include fundraising which may help repay faster.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Appendix A: Trust Financial Modeling (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential	23/1529443
b ⇩	Appendix B: Canterbury Cricket Levy	23/1529370	12

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Approved By

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

Nigel Cox - Head of Recreation, Sports & Events

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Council

18 October 2023

6. Service Delivery (S17A) reviews
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1476721
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Peter Ryan Head of Corporate Planning & Performance (peter.ryan@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider the below reviews for implementation between now and June 2024.

1.2 Note that the period beyond June 2024 could also include Recreation and Sport, and Facilities and Asset Planning.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve the recommended programme of Service Delivery Reviews (section 17A.), noting that the scope of individual reviews will be discussed between the Council and staff:

a. Solid Waste Resource Recovery

b. Governance & Decision Making (elections management)

c. Parks

d. Transport

e. Technical Services & Design

2. Note that the period beyond June 2024 could include Recreation and Sport, and Facilities and Asset Planning.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Under legislation the Council has a requirement to review the cost-effectiveness of current arrangements for meeting the needs of communities within its district or region for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions.

3.2 Reviews must consider options for governance, funding, and delivery (infrastructure, services, and regulatory functions), and responsibility for the reviews is exercised by the Council.

3.3 The Council must do this in conjunction with consideration of any significant change to relevant service levels, within two years before the expiry of any contract (that is materially significant to the delivery of the service), but not later than six years following the last review.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Other options were considered but these did not meet the criteria for review or would have added excessive workload to the organisation during a Long-Term Plan (LTP) year. These options will be considered for future reviews.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The review process is an opportunity to frame the facts, issues and constraints around each activity to councillors.

5.2 Reports were tabled to the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) in April 2022, 3 November 2022 and earlier in 2023 on recommended reviews. Advice received suggested that no more than 3-4 per year should be considered and that reviews should have a strategic and value-add focus.

5.3 Since the work has taken place by the Corporate Planning Unit with both the Procurement team (who identified upcoming contract triggers for review) and the Risk and Assurance team to identify a smaller pool of review candidates.

5.4 A draft list of activities proposed for s17A Service Delivery Reviews is set out below, including some reviews already in progress (as approved by the Council or ELT.)

5.5 Solid Waste Resource Recovery (in progress)

5.6 Governance and Decision Making (specifically the elections management process - in progress.

5.7 Parks

5.8 Transport (Safety, Access, Environment) The Transport Unit has indicated its intention to run a full activity review within the next year.

5.9 Technical Services and Design

5.10 The period beyond June 2024 could include –

5.10.1 Recreation and Sport (recommended deferral of review until all in-progress facilities are built and operational).

5.10.2 Facilities and Asset Planning (Reviewed in 2019. Review only if contracts are due for renewal – e.g., Cleaning and Hygiene Services; Facilities Maintenance; Security Services).

5.11 Further specifics on scope and terms of reference would be subject to discussion between the Council (who have a governance role around these reviews) and staff.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This report directly supports the approved project plan for the Long-Term Plan 2024-34.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.4 The decisions in this report have potential to:

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

6.4.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.5 N/A.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – generally within BAU, but additional resourced may be required. These cannot be accurately estimated until the scope/terms of reference of reviews are clarified and approved.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Under s17A of the Local Government Act, Council must review the cost-effectiveness of current arrangements for meeting the needs of communities within its district or region for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions:

8.1.1 in conjunction with consideration of any significant change to relevant service levels; and

8.1.2 within two years before the expiry of any contract or other binding agreement relating to the delivery of that infrastructure, service, or regulatory function; and

8.1.3 at such other times as the local authority considers desirable, but not later than 6 years following the last review.

8.2 A review must consider options for:

8.2.1 Governance

8.2.2 Funding, and

8.2.3 Delivery of infrastructure, services, and regulatory functions (delivery).

8.3 Responsibility for the reviews is exercised by the Council.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.4 Failure to conduct reviews is a technically breach of the LGA 2002.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There is low risk of penalty due to non-compliance but there may be significant opportunity cost (in terms of better efficiency and effectiveness) if reviews are not conducted.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Peter Ryan - Head of Corporate Planning & Performance

Boyd Kedzlie - Senior Business Analyst

Approved By

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Council

18 October 2023

7. Botanic Gardens - Licence to Occupy for monitoring wells
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1318512
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Nigel Collings, Property Consultant (nigel.collings@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of the report is to seek Council approval for Environment Canterbury to place 3 wells in the Botanic Gardens to monitor ground water.

1.2 Environment Canterbury have approached the Council for permission to install up to 3 wells in the Botanic Gardens. This will be one new well and two replacement wells currently in the Museum.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve the granting of a Licence to occupy to Environment Canterbury to install up-to 3 wells in the Botanic Gardens approximately 30 metres west of the Peacock fountain and as outlined in the image in section 5.3 of this report.

2. Recommend that the Chief Executive, in her capacity of holding the Minister of Conservation’s Delegation, give consent to the licence in accordance with section 48A of the Reserves Act 1988

3. Authorise the Property Consultancy Manager to manage and finalise Licence documentation for the above matter.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The two Museum wells were installed in the 1800’s, with ground water data reaching back to 1894, meaning they are possibly the oldest ground water records in New Zealand.

3.2 The Redevelopment of the Canterbury Museum has started. This redevelopment will result in decommissioning of two existing Canterbury groundwater monitoring wells, located in the basement of the Museum.

3.3 Installation of the 3 proposed wells will enable Environment Canterbury to continue the 129-year ground water records currently recorded at the wells in the basement of the Canterbury Museum.

3.4 They are also significant as monitoring wells for the Riccarton and Linwood gravels for the central Christchurch area. Due to their importance in monitoring the Christchurch ground water system, Environment Canterbury would like to install replacement monitoring wells at a location close to the old wells.

3.5 Environment Canterbury would also like the option of installing a third well, with an anticipated depth of 80-100m in the Burwood gravel aquifer. The third well would provide more information about the groundwater system at this location.

3.6 The three ground water monitoring wells are slated to be installed approximately 30 metres west of the Peacock fountain and will have depths of 30m, 50-60m and 80-100m. Depending on costs, the third well may be installed in the 2024/25 Financial year.

3.7 The Christchurch Botanic Gardens was selected as the desired location for the replacement wells to ensure that they are in close proximity to the existing wells being decommissioned. They are shown as three red dots on the image in section 5.3.

3.8 A Licence is required to permit Environment Canterbury to install the wells.

3.9 The availability of long-term data together with the long-term protection of the Botanic Gardens as a reserve make it an ideal location.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The Botanic gardens has been identified as the best location for the wells. The close proximity to the existing wells, and the availability of long-term data together with the long-term protection of the Botanic Gardens as a reserve make it an ideal location.

4.2 Other sites have not been considered.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The Botanic Gardens are located at 5-7 Rolleston Avenue and held as a local purpose (botanic garden) in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977.

5.2 The legal description is Part Reserve 25, gazetted as a local purpose (botanic garden) reserve, certificate of title identifier 668229

The Equipment and Location

5.3 The proposed location is indicated by the 3 red dots.

5.4 The most appropriate drill method will be sonic drilling. This will minimise noise and debris generation and provide core samples which may be sent to GNS to review the presence and types of micro fossils which will assist in their study of climate and the rate of sea level change. The micro fossil review can also provide greater detail in the age of deposition of units.

5.5 The installed wells will be constructed in a way that does not impact Botanic Gardens daily operations. This will likely result in below ground well heads, allowing Botanic Gardens staff to continue regular garden maintenance unaffected.

5.6 On 12 June 2013, the minster of Conservation delegated to all territorial authorities’ powers, functions and duties where the territorial authority is the administering body of the relevant reserve. The Council has sub-delegated that power to the Chief Executive.

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

5.7.1 The land has been correctly identified.

5.7.2 The necessary statutory processes have been followed.

5.7.3 The functions and purposes of the Reserves Act have been taken in account in respect to the classification and purpose of the reserve as required under section 40 of the Act.

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

5.7.5 Pursuant to the requirements of section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, the administering body has consulted with and considered the views of Tangata Whenua or has in some other way been able to make an informed decision.

5.8 Public notification of the Council’s intentions to consider granting Environment Canterbury a Licence to Occupy is not required under section 48A(5) as the reserve is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged and the rights of public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected the granting and lawful exercise of the rights and powers contained in the licence.

5.9 Council officers are satisfied that the proposed licence will comply with the Minister’s requirements.

5.10 The community’s views have not been obtained. The three wells will be out of sight, out of the way and the installation does not affect the public. Public notification is not required in accordance with clause 48A (5) of the Reserves Act 1977 as the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected.

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

5.11.1 All wards/Community Boards as this is a metropolitan asset.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 Installation of the three wells will provide the means for ground water monitoring.

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

6.3 Internal Activities

6.3.1 Activity: Facilities, Property and Planning

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 The decision does involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

6.6 The decision to enter into a Licence with Environment Canterbury is not a significant decision, However, it does have a significant beneficial impact to Mana Whenua. The impact is that Mana Whenua will benefit from the data collected as it relates to water monitoring and planning for the future generations. This will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

6.7 Environment Canterbury have engaged with the Environmental Advisor at Mahaanui Kurataio (MKT) regarding the proposed License. The information has been considered and they cannot see any issue with the installation of the proposed wells in the Botanical Gardens.

6.8 The contractor is required to follow an accidental discovery protocol to cover the risk of encountering Māori archaeology.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.9 The granting will allow the City to support research into understanding the effect of changes in the water which in due course may form part of our climate change response.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.10 The borehole lid will be flush with the surrounding grass with no trip hazard to members of the public.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – this is funded by the Licensee, ECAN; no cost to Council.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – Funded by ECAN; no cost to Council

7.3 Funding Source – this is funded by the Licensee, ECAN.

Other He mea anō

7.4 There will be no other cost to Council.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1 Reserves Act 1977 – Section 48A.

8.2 Minister of Conservation Powers delegated to Christchurch City Council.

8.3 The Botanic Gardens are a metropolitan asset, therefore the decision to grant a licence to occupy is with the Council.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There is reputational risk if the Council does not agree or discontinues partnerships or support with ECAN in supporting water monitoring work that provides benefits to the city and the country.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Nigel Collings - Property Consultant

Approved By

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Wolfgang Bopp - Director Botanic Gardens & Garden Parks

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Council

18 October 2023

8. Plan Change 5E (Noise sensitive activities near roads and rail corridors) correction to recommendations by the Hearings Panel
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1331407
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Abby Stowell, Policy Planner (abby.stowell@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	John Higgins, Head of Planning & Consents (John.Higgins@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to present the Hearings Panel's correction to its earlier recommendations on Plan Change 5E following Council's decision CNCL/2023/00065 and to seek approval of the plan change as amended.

1.2 The Council, as the final decision maker, resolved to accept the Hearings Panel's recommendation without amendment.

1.3 Subsequently, information was brought to the attention of the Hearings Panel that two errors were made, specifically, the activity status tables in rule 6.1.7.1 do not refer to the new rule 6.1.7.2.3, and the new matter of discretion was labelled 6.1.8 a. xii, instead of 6.1.8 a. xiii.

1.4 The Hearings Panel has no decision-making powers but, in accordance with its delegation has considered the written and oral submissions received on Plan Change 5E and made its recommendations to the Council, which were considered at the Council meeting on 3 May 2023.

1.5 The Hearings Panel has the ability to amend its recommendation to the Council if the recommendation was made in error. The Council has the ability, under s46 of the Legislation Act 2019, to amend its decision on Plan Change 5E (Noise sensitive activities near roads and railways) to correct errors.

1.6 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the number of affected parties and the nature of the effects, which in this case is all those applying for consent for noise sensitive activities near specific roads in the central city. The effects on these applicants are positive as they allow applications to be assessed to ensure an appropriate level of control to mitigate noise effects for residents while contributing to higher costs of consenting. The latter is mitigated by the correction, which changes the activity status to be less restrictive.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receives the supplementary report and recommendations of the Hearings Panel on Plan Change 5E Noise sensitive activities near roads and railways.

2. Adopts, as the decision of the Council, the amended recommendation of the Hearings Panel to include reference to rule 6.1.7.2.3 in Rule 6.1.7.1 – Activity Status tables for “sensitive activities near roads in the Central City” as shown in Attachment A to this report, and renumber the new matter of discretion in relation to adverse effects on heritage values of buildings as 6.1.8 a.xiii.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 As part of PC5E noise sensitive near roads and railways, the staff recommendation to the Hearings Panel and the Hearings Panel recommendation to the Council intended to retain the operative rule for noise sensitive activities in the central city area until such time as the provisions for managing noise in Central City zones are reviewed and a new rule written to better cater for the complexities of that area.

3.2 The Hearings Panel accepted this intention and the proposed recommendation by staff to insert a new rule 6.1.7.2.3 Sensitive activities near roads in the Central City in the Plan. The original recommendation from the Hearings Panel, adopted by Council, did not include this.

3.3 Since starting to apply the rule, processing staff in the Resource Consents Team within Council have raised the concern that the relevant activity status tables do not reference the new rule number 6.1.7.2.3 (Sensitive activities near roads in the Central City). This effectively means that sensitive activities near roads in the central city do not have a specific activity status under the Christchurch District Plan and all such activities default to being non-complying under rule 6.1.7.1.5 NC3, being any activity not otherwise specified. This is an error and is not in line with the intent of the Hearing Panel recommendations which was that these activities may be permitted under rule 6.1.7.1.1, restricted discretionary under 6.1.7.1.3 or non-complying under 6.1.7.1.5.

3.4 Additionally, staff noticed an error in the numbering of the new matter of discretion in relation to adverse effects on heritage buildings. It currently reads
2. Insert new matters of discretion.
6.1.8 Rules – Matters of discretion […]
xii. The extent to….

3.5 The number of the new matter should be 6.1.8 a. xiii.

3.6 These mistakes originated from Council staff’s drafting of the rules and were repeated in the Hearings Panel’s recommendations.

3.7 Council staff subsequently requested the Hearings Panel to review its recommendation to Council to correct these errors.

3.8 The Hearings Panel have considered these errors and issued a supplementary report and recommendations regarding the omission and error to correct the rule and achieve the intent of the plan change. The amended report is attached as Attachment A.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The alternative option is not to make the correction. If this option is chosen, all applications for noise sensitive activities in the Central City would continue to be assessed as non- complying. This is an overly onerous assessment in most cases.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Plan Change 5 was publicly notified on 22nd October 2020, following pre-notification consultation in July-August 2020. A summary of submissions was notified for further submissions on 28^th January 2021, closing on 12^th February 2021.

5.2 For PC5E Council received 12 submission and 3 further submissions. Council appointed a Hearings Panel to hear the submissions. The hearing was held on 13^th February 2023. Council decided to adopt the Hearings Panel’s recommendations on 3^rd May 2023 and this was notified on 11^th and 12^th May 2023. There were no appeals on Council’s decision.

5.3 The decision affects all wards/Community Board areas.

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 Regulatory and Compliance

6.2.1 Activity: Resource Consenting

· Level of Service: 9.2.6 Ensure resource consent decision-making is robust and legally defensible. - No decisions are overturned by the High Court upon judicial review.

6.3 Strategic Planning and Policy

6.3.1 Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The decision is consistent with Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act and is consistent with s46 of the Legislation Act 2019.

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 Consultation was undertaken with Mahaanui Kurataiao in the preparation of Plan Change 5 and on the draft plan change. The matter subject to this report is not deemed to impact on Manawhenua values.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 The proposals in this report are unlikely to contribute significantly to adaptation to the impacts of climate change or emissions reductions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.8 This report does not have an impact on accessibility considerations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Adopting the Hearings Panel’s amended recommendation will not result in additional costs to Council beyond what has been budgeted for.

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

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Sections 74 and 75 of the Resource Management Act (RMA) set out the Council’s obligations when preparing a change to its District Plan. The Panel’s report on PC5E (Attachment B) and the supplementary report (Attachment A) applied the appropriate considerations under the RMA.

8.2 The legal framework for the Council’s decision on the Panel’s recommendations is set out in Section 1.5 above.

8.3 The Hearings Panel has the ability to amend its recommendation to the Council if the recommendation contains an error or omission.

8.4 The Council has the ability, under s46 of the Legislation Act 2019, to amend its decision on Plan Change 5E Noise sensitive activities near roads and railways to correct an error and omission.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.5 This report has been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Team.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Council is statutorily required to have an operative District Plan at all times. Issues have been identified with the District Plan which are addressed through Plan Change 5. Therefore, the risk of not acting is considered greater than the risk of acting.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	PC5E Supplementary Report and Recommendations	23/1390203	32
b ⇩	Hearings Panel Report and Recommendations	23/1390205	38

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

Abby Stowell - Policy Planner

Mark Stevenson - Manager Planning

Approved By

Brent Pizzey - Senior Legal Counsel

John Higgins - Head of Planning & Consents

9. Mayor's Monthly Report
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1607319
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Phil Mauger, Mayor

ITEM NO.	GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED	SECTION	SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT	PLAIN ENGLISH REASON	WHEN REPORTS CAN BE RELEASED
5.	Canterbury Cricket Trust Loan
	Attachment a - Appendix A: Trust Financial Modeling	s7(2)(b)(ii)	Prejudice Commercial Position	Contains financial information, the publication of which will impact the ability of the Trust to operate sucessfully.	This information will not be released.