Agenda of Council - Wednesday, 1 November 2023

Council

01 November 2023

Woodham Road / Gloucester Street - Intersection Improvements
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1195588
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Gautham Praburam, Traffic Engineer, gautham.praburam@ccc.govt.nz Lachlan Beban, Senior Transportation Engineer, lachlan.beban@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Waitai Coastal Burwood Linwood Community Board to approve the proposed safety improvements at the Woodham Road / Gloucester Street intersection.

1.2 This report has been written in response to concerns raised by road users passing through this intersection and safety risks identified at this location by Council staff.

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 through consideration of the various assessment criteria in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy Worksheet.

1.4 The recommended option is to reconfigure the intersection approaches to have separate right turn bays, shared left/through lanes and cycle lanes on each approach, along with associated cyclist markings, as shown in Attachment A. Advanced waiting bays within the intersection for right turning vehicles from the Gloucester Street approaches are also included in this option.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

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

1. Pursuant to Clause 18 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

a. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the western side of Gloucester Street, commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of approximately 60 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

b. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the eastern side of Gloucester Street, commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of approximately 64 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

c. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the western side of Gloucester Street, commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of approximately 30 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

d. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the southern side of Woodham Road, commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of approximately 45m as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

e. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the northern side of Woodham Road, commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of approximately 47 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

f. That any Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle) along the southern side of Woodham Road between its intersection with Gloucester Street and Tancred Street (located to the west of the intersection) be revoked.

g. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the southern side of Woodham Road, commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in a westerly direction up to its intersection with Tancred Street.

h. That any Special Vehicle Lanes (Cycle) along the northern side of Woodham Road between its intersection with Gloucester Street and Patten Street (located to the west of the intersection) be revoked.

i. That a Special Vehicle Lane (Cycle) be installed along the northern side of Woodham Road, commencing at its intersection with Patten Street and extending in an easterly direction up to its intersection with Gloucester Street.

That the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board approves:

2. All road surface treatments, lane changes and road markings as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

3. That in accordance with Section 2.4 of the Land Transport Rule: Road User Rule 2004 that cycles be exempt from being required to turn left, when in the left turn lane on the Gloucester Street northern approach at its intersection with Woodham Road.

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

a. Along the western side of Gloucester Street commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of approximately 53 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

b. Along the eastern side of Gloucester Street commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of approximately 42 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

c. Along the western side of Gloucester Street commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of approximately 31 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

d. Along the eastern side of Gloucester Street commencing at its intersection with Woodham Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of approximately 27 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

e. Along the southern side of Woodham Road commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of approximately 46 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

f. Along the northern side of Woodham Road commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of approximately 43 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

g. Along the southern side of Woodham Road commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 28 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

h. Along the northern side of Woodham Road commencing at its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 44 metres as detailed on plan RD3874S1, dated 12/09/2023 and attached to this Agenda report as Attachment A.

5. Pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, revokes any time restricted parking restrictions along the southern side of Woodham Road between its intersection with Gloucester Street and Tancred Street.

6. Pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, approves that the parking of vehicles be restricted to a maximum period of 30 minutes on the southern side of Woodham Road commencing at a point approximately 28 metres west of its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 16 metres.

7. 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 above.

8. 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.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The existing layout of the approaches to the intersection of Gloucester Street / Woodham Road consists of an unmarked kerbside lane and a shared through / right turn lane. This layout (without an exclusive right turn lane) is problematic in operation as any right turning vehicles have to wait to give way to opposing traffic and therefore block any trailing through vehicles. As a result, drivers often use the adjacent unmarked lane to undertake the waiting right turning vehicles thereby creating safety risks.

3.2 Also, currently there are no dedicated facilities to assist cyclists in safely navigating the intersection.

3.3 The proposed intersection improvements include reconfiguring the approaches with separate right turn bays, shared left/through lanes, and cycle lanes on each approach, along with cyclist markings and additional no stopping restrictions to accommodate the revised lane arrangement, as shown in Attachment A. Additionally, advanced waiting bays will be introduced within the intersection for right-turning vehicles from Gloucester Street.

3.4 The recommendations in this report will help to achieve the desired community outcome of a well-connected and accessible city through improved road safety.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Do Nothing

4.1 The advantages of this option include:

4.1.1 No cost to Council.

4.2 The disadvantages of this option include:

4.2.1 Does not address the identified safety concerns for road users at this location.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Improving safety on local roads in Christchurch is a priority for Council. Providing safe infrastructure is key to ensure people get to where they are going safely regardless of how they are travelling.

5.2 Woodham Road is an Arterial Road with an average weekday traffic volume of over 10,000 vehicles. Gloucester Street is a Primary Collector with an average weekday traffic volume of over 8,000 vehicles. This intersection lies along one of the primary routes for individuals commuting between the city centre and the eastern side of the city.

5.3 According to the latest available traffic survey data (2020), the number of vehicles making right turns from Gloucester Street is nearly twice the number of vehicles turning right from Woodham Road.

5.4 Council staff have received feedback in the past regarding safety concerns for road users at this intersection.

5.5 The existing lane alignments have been in place since the pre-earthquake period when there were a higher number of vehicles travelling towards the present red zone areas. This type of intersection lane layout was once common in the city, however over the last few decades these layouts have progressively been upgraded to provide safety improvements.

5.6 The current layout presents several issues, primarily related to right-turning vehicles having to wait and yield to oncoming traffic, subsequently creating delay and obstructing through vehicles. Consequently, drivers frequently resort to using the adjacent unmarked lane to bypass the queue of waiting right-turning vehicles. This behaviour increases the risk of conflicts with vehicles and cyclists in the kerbside lane. It also raises the likelihood of collisions with right-turning vehicles from the opposing approach, as the through vehicles become obscured behind the queue of waiting vehicles.

5.7 Also, currently the intersection lacks dedicated facilities to assist the safe passage of cyclists.

5.8 The Waka Kotahi Crash Analysis System (CAS) was used to gain an understanding of any underlying safety issues at this location. 16 crashes have been reported within 50m of this intersection since 2013. Ten crashes were non-injury crashes and six crashes resulted in minor injuries.

5.9 Staff acknowledge the concerns at this location and feel that safety improvements are warranted around this intersection.

5.10 The proposed treatments include:

· Altering the intersection approaches to have separate right turn bays.

· Shared left/through lanes and cycle lanes on each approach.

· Associated cyclist markings at key locations to highlight the potential presence of cyclists.

· Advanced waiting bays within the intersection for right turning vehicles from Gloucester Street.

· No stopping restrictions - to provide road space to accommodate the revised lane arrangement.

· Moving the existing time restricted parking spaces in Woodham Road immediately near the intersection to the west to accommodate the revised lane layout.

5.11 The project is being funded from the Minor Safety Interventions budget, which is used to fund low-cost safety improvements in the city’s local road network. This programme is focussed on delivering smaller scale projects which generally originate from community requests that might otherwise struggle to get funded when ranked against other safety initiatives around the city.

5.12 Approval for the proposed improvements is required by the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board.

5.13 If approved, the recommendations will be implemented within the current financial year.

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.1 Early engagement with the affected businesses around the Gloucester Street – Woodham Road intersection started on 11 April 2023 and ran until 25 April 2023. Businesses included:

· Vortica Disc Golf

· T Bakery

· Mainland Turkish Food

· Dallington Seafood Centre

· Jo’s Mart and Sushi

· The Great India

· City Express Convenience

· Vape Crew and,

· BP Service Station

6.2 Staff doorknocked reachable businesses to talk to staff about the proposed plans and left letters to businesses that couldn’t be reached, inviting them to give feedback on the proposed plan by a private form.

6.3 Public consultation started on 1 May 2023 and ran until 19 May 2023. An email was sent to key stakeholders:

· Spokes

· NZ Police

· Metro

· Automobile Association

· St John

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) and,

· Dallington Residents Association.

6.4 Community organisations were provided with information to share with their community on social media. The consultation was posted on the following community pages inviting submissions on the Have Your Say webpage: https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/590

· Aranui and Wainoni Community

· Woolston Community United

· Inner East Burbs – Linwood, Phillipstown and Woolston Locals

· R.A.D.S – Richmond Avonside Dallington Shirley Locals

· Peoples Independent Republic of New Brighton

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

6.5 During early engagement, Vortica Disc Golf submitted their concerns regarding the proposal. They expressed worries about its potential negative impact on both existing and future businesses in the area. The main concern raised was that these businesses heavily rely on the on-street parking that currently exists, and any changes could hinder their growth and discourage new businesses from establishing themselves in the area.

6.6 Submissions were made by one recognised organisation, three businesses and 48 individuals. All submissions are available as Attachment B.

6.7 Of the 22 submitters (43%) who supported the proposal, 17 identified intersection safety as a problem and these improvements addressed the issues.

6.8 Out of the 18 submitters (34%) who did not support the proposal for the same reasons outlined in section 6.5, 14 (27%) suggested that a different intersection should be prioritized for improvement. These intersections included:

· Gloucester Street – Avonside Street - Retreat Road

· Worcester Street – Woodham Road

· Woodham Road – Kerrs Road

6.9 A further 12 (23%) made specific comments on the proposal that neither supported or opposed the overall project.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

7.2 This report supports the:

7.3 Transport

7.3.1 Activity: Transport

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

7.4 The recommendations in this report are consistent with Council’s Policies and Plans.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

7.5 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.

7.6 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.

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.8 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

7.9 This proposal improves safety and accessibility for pedestrians passing through this intersection.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement - Approximately $30,000.

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Approximately $500 per year.

8.3 Funding Source - Traffic Operations Minor Safety Interventions Budget 2023/24.

Other He mea anō

8.4 None identified.

9. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

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

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 None identified.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Gloucester Street / Woodham Road - Proposed Intersection Improvements	22/1662987
b	Gloucester Street Woodham Road intersection - Submission Table (Public)	23/1350420

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

Gautham Praburam - Senior Traffic Engineer

Lachlan Beban - Senior Transportation Engineer

Kiran Skelton - Engagement Assistant

Approved By

Katie Smith - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

Council

01 November 2023

Report from Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board – 12 October 2023

10. Wigram/Hayton Roads Intersection Improvement
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/1692167
Report of Te Pou Matua:	David Sun, Transport Project Manager David.Sun@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Leader Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board (Board) to approve intersection changes at Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection; and to recommend that Council approve special vehicle lanes for use by cycles.

1.2 The report has been prepared by Council staff. The project will provide safe pedestrian and cyclist connections from Hayton Reserve to the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection, and safe vehicular access from the intersection to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub.

1. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Consideration Te Whaiwhakaarotanga
	The Board took into consideration the deputations made from Wayne Keen, Halswell Residents’ Association and Spokes Canterbury whilst making its recommendation to Council and Part C decision.

2. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Decisions Under Delegation Ngā Mana kua Tukuna

(Officer recommendations accepted)

Part C

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board approves:

3. All kerb alignments, road surface treatments, lane changes, raised safety platforms (at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection and across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point), coloured pavement surfacing and road markings as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

4. That in accordance with Section 2.4 of the Land Transport Rule: Road User Rule 2004 that cycles be exempt from being required to turn left, when in the left turn lane on the Wigram Road northeastern approach at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

5. That in accordance with Section 8.2 of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004, a Pedestrian / Cyclist Crossing be established on Nga Puna Wai Access Road at a distance of 80 metres southeast of its intersection with Wigram Road as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

6. That in accordance with Section 4 of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004, the northwest bound traffic on Nga Puna Wai Access Road be controlled by a STOP Control at the pedestrian / cyclist crossing point located at a distance of 80 metres southeast of its intersection with Wigram Road as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

7. That in accordance with Section 4 of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004, the southeast bound traffic on Nga Puna Wai Access Road be controlled by a STOP Control at the pedestrian / cyclist crossing point located at a distance of 80 metres southeast of its intersection with Wigram Road as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

8. That the Give Way control on Hayton Road at its intersection with Wigram Road be revoked.

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

a. On the northwestern side of Wigram Road, commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in south westerly direction for a distance of 105 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

b. On the southeastern side of Wigram Road, commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 109 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

c. On the northwestern side of Wigram Road, commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in a northeasterly direction for a distance of 35 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

d. On the southeastern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 50 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

e. On the southwestern side of Hayton Road, commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 46 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

f. On the northeastern side of Hayton Road, commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 44 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

10. That the pathway on the southeastern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 50 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

11. That the pathway on the southeastern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a south-westerly direction for a distance of 11 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

12. That the pathway on the northwestern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 238 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

13. That the pathway on the northwestern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in a northeasterly direction for a distance of 35 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

14. That the pathway on the southwestern side of Hayton Road commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north-westerly direction for a distance of 46 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

15. That the pathway on the northeastern side of Hayton Road commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north westerly direction of for a distance of 27 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A, be resolved as a southeast bound bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

16. That right turn movements from the Wigram Road southwest approach into Nga Puna Wai Access Road be prohibited in accordance with Clause 17(1) (a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017. This restriction is to apply every day from 11:00pm to 6:00am.

17. That left turn movements from the Wigram Road northeast approach into Nga Puna Wai Access Road be prohibited in accordance with Clause 17(1) (a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017. This restriction is to apply every day from 11:00pm to 6:00am.

18. That through movements from the Hayton Road northwest approach into Nga Puna Wai Access Road be prohibited in accordance with Clause 17(1) (a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017. This restriction is to apply every day from 11:00pm to 6:00am.

19. That 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 above be revoked.

20. That these resolutions take effect when parking signage and/or road markings that evidence the restrictions described in the staff report are in place.

Mark Peters/Helen Broughton

3. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Recommendation to Council

(Officer recommendations accepted)

Part A

That the Council relying on its powers under the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004 and Part 21 of the Local Government Act 1974, approves:

1. That in accordance with Sections 6 and 10.5 of the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004, all road user movements at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road / Nga Puna Wai Access Road intersection be controlled by Traffic Signals.

2. Pursuant to Clause 18 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

a. That a Special Vehicle Lane for use by northeast bound cycles only be installed on the northwestern side of Wigram Road, commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 105 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

b. That a Special Vehicle Lane for use by southwest bound cycles only be installed on the southeastern side of Wigram Road, commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 109 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

c. That a Special Vehicle Lane for use by northwest bound cycles only be installed along the southwestern side of Hayton Road, commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 51 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

d. That a Special Vehicle Lane for use by southeast bound cycles only be installed along the northeastern side of Hayton Road, commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north westerly direction for a distance of 44 metres as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Report Title	Reference	Page
1	Wigram/Hayton Roads Intersection Improvement	23/1483665	115

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Wigram-Hayton Roads Intersection Improvement Scheme Plan for Approval	23/1561226	126
b ⇩	Wigram Hayton Road Intersection - Submission Table (Public)	23/1568090	127

Council

01 November 2023

Wigram/Hayton Roads Intersection Improvement
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1483665
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	David Sun, Transport Project Manager David.Sun@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynette Ellis, Head of Transport & Waste Management (Lynette.Ellis@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board (Board) to approve the parking changes at Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection; and to recommend that Council approve the proposal including signalisation.

1.3 The decisions in this report are of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the new pedestrian and cycle connection to the Major Cycle Route (MCR) Little River Link provided by the recommended proposal.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board recommends that the Council relying on its powers under the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004 and Part 21 of the Local Government Act 1974, approves:

2. Pursuant to Clause 18 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017:

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board approves:

8. That the Give Way control on Hayton Road at its intersection with Wigram Road be revoked.

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

10. That the pathway on the southeastern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a north easterly direction for a distance of 50 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

11. That the pathway on the southeastern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Nga Puna Wai Access Road and extending in a south-westerly direction for a distance of 11 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

12. That the pathway on the northwestern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in a south westerly direction for a distance of 238 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

13. That the pathway on the northwestern side of Wigram Road commencing at its intersection with Hayton Road and extending in a northeasterly direction for a distance of 35 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

14. That the pathway on the southwestern side of Hayton Road commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north-westerly direction for a distance of 46 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A, be resolved as a bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

15. That the pathway on the northeastern side of Hayton Road commencing at its intersection with Wigram Road and extending in a north westerly direction of for a distance of 27 metres, as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A, be resolved as a southeast bound bi-directional shared pedestrian / cycle pathway in accordance with Clause 21(1)(a) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.

19. 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 above.

20. 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.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Wigram Road is an arterial road with approximately 13,700 vehicles per day and Hayton Road is a collector road with approximately 2,800 vehicles per day. The existing shared path on the north side of Wigram Road starts at the Wigram/Skyhawk Roads roundabout and ends near Hayton Reserve, approximately 250 metres west of the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection. There are no footpaths or crossing facilities along this section of Wigram Road to provide safe access for pedestrians and cyclists to the MCR Little River Link.

3.2 Following the opening of the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub in 2018, residents in the Aidanfield area have raised concerns about the traffic and parking issues due to the single entrance to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub from Augustine Drive.

3.3 An original proposal was developed, which completed the link from the existing shared path to the intersection, and upgraded the intersection to improve crossing facilities, but did not address the access to Ngā Puna Wai. This was brought to the Community Board on 30 November 2021 where the design was approved where delegations applied, with other elements referred to Council to approval. This was then dropped from the Council agenda of 10 February 2022.

3.4 The development of a Netsal facility at Ngā Puna Wai has resulted in access needing to be provided to the facility through the existing motorway underpass by the Wigram-Hayton intersection. This has resulted in the intersection being upgraded from a T-intersection to a 4-way intersection.

3.5 The revised recommended option will improve safety and accessibility for the community by signalising the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection with a raised safety platform. This option incorporates the following aspects.

· Replacement of the existing three-way priority-controlled intersection with a four-way signalised intersection with a raised platform to reduce operating speeds through the intersection and provide a safer environment for all road users.

· The existing access to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub (Ngā Puna Wai Access Road) via the Christchurch Southern Motorway (CSM) underpass will be sealed, narrowed and connected to the proposed signalised intersection.

· The Ngā Puna Wai Access Road will only be open to light vehicles between 6am and 11pm. Full time pedestrian and cycle access will not be affected. The existing 2.4 metres height restriction on the Ngā Puna Wai Access Road will be maintained.

· Cycle and pedestrian crossing facilities such as signalised crosswalk, cycle lane, Advanced Stop Boxes and hook-turn boxes will be provided at the signalised intersection.

· A shared path will be provided on the northern side of Wigram Road connecting the existing shared paths terminating near Hayton Reserve to the Wigram/Hayton interchange, from where pedestrians and cyclists can access the MCR Little River Link.

· The MCR Little River Link cycle crossing on Ngā Puna Wai Access Road will be moved away from the underpass to improve visibility between crossing cyclists and vehicles passing through the motorway underpass culvert and will be upgraded to a crossing with a raised safety platform where vehicles stop for crossing cyclists.

· Removal of 34 on-street parking spaces due to accommodate turning lanes and road widening. This includes five on Hayton Road, three on Wigram Road north-east and 26 on Wigram Road south-west.

· Introducing five new trees and new landscaping in the street reservation to improve amenity.

3.6 This option provided the greatest benefit for vulnerable road users safety and connectivity due to the signalised crossings across all four legs of the intersection and connectivity between the existing and proposed cycle lanes.

3.7 This option also allows for direct control and direction of access restriction on the Ngā Puna Wai Access Road.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

Priority controlled intersection option

4.1 This option proposed a priority-controlled intersection with Ngā Puna Wai Access Road connected to the intersection.

4.2 The advantages of this option include:

4.2.1 It has the lowest capital construction cost and easiest constructability due to the smallest intervention extent to the existing roads.

4.3 The disadvantages of this option include:

4.3.1 There is an overall negative impact on the safety of vulnerable road users, mainly due to the lack of priority crossing facilities for pedestrians and cyclists at the intersection.

4.3.2 The safety of motorists will also be compromised by the additional approach to the intersection (Ngā Puna Wai Access Road), as this introduces additional conflict points.

4.3.3 Time restricted access to Ngā Puna Wai would be difficult to implement.

Roundabout with raised safety platform option

4.4 This option proposed a four-leg roundabout with raised safety platforms on all the approaches to the intersection.

4.5 This option provides improvements for safety and connectivity for vulnerable road users compared to the priority controlled intersection option described in paragraph 4.1 above.

4.6 The disadvantages of this option include:

4.6.1 Safety concerns about pedestrian and cycle crossing facilities will not be addressed.

4.6.2 A roundabout would require significant road re-alignment, seal widening and land acquisition from neighbouring park lands which would also increase construction costs and project timeframes.

4.6.3 Time restricted access to Ngā Puna Wai would be difficult to implement.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 This project was initiated in 2019 to complete a safe linkage for pedestrians and cyclists between the Hayton Reserve and the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection, and to provide safety facilities at the intersection. This supported the growth in subdivisions in the area.

5.2 The Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub opened in 2018 has an entrance only from Augustine Drive at Aidanfield, which has caused some challenges with traffic and parking. In 2020, the Council agreed to lease land in Ngā Puna Wai to the Christchurch Netball Centre to build a new indoor Netsal Centre, which would attract more traffic to the Ngā Puna Wai.

5.3 There is a private access road to Ngā Puna Wai from Wigram Road on Council land. It is a gravel access road with a wide entrance. It has a 2.4 metre height restriction as it passes through the State Highway 76 underpass culvert. The access road is currently closed to vehicular traffic and is only opened for major events such as the New Zealand Agricultural Show.

5.4 The scope of this project has therefore been extended to include upgrading the existing private access road to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub from the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection to share the traffic load from the main access to Ngā Puna Wai from Augustine Drive at Aidanfield.

5.5 This proposal combines the two main objectives by proposing a signalised intersection. It provides a shared path link for the long missing section of shared path on Wigram Road. It also improves safe connections for all road users at the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection, including an alternative access point to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub from Wigram Road.

5.6 The Ngā Puna Wai Access Road from Wigram Road will be upgraded for vehicle access between 6:00 am and 11:00 pm. Full time pedestrian and cycle access will not be affected. The Ngā Puna Wai Access Road will only allow light vehicles due to the 2.4 metre height restriction of the motorway underpass culvert.

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

5.7.1 Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board

6. Community Views and Preferences Ngā mariu ā-Hāpori

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.1 Businesses at the Hayton Road/ Avenger Crescent/Ballarat Way intersection were engaged early in May 2023 to understand the concerns and get feedback on the Wigram Road and Hayton Road Intersection. Staff advised businesses of public consultation on Wigram and Hayton Road intersection upgrade occurring later in the year.

6.2 Staff attended Halswell Residents Association on 31 July to discuss this project to get early feedback and understand residents concern around the intersection. Feedback from this meeting informed the online Frequently Asked Questions of the consultation.

6.3 Consultation started on 7 August and ran until 27 August 2023. An email was sent to 45 key stakeholders, including Police, St Johns, Fire and Emergency, Spokes, and AA inviting submissions online through Social Pinpoint platform , email or phone call. A printed submission form for those wanting to make handwritten submissions were available upon request.

6.4 The consultation was posted on the Halswell/ Westlake/ Wigram/ Aidanfield/ Kennedys Bush Community Facebook Group and the Social Pinpoint platform link was shared by Councillor Andrei Moore Facebook page, Reddit Christchurch review, and Wigram MP Megan Woods Facebook page. Signage was also installed around the Nga Puna Wai access and shared path on Wigram Road.

6.5 During consultation, 25 businesses in the local area were visited with posters to inform them and their customers of the consultation.

Summary of Submissions Wigram and Hayton Road Intersection Upgrade

6.6 54 submissions were made on the project via Social Pinpoint platform, with three email submissions made by the Disabled Persons Assembly and the Halswell Residents Association and a late submission by an individual ID#7293.

6.7 Submitters were asked if the Intersection upgrade would improve safety.

Do you think this intersection upgrade will improve safety?	Number of submitters
Agree	43 (79.62%)
Disagree	6 (11.11%)
Somewhat	3 (5.55%)
Not sure / Don’t know	2 (3.70%)

6.8 Of those 22 submitters who live in the area, 17 thought the intersection would be improved, 3 disagreed, 1 submitter said “somewhat” and 1 submitter said Not sure/ don’t know. A pie chart with text

Description automatically generated

6.9 Of those 27 submitters that commute through including those who frequent Ngā Puna Wai and who selected “other”, 22 agreed that the upgrade to the intersection would improve safety, 3 disagreed, 1 submitter said “somewhat,” and 1 submitter said, “not sure / don’t know.”

6.10 Of those five submitters who work in the area, all five submissions agree that the intersection upgrade would improve safety.

6.11 Key themes from the submissions are summarised below.

Key themes on existing intersection	Total number of submissions that mention
Concerns about safer speeds at existing intersection · Comments on the current unsafe road user behaviour through this intersection.	15
Concerns about traffic flow at existing intersection · Comments on the increase of traffic during peak times and at times when events are on at Ngā Puna Wai.	12
Key themes on outcomes of the proposed upgrade	Total number of submissions that mention
Supportive of shared path	14
Supportive of raised safety platforms · Rationales of encouraging safer speeds, beneficial traffic calming effects	7
Supportive of cycle connection. · Connection from suburbs and places	18

Changes made to the scheme design as a result of consultation feedback.

6.12 Cycle on/off ramps added between the shared path and on-road cycle lane on Wigram Road.

6.13 Additional speed hump signs added on the Wigram Road approaches to the intersection.

6.14 Cycle hook turn boxes added at the intersection.

6.15 Priority control for vehicles on the Ngā Puna Wai Access Road changed from 'give way' to 'stop' to the raised cycle crossing.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

7.1 This project is in alignment with the Christchurch Transport Strategic Plan 2012, the Draft Christchurch Transport Plan 2022 and the Christchurch District Plan.

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

7.3 Transport

7.3.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.0.2 Increase the share of non-car modes in daily trips - >=36% of trips undertaken by non-car modes

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

· Level of Service: 10.5.2 Improve the perception that Christchurch is a cycling friendly city - >=66% resident satisfaction

· Level of Service: 16.0.2 Improve roadway condition, to an appropriate national standard, measured by smooth travel exposure (STE) - >=75% of the sealed local road network meets the appropriate national standard

· Level of Service: 16.0.8 Maintain the condition of footpaths - >=81% footpaths rated 1,2 or 3

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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 contributes positively to adaption to the impacts of climate change and emissions reductions as it includes measures to encourage walking and cycling, thereby reducing vehicle emissions. It also includes a new vehicular access point to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub from Wigram Road, thereby reducing vehicular travel distances and emissions for those travelling to Ngā Puna Wai from the northern area. These changes will help to achieve the desired community outcome of a safe and accessible city through improved road safety, improved pedestrian and cycle facilities and walking and cycling networks.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.9 This proposal significantly improves accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists by providing a shared path link for the long missing section of shared path on Wigram Road from Hayton Reserve to the Wigram/Hayton Roads intersection and crossing facilities at the proposed signalised intersection to facilitate safe access to the MCR Little River Link.

7.10 This proposal also significantly improves vehicular access to the Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub by providing an additional access point from Wigram Road to share the traffic load from the existing main and only access point from Augustine Drive.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement – The total project budget is $2,979,985.

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - There will be an increased operational cost of approximately $2,700 per annum for the maintenance works associated with the proposed traffic signs, road marking and street cleaning. These works will be covered under the area maintenance contract.

8.3 Funding Source - This project has been funded in the Council’s capital programme as follows:

· 42027 Wigram & Hayton Intersection Improvement

Other He mea anō

8.4 Not applicable.

9. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

9.1 The Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, the Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004 and Part 21 of the Local Government Act 1974 provide the Council with the authority to approve traffic lights, special vehicle lanes and to declare the Ngā Puna Wai Access Road on the Council land to be used as public road.

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

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

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

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

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 There are currently no departures from any standards or policies.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Wigram-Hayton Roads Intersection Improvement Scheme Plan for Approval	23/1561226
b	Wigram Hayton Road Intersection - Submission Table (Public)	23/1568090

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board minutes: 30 November 2021

https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2021/11/HHRB_20211130_MIN_5651_AT.PDF

Council meeting minutes: 10 February 2022

https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2022/02/CNCL_20220210_MIN_7420_AT.PDF

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

David Sun - Project Manager

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

Council

01 November 2023

13. Approval of Transport Choices - Linwood Bus Stop Improvements (CERF)
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1388550
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Chris Strydom, Transport Project manager (Chris.Strydom@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 this report is for Christchurch City Council (Council) to approve bus stop improvements to 14 locations including the installation of 11 shelters in the Linwood area.

1.2 The origin of this report is the Climate Emergency Response Fund (CERF) Transport Choices programme.

1.3 Bus stop infrastructure upgrades are proposed at locations along the following public transport corridors:

· Woodham Road as shown on Attachment A

· Tuam Street and St Asaph Street as shown on Attachment B

· Hereford Street and Stanmore Road as shown on Attachment C

1.4 The new / upgraded bus stops include, but are not limited to, line marking, seats, improved lighting, shelters, footpaths and kerbs.

1.5 The decisions in this report are of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by evaluation of the Transport Choices programme against the criteria set out in the Policy. This evaluation has considered the Transport Choices projects as a cohesive programme of work. This is consistent with how community engagement has been undertaken, with all work packages being presented concurrently on ‘Have your Say’ under the banner of ‘Way Safer Streets’.

1.6 Council resolved the Transport Choices programme as Metropolitan Significance when the programme was included in the draft Annual Plan in February 2023.

1. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council, in accordance with Attachments A, B, and C attached to the agenda for this meeting, approve:

Attachment A - Woodham Road

Drawing SK104

Bus stop 51072 – 712 Gloucester Street (Attachment A)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 56 metres east of its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 7 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the south side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 63 metres east of its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 77 metres east of its intersection with Gloucester Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 15 metres.

2. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a slim bus passenger shelter on the south side of Woodham Road immediate to the west of 186 Woodham Road.

Drawing SK105

Relocation of Bus stop 51190 – From 211 Woodham Road to 213 Woodham Road (Attachment A)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 5 metres east of its intersection with Ngarimu Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 19 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the north side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 24 metres east of its intersection with Ngarimu Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 38 metres east of its intersection with Ngarimu Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 9 metres.

4. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a full size bus passenger shelter on the north side of Woodham Road outside 213 Woodham Road.

Drawing SK106

Bus stop 36862 – 259A- 259D Woodham Road (Attachment A)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 36 metres east of its intersection with Rowcliffe Crescent and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the north side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 48 metres east of its intersection with Rowcliffe Crescent and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 62 metres east of its intersection with Rowcliffe Crescent and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 7 metres.

6. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a standard size bus passenger shelter on the north side of Woodham Road outside 259A Woodham Road.

Bus stop 37174 – 234 Woodham Road (Attachment A)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 3 metres west of its intersection with Carnarvon Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 17 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the south side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 20 metres west of its intersection with Carnarvon Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Woodham Road, commencing at a point 34 metres west of its intersection with Carnarvon Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 6 metres.

8. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a slim bus passenger shelter on the south side of Woodham Road outside 234 Woodham Road.

Attachment B - Tuam Street and St Asaph Street

Drawing SK201

Bus stop 18718 – 365 and 367 Tuam Street (Attachment B)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 1 metre west of its intersection with Livingstone Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the north side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 13 metres west of its intersection with Livingstone Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 27 metres west of its intersection with Livingstone Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

10. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a slim bus passenger shelter on the north side of Tuam Street outside 365 Tuam Street.

Drawing SK202

Relocation of Bus stop 18787 – From 414 St Asaph Street to 420 St Asaph Street (Attachment B)

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

a. That all existing parking and stopping restrictions associated with bus stop 18787 on the south side of St Asaph Street commencing at a point 132 metres west of its intersection with Philips Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 19 metres, be revoked.

b. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of St Asaph Street, commencing at a point 98 metres west of its intersection with Phillips Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the south side of St Asaph Street, commencing at a point 112 metres west of its intersection with Phillips Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

d. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of St Asaph Street, commencing at a point 126 metres west of its intersection with Phillips Street and extending in a westerly direction for a distance of 6 metres.

12. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a standard size bus passenger shelter on the south side of St Asaph Street outside 420 St Asaph Street.

Drawing SK203

Bus stop 18702 – 403 and 407 Tuam Street (Attachment B)

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

a. That a bus stop with a seat for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the north side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 10 metres east of its intersection with Gatherer Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

b. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 24 metres east of its intersection with Gatherer Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 6 metres.

Drawing SK204

Bus stop 18938 – 462 Tuam Street (Attachment B)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 56 metres east of its intersection with Phillips Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 6 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the south side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 62 metres east of its intersection with Phillips Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Tuam Street, commencing at a point 76 metres east of its intersection with Phillips Street and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

15. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a standard size bus passenger shelter on the south side of Tuam Street outside 462 Tuam Street.

Attachment C - Hereford Street and Stanmore Road

Drawing SK301

Bus stop 53656 – 367 Hereford Street (Attachment B)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 171 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 185 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 15 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the north side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 200 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 8 metres.

17. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a standard size bus passenger shelter on the north side of Hereford Street outside 367 Hereford Street.

Bus stop 53660 – 1/366 - 2/366 Hereford Street (Attachment B)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 141 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 10 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the south side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 151 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the south side of Hereford Street, commencing at a point 165 metres east of its intersection with Fitzgerald Avenue and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 13 metres.

19. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a standard size bus passenger shelter on the south side of Hereford Street outside 366 Hereford Street.

Drawing SK302

Bus stop 40323 – 1/138 – 9/138 Stanmore Road (Attachment B)

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

a. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the east side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 27 metres north of its intersection with Armagh Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

b. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the east side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 41 metres north of its intersection with Armagh Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

Drawing SK303

Bus stop 13685 – 1/149 – 5/149 Stanmore Road (Attachment B)

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

a. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the west side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 19 metres north of its intersection with Haast Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 3 metres.

b. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the west side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 22 metres north of its intersection with Haast Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

c. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the west side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 36 metres north of its intersection with Haast Street and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 6 metres.

Drawing SK304

Bus stop 12431 – Beverley Park at 171 Stanmore Road (Attachment B)

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

a. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the west side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 52 metres (measured in a straight line) south of its intersection with Avonside Drive and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

b. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the west side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 66 metres (measured in a straight line) south of its intersection with Avonside Drive and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

23. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a standard size bus passenger shelter on the west side of Stanmore Road outside Beverley Park Playground.

Relocation of Bus stop 42944 – From 180 Stanmore Road to 172 Stanmore Road (Attachment B)

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

a. That all existing parking and stopping restrictions associated with bus stop 42944 on the east side of Stanmore Road commencing at a point 51 metres south of its intersection with Avonside Drive and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 13 metres, be revoked.

b. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the east side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 90 metres south of its intersection with Avonside Drive and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 12 metres.

c. That a bus stop for scheduled bus services only (in accordance with the definition of ‘bus service’ in Section 5 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003) be installed on the east side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 102 metres south of its intersection with Avonside Drive and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 14 metres.

d. That the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the east side of Stanmore Road, commencing at a point 116 metres south of its intersection with Avonside Drive and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 6 metres.

25. Pursuant to Section 339(1) of the Local Government Act 1974:

a. The installation of a slim size bus passenger shelter on the east side of Stanmore Road outside 172 Stanmore Road.

26. That any previous resolutions pertaining to parking and stopping restrictions made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they conflict with the parking and stopping restrictions described in recommendations 1 – 29 above are revoked.

27. That, if approved, recommendations 1-29 above take effect when the parking and stopping restrictions that evidence the restrictions described in recommendations 1 – 29 above are in place (or removed, in the case of revocations).

2. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

2.1 This project is funded by the Central Government Transport Choices Programme – a $348 million national programme made available from the Climate Emergency Response Fund (CERF).

2.2 The Transport Choices programme is important because transport makes up almost half of New Zealand’s carbon emissions. In May 2022, government released its first Emissions Reduction Plan and transport has a significant role to play, targeting a 20 percent reduction in light vehicle travel by 2035. Reducing reliance on cars and supporting people to walk, cycle and use public transport is one of three focus points of the Emissions Reduction Plan.

2.3 The recommendations in this report meet the below four primary design parameters for Transport Choices:

· Design for children and mobility impaired.

· Priority to people walking, cycling and using public transport.

· Integration with existing modal networks.

· Designs that comply with all relevant Waka Kotahi standards and guidelines.

2.4 Measures that promote the use of public transport help the Council achieve its community outcomes and strategic framework of providing a well-connected and accessible city promoting active and public transport, as well as meeting the challenge of climate change through every means available.

2.5 Figure 1 shows an example of a new generation bus shelter in Christchurch. The bus shelters will feature solar powered LED lighting to improve the safety and reinforced toughened glass to provide weather protection.

Figure 1: An example of new generation of bus shelters in Christchurch.

2.6 Bus stops are being reviewed and upgraded within the Linwood area. Subsequent reports will be presented to Council to approve additional bus stops within this study area.

2.7 The benefits of focusing on Linwood as a pilot for future delivery of similar packages across the city, include:

· This suburb is located close to the central city with several potential walking and public transport connections to the central city, eastern suburbs and key activity centres such as Eastgate shopping mall, Te Pou Toetoe – Linwood Pool, and the Linwood Library and Service Centre.

· There are several schools located in and around Linwood creating demand for safe and healthy school travel and the transport choices programme provides an opportunity for cluster planning and delivery of benefits to multiple schools at once.

· Linwood is well placed to enhance connections to significant longer term active transport programmes such as the Major Cycleways Programme.

· Linwood is identified as an area where people are more adversely impacted by transport poverty and access equity so will benefit more from interventions that support a range of accessible and low-cost transport options. This aligns with Christchurch’s wider strategic goals of improving transport access and choice to reduce emissions, while working towards a more equitable transport system.

2.8 This approach allows the Council to concentrate resources in a manageable area, maximising delivery under the constrained timeframes, and supports project integration within a programme of work, which will encourage multi-modal journeys, reduce vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) and emissions. The implementation of these projects aligns with the goals and outcomes sought by the Emissions Reduction Plan.

2.9 Bus stops outside the Linwood Area are currently being addressed through the seats and shelters programme.

Proposed infrastructure improvements on Woodham Road (Attachment A)

2.10 There are four bus stops under review for this report, which are serviced by the high frequency Orbiter, on Woodham Road between Avonside Drive and Kerrs Road. And two bus stops currently out for consultation that will be covered under a separate report.

2.11 The Orbiter operates a 15-minute frequency Monday to Saturday, 10-minute frequency during peak times, and 30-minute frequency Sunday.

2.12 Environment Canterbury are currently exploring increasing the frequency of the Orbiter route as part of the recommendations made in the Greater Christchurch Public Transport Futures Combined Business Case (PT Futures).

2.13 All bus stops are proposed to have shelters, road marking, tactile ground surface indicators and signage in accordance with Council’s Construction Standard Specification Drawing SD644 (page 35).

2.14 The existing bus stop spacing is considered adequate along the corridor.

2.15 Figure 2 shows the proposed bus stops along this corridor.

Figure 2: Proposed locations of bus stops on Woodham Road.

Proposed infrastructure improvements on Tuam Street and St Asaph Street (Attachment B)

2.16 There are three bus stops along Tuam Street and one bus stop on St Asaph Street that are proposed to be upgraded.

2.17 The corridor is serviced by the city connector Route 80. This route operates to 30-minute frequency every day, and 15-minute frequency during peak times.

2.18 Three bus shelters and one seat are being proposed along this public transport corridor. All bus stops are proposed to have road marking, tactile ground surface indicators and signage in accordance with Council’s Construction Standard Specification.

2.19 Feedback was sought on five additional proposed bus stop upgrades along Tuam Street and Harrow Street. Given the consultation findings, further assessment and consultation is required before presenting a recommendation to the Council. The results of this consultation can be found in Attachment E. A detailed report addressing these bus stops will be submitted to the Council in due course.

2.20 Figure 3 shows the proposed location of the bus stops as described above.

Figure 3: Proposed bus stop upgrades on Tuam Street and St Asaph

Proposed infrastructure improvements on Hereford Street and Stanmore Road (Attachment C)

2.21 There are two bus stops along Hereford Street and four bus stops on Stanmore Road between Hereford Street and Avonside Drive proposed to be upgraded.

2.22 This corridor is serviced by the city connector Route 60. This route predominantly operates to a 30-minute frequency every day, and 15-minute frequency during peak times.

2.23 All bus stops are proposed to have road marking, tactile ground surface indicators and signage in accordance with Council’s Construction Standard Specification.

2.24 Four Bus shelters are being proposed along this public transport corridor.

2.25 The existing bus stop spacing on Hereford Street and Stanmore Road (between Hereford Street and Gloucester Street) is considered adequate along the corridor and no relocations are being proposed.

2.26 Figure 4 shows the proposed location of the bus stops as described above.

Figure 4: Proposed locations of bus stops on Tuam Street and Harrow Street.

Proposed infrastructure improvements (Attachment A, B and C)

2.27 The advantages of the proposed bus stop upgrades include:

· Bus shelters with lighting provide a safer environment and provide a protected place to sit and wait.

· The bus stops are consistently spaced along the corridor, which minimises the delays associated with stopping / boarding /alighting, and potentially improves the bus journey time along the corridor.

· Upgrading bus stop road markings to best practice standards allows a bus to manoeuvre parallel and close to the existing kerb. This reduces the gap and step between the bus and the kerb, providing improved accessibility for bus patrons.

· Upgrading bus stop road markings to best practice standards allows a bus to safely pull out of the stop to merge into the traffic lane.

· Upgrading the tactile ground surface indicators will improve access to bus stops for people with a vision impairment and warn people of the kerb and potential hazards beyond.

2.28 The disadvantages are:

· At existing bus stops where road markings have been extended to meet best practice, there may be a loss of on-street parking. However, nearby on-street parking will be readily available to accommodate any loss in parking due to bus stop upgrades.

· For relocated bus stops, there will be a loss in on-street parking at the new location to accommodate the new stop, however it is expected that some loss of parking will be re-gained at the old bus stop location.

· The increased spacing between the relocated bus stops has increased the distance people have to walk to/from each stop. However, the bus stop spacing is within the Waka Kotahi guidelines and has generally not reduced the walkable catchment to each bus stop.

· The financial cost of building and maintaining additional public transport infrastructure.

2.29 The kerb height impacts the step or ramp up to the bus, while considering the ground clearance of buses. As per guidance, a standard kerb height of 150 mm is desirable along the length of the passenger hardstand to minimise the step up or down relative to the bus floor.

2.30 Two bus stops (ID 18702 and 18938) are being upgraded to a kerb height of 150mm.

Kerb upgrades are based on a kerb condition assessment. If the existing kerb condition is assessed as poor, then it is proposed to replace the existing kerb with an improved 150mm high kerb. Upgrading the remaining bus stops to 150mm kerbs are proposed to be undertaken with any planned future street renewal works.

3. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

3.1 Alternative options include:

· ‘Do Nothing’ (i.e. to retain existing bus stop locations and infrastructure)

· ‘Do Minimum’ (i.e. to retain existing bus stop locations, and upgrade bus stop road markings, excluding TGSIs and shelters)

3.2 The advantages of the Do Nothing option are:

· No additional costs for bus shelter infrastructure.

· No loss of existing on-street parking.

3.3 The disadvantages of the do-nothing option are:

· Where existing bus stops are not consistently spaced along the corridor, there are higher delays associated with stopping / boarding /alighting, which increases the bus journey time along the corridor.

· The existing bus stops without a bus shelter will have poor safety and legibility, with no protection for bus patrons to sit and wait.

· Poorly maintained and / or lack of appropriate bus stop road markings makes it difficult to manoeuvre the bus parallel and close to the existing kerb. This risks larger gaps between the bus and the kerb and creates potential accessibility problems for bus patrons.

· With poor road markings, it may be difficult for buses to pull out of the stop to merge into the traffic lane.

· With poor, non-standard or no tactile ground surface indicators, it makes it difficult for people with vision impairment to access the bus stops.

3.4 The advantages of the do minimum option are:

· No additional costs for bus shelter infrastructure.

· Upgrading bus stop road markings to best practice standards allows a bus to safely pull out of the stop to merge into the traffic lane.

3.5 The disadvantages of the Do Minimum option are:

· Further consultation will have to be carried out. This will incur additional design fees, staff time and will delay the upgrade of bus stops in the Linwood Area.

· The existing bus stops without a bus shelter will have poor safety and legibility, with no protection for bus patrons to sit and wait.

· At existing bus stops where road markings have been extended to meet best practice, there may be a loss of on-street parking. However, it has been assumed that nearby on-street parking will be readily available to accommodate any loss in parking due to bus stop upgrades.

· With poor, non-standard or no tactile ground surface indicators, it makes it difficult for people with vision impairment to access the bus stops.

4. Detail Te Whakamahuki

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

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

· Waitai Coastal Burwood – Linwood Community

· Waipapa Papanui-Innes - Central Community

4.2 Two community board briefings were held on Monday 26 June and Thursday 29 June at the Waitai Coastal Burwood – Linwood Community Board and Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board respectively.

Changes made to the scheme design after consultation feedback

4.3 The following changes have been made to the scheme design in response to consultation feedback and kerb condition assessments.

· A seat is being proposed outside 407 Tuam Street instead of a shelter.

· A slim line shelter is being proposed outside 365 Tuam Street instead of a full-size shelter.

· New bus stop kerbs are being proposed outside 407 Tuam Street.

· New bus stop kerbs are being proposed outside 402 Tuam Street.

· Rubbish bin placement will be considered for installation during detailed design.

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

4.4 Two different types of consultation occurred for this project. A general consultation sharing the overarching goals of reviewing and upgrading bus stops in the Linwood and Woolston area. The second consultation was a more specific resident and business focused consultation where immediately affected residents and businesses received more detail about the proposed bus stop upgrades. General submissions and comments are available in Attachment D, and resident and business submissions are available in Attachment E.

General Consultation - ‘Way Safer Streets’

4.5 Local residents received warm up flyers in their mailboxes from 29 May, indicating we would be seeking feedback on Way Safer Streets projects proposed for their area in June.

4.6 Early engagement started when staff attended a LinWard collective hui (consisting of Te Whare Taonga o Ngā Iwi Katoa (Linwood Resource Centre), Bromley Community Trust, The Loft, CCC Libraries, Christchurch Methodist Mission and St Chads Church and Linwood Avenue Corner Trust) to brief them on Way Safer Streets projects in early June 2023. Recommended engagement tactics were taken on board.

4.7 General program-level consultation on the Social Pinpoint Map started on 16 June 2023 and ran until 16 July 2023, as part of the wider Way Safer Streets consultation.

4.8 An email was sent to 150 key stakeholders across the entire Way Safer Streets programme, including emergency services, Mahaanui Kurataiao, ECan, Businesses, schools and community groups. The consultation was posted on the council Facebook page, as well as local community groups, inviting submissions on the Social Pinpoint Map.

4.9 General information on the project and how the decision to install a bus shelter, install a bus stop, remove a bus stop and change road markings was posted on CCC webpage. The link to this webpage is https://ccc.govt.nz/transport/getting-around/bus/

4.10 Two Newsline stories were published and picked up by local media outlets. Digital screens advertised the consultation in Civic Offices and Linwood Library, as well as newspaper advertisements in The Star and The Pegasus Post. Digital billboards were utilised in Linwood, including outside Eastgate mall. An online targeted campaign ran for the entire consultation period.

4.11 Consultation documents (including a submission form) and flyers were available at Bromley Community Centre, Linwood Union Church, Linwood Library, and Linwood Resource Centre and Community Gardens. Two Newsline stories were published and picked up by local media outlets. Digital screens were displaying the consultation in Civic Offices, as well as newspaper advertisements in The Star and The Pegasus Post. An online targeted campaign ran for the entire consultation period.

4.12 Key stakeholder meetings throughout and after consultation, with Spokes, FENZ, St John, NZ Police and Disabled Persons Assembly, further informed projects in the Way Safer Streets program.

Specific resident and business focused consultation

4.1 Project consultation started on 1 August 2023 and ran until 18 August 2023, when 244 residents and businesses immediately impacted by a new proposed bus shelter, shifting of bus stops/shelters, proposed extension of no stopping lines, or bus stop removals outside their house were all door knocked between 1 August – 4 August, and were provided with the full scheme plans corresponding with their street address. The letters provided a link to where they could make a submission about the proposed bus stop upgrades. Within the submission participants were asked if they were commenting on a proposed bus shelter and for general comments and supporting documents on a proposed bus stop upgrade.

4.2 As part of pre-engagement activities staff consulted with Whītau school in person on 30 June.

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

Submissions from General Consultation - ‘Way Safer Streets’

4.3 Feedback on the program-level consultation plan (the wider routes proposed for the whole area of Linwood and Woolston) could be given by posting a comment on the Social Pinpoint Map, by making a submission, or sending feedback via email or post.

4.4 Feedback on the resident and businesses consultation was specific to the plan proposed outside their property, and specific to the upgrades proposed on Woodham Road, Tuam Street, St Asaph Street, Harrow Street, Stanmore Road, and Hereford Road. Those residents and businesses who were directly impacted could fill out a specific feedback form after reading through the plans.

4.5 A total of 52 submissions and four comments were received on the Public Transport Linwood and Woolston (Phase 1) project. 29 submissions were received in the interactive Social Pinpoint Map, five were received via email/PDF/post, and 18 were received via the resident and business specific feedback form. Submissions were received by Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board, Richmond Residents’ and Business Association, the Disabled Persons Assembly, Te Aratai College, Valdez Investments, Hundlestone Developments Ltd, Ōtautahi Sports Association, and 45 individuals.

Program level social pinpoint feedback

4.6 On the Social Pinpoint Map, the project received a total of 51 upvotes, two downvotes, and four comments. Of the four comments, two were positive and two were neutral.

4.7 Over half of the 29 submitters (58.6%) use public transport more than once a month.

4.8 Submitters were asked which infrastructure improvements they wanted to see out of the public transport system in Christchurch, and could select multiple. Over half of the submitters suggested improvements to lighting and visibility (65.5%), more seats and shelters (58.6%), and bus locators (51.7%):

4.9 Submitters were asked for specific locations where improvements or changes to bus infrastructure were needed:

Specific location themes	Total mentions
Ferry Road	4
Tilford Street	3
Linwood Ave	3
Pages Road	2
Radley Street	2
Buckleys Road (outside Eastgate)	2
Stanmore Road	2

4.10 Key themes and requests from both comments and submissions are summarised below. Note that there could be cross-over between those making comments and making submissions:

Key themes on outcomes of the proposal	Number of comments	Number of submissions	Total mentions
Support for bus stop and shelter upgrades	2	3	5

Requests	Number of comments	Number of submissions	Total mentions
Improve lighting at bus stops / in the area	0	3	3
Improve speed control measures for the area	0	2	2
Fix the roads in the area	0	2	2

Submissions from specific resident and business focused consultation

4.1 Residents and businesses directly impacted were asked to provide comments on the bus stop proposal that impacted their address. The following table indicates the sentiment of feedback received:

Sentiment	Number of submitters
For a new bus shelter	3
Against a new bus shelter	10
For a new bus stop (including shelter)	1
Against a new bus stop (including shelter)	4

4.2 Key themes and requests from both comments and submissions are summarised below:

Theme	Mentions
Concern about parking loss	8
Concern about graffiti or vandalism	6
Concern about impact on personal safety	3
Concern about littering	3
Concern about shelter	3
Concern about noise and vibrations	3
Concern about rubbish bin collection	3

4.3 The feedback above relates to the full 25 bus stops that were originally consulted on. Staff are only presenting a total of 14 bus stop improvements and a subsequent report will be taken to council in due course once further consultation and investigation is carried out as required. Below is a summary of feedback specific to the bus stops proposed to be upgraded in this report.

Summary of issues raised on Woodham Road (Attachment A)

4.4 There was one objection to bus stop 36862 outside 259A Woodham Road. The owners requested a reduction in the hardstand area being installated. No changes are being made to the proposed hardstand area as it is essential to have a paved area for people getting on and off the bus for accessibility reasons. The hardstand area is in accordance with Council’s Construction Standard Specification Drawing SD644.

4.5 No other bus stops received objections. We have had requests to install bins at bus stops along this corridor. We will consider this in detailed design, but it will have a direct impact on Council’s operating costs.

Summary of issues raised on Tuam Street and St Asaph Street (Attachment B)

4.6 We received one objection to the shelter outside 365 Tuam Street (bus stop 18718) due to restricting the footpath width. In response to this feedback, we are proposing to install a slim line shelter.

4.7 We received one objection to the proposed upgrades for 414 and 420 Tuam Street (bus stop 18787) due to the removal of parking.

4.8 We received one objection for the installation of a bus stop shelter outside 403 Tuam Street (bus stop 18702). The property owners have informed staff that the shelter location conflicts with a planned fire exit door installation. For this reason, staff are not proposing to install a shelter at this stage but will install a seat.

4.9 No objections were received on the bus stops adjacent to 462 Tuam Street (bus stop 18938).

Summary of issues raised on Hereford Street and Stanmore Road (Attachment C)

4.10 We received one objection to the line marking outside 366 and 368 Hereford Street (bus stops 53660) due to loss of parking. No stopping lines are being proposed for outside 368 Hereford Street. This is to allow the bus to pull in close and parallel to the kerb without being in conflict with parked cars. No stopping lines are in accordance with Council’s Construction Standard Specification Drawing SD644 (page 35).

4.11 No other objections were received for the other bus stops proposed to be upgrade.

5. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

5.1 Council’s Strategic Framework is a key consideration in guiding the recommendations in this report. The recommendations in this report help achieve the:

· Community outcome of a well-connected and accessible city promoting active and public transport, and

· Strategic priorities of meeting the challenge of climate change through every means available.

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

5.2.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.4.4 Improve user satisfaction of public transport facilities (number and quality of shelters and quality of bus stop) - >=72% resident satisfaction

· Level of Service: 10.4.1 More people are choosing to travel by bus

5.3 Level of Service: 10.0.41 Reduce emissions and greenhouse gases related to transport:

5.4 Transport

5.4.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.4.1 More people are choosing to travel by bus - >=13.1 million people

· Level of Service: 10.4.4 Improve user satisfaction of public transport facilities (number and quality of shelters and quality of bus stop) - >=72% resident satisfaction

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

5.8 The decisions in this report are likely to:

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

· Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

5.9 Enhancing our bus service to become more reliable, with more frequent and efficient trips, will encourage more people to shift modes.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

5.10 Extending bus stops with no-stopping zones ensures buses stop close and parallel to the kerb, aiding those with limited mobility or prams.

5.11 Tactile ground indicators guide visually impaired individuals towards the bus's front door.

5.12 A 150 mm kerb height standard is ideal for easier and safer boarding, as well as for a more manageable ramp gradient.

5.13 Bus stops are adjusted so bus doors align with kerbs, not driveways, ensuring a safe passenger waiting area.

5.14 For pedestrian safety and adequate bus passenger waiting space, a clear 9 metres of hardstand at bus stops, free of obstacles, is proposed.

5.15 Proper lighting in bus shelters enhances safety, visibility, and comfort for passengers, especially during early mornings and evenings.

6. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

6.1 The table below provides the cost estimates for various bus stop upgrades:

Bus stop upgrades	Quantity	Rate	Construction estimate
Bus shelters, line marking, signs, TGSI’s	9	$43,000	$387,000
Bus shelters,150mm kerbs, line marking, signs, TGSI’s	2	$73,000	$146,000
Line marking, signs, seat, TGSI’s	3	$2,500	$7,500
TOTAL	14		$540,500

6.2 The cost estimates are for construction costs only, and do not include contingency, cost of pre implementation, management supervision and quality assurance.

6.3 The total construction cost estimate of bus stop improvements is $540,500.

6.4 If approved, all recommendations will be constructed before July 2024.

6.5 The works will be funded out of the CERF fund.

6.6 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Transport Unit operational expenditure budget, includes maintenance of bus stop infrastructure, which may cost on average approximately $200 annually per bus stop, on average.

Other He mea anō

6.7 No other costs estimated.

7. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

7.1 Council resolved the Transport Choices programme as Metropolitan Significance when the programme was included in the draft Annual Plan in February 2023.

7.2 Council retains decision-making responsibilities that might otherwise be delegated in accordance with the Delegations Register when a project is determined as Metropolitan Significance.

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

7.4 The Council have authority to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations. The list of delegations for the Council includes the resolution of stopping, standing and parking restrictions.

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

7.6 Under Section 339 of the Local Government Act 1974, the Council may erect on the footpath of any road, a shelter for use by intending public transport passengers or small passenger service vehicle passengers provided that no such shelter may be erected so as to unreasonably prevent access to any land having a frontage to the road. The Council is required to give notice in writing to the occupier and owner of property likely to be injuriously affected by the erection of the shelter and shall not proceed with the erection of the shelter until after the expiration of the time for objecting against the proposal or, in the event of an objection, until after the objection has been determined.

7.7 Staff confirm the shelters will not prevent vehicular or pedestrian access to any land having a frontage to the road.

7.8 Council has authority to exercise the delegations as set out in the Register of Delegations. The list of delegations for Council includes the resolution of bus passenger shelters under Section 339 (1) of the Local Government Act 1974.

7.9 Where no objection to the shelter has been presented by the owner or occupier of an affected property, staff present a decision-making report directly to the Council.

7.10 Council will determine the outcome of any objection pertaining to a bus shelter in accordance with Section 339 of the Local Government Act 1974.

7.11 Under this legislation the council may erect on the footpath of any road a shelter for use by intending public-transport passengers or small passenger service vehicle passengers: provided that no such shelter may be erected so as to unreasonably prevent access to any land having a frontage to the road.

7.12 For this decision report objections pertaining to the installation of bus shelters will not be heard through the bus shelter hearings panel but directly to the Council due to the time constraints set out by the CERF funding agreement.

7.13 There are a number of proposed bus stop shelters that are close to power lines. An ECP34 report is currently being prepared to satisfy New Zealand Electrical Code of Practice for Electrical Safe Distances 2001 (NZECP 34:2001). If the proposed shelter location is non-compliant with NZECP 34:2001 the shelter will be shifted, and an updated resolution will be taken to the Council or alternatively seat will be installed.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

7.15 This specific report has not been reviewed and approved by the Legal Services Unit.

8. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

8.1 Scope – Waka Kotahi has governed the scope and design of the project to align with programme KPI’s and consistency with Transport Choices design parameters. Departing from the recommendations of this report creates a risk that Waka Kotahi would not agree to fund the physical works phase of the project.

8.2 Delivery – Transport Choices funding is subject to delivery being complete by June 2025. Waka Kotahi has established additional milestones to track progress. Delays in approval of the projects would impact on the timeframe for delivery. Due to staff resources, we are still aiming to deliver this project by June 2024, as per the original funding agreement.

8.3 Funding security - the Transport Choices funding agreement between Council and Waka Kotahi presently covers this project for design only, and a further stage gate approval is required to gain funding approval for construction. The instruction of physical works will be withheld until an implementation agreement is in place.

8.4 Implementation cost uncertainty – the funding agreement with Waka Kotahi places the risk of cost variations with Council. This risk is being managed by minimising price uncertainty and building contingency into the funding agreement.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Woodham Road Bus Stops	23/1561196	220
b ⇩	Tuam Street ST Asaph Street and Harrow Street Bus Stops	23/1561199	223
c ⇩	Hereford Street and Stanmore Road Bus Stops	23/1561200	227
d ⇩	Submission Table General (Public)	23/1566741	231
e ⇩	Public Transport Phase 1 - Submission Table Res (Public)	23/1569280	254

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

Chris Strydom - Project Manager

Samantha Smith - Engagement Advisor

Wayne Gallot - Senior Transportation Engineer

Sarah Thorne - Principal Advisor Public Transport Infrastructure

Rushani Bowman - Public Transport Coordinator

Approved By

Jacob Bradbury - Manager Planning & Delivery Transport

Lynette Ellis - Head of Transport & Waste Management

Council

01 November 2023

14. Plan Change 4 Short-term accommodation - Final approval
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1554274
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Mark Stevenson, Manager – Planning. Mark.stevenson@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 the report is to seek that Plan Change 4 (PC4) on Short-term accommodation is made operative. This follows an appeal on Council's decision and a subsequent Consent Order from the Environment Court.

1.2 Plan Change 4 was approved for notification in September 2020. This report to make plan change 4 operative is the last step in the process and is formal endorsement of the Environment Court's decision.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance has been determined as low on the basis that it ratifies a decision of the Environment Court that is consistent with provisions agreed between parties at mediation.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve the changes to the District Plan as set out in the attached Consent Order of the Environment Court dated 24^th July 2023 on Plan Change 4, pursuant to Clause 17(2) of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act, to become operative on 11^th November 2023.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The staff recommendation is to approve that the plan change is made operative in accordance with the Consent Order issued by the Environment Court dated 24^th July 2023. This has regard to the statutory process that the plan change has been through including the outcome of the appeal process.

3.2 The Consent Order is attached.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The recommendation in this report is for the Council to take the procedural step to make Plan Change 4 operative. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that, following the end of the appeal period and the resolution of any appeals, a local authority must formally approve the changes to the plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 before the plan change becomes operative on a date that is nominated in a public notice.

4.2 There are no reasonable alternatives for plan change 4, having regard to the Court issuing a Consent Order allowing the appeal and the outcome being consistent with what was agreed at mediation.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Plan Change 4 amends the District Plan to better manage the effects associated with the use of residential units for visitor accommodation in rural and residential zones.

5.2 In 2019 the Council was approached by BATCH, an association consisting of backpacker, hostel and motel owners seeking stronger enforcement of the existing District Plan rules. In response to this, the effects on neighbours associated with the increase in accommodation advertised on online booking platforms, and the previous District Plan rules being unnecessarily restrictive for owners seeking resource consent, Plan Change 4 Short-Term Accommodation was developed, aimed at managing the impacts of short-term visitor accommodation on residential, rural and other areas.

5.3 In March 2020 the Council gathered public feedback on five options for managing short-term accommodation in residential and rural areas. About 570 responses were received, which informed the plan change.

5.4 The plan change was formally notified by the Council in September 2020 with 133 submissions received. A further 18 submissions, supporting or opposing points made in the original submissions, were then received. Submissions were received from a range of stakeholders. AirBnB, other online platforms and hosts generally sought a more permissive approach while the hospitality sector (including the operators/ owners/ managers of hotels and motels) sought enforcement of the status quo and in some cases, a more restrictive set of rules.

5.5 The hearing was originally scheduled to occur in May 2021 but was rescheduled to October 2021 to enable Council to prepare additional economic evidence. The recommendations of the Hearings Panel were presented and adopted by the Council in March 2022.

5.6 Following the Council’s approval of the plan change, Airbnb lodged an appeal to the Environment Court. Mediation was carried out where parties, representing a broad range of interests, were able to share their views on the proposed rules.

5.7 Following mediation, the parties filed a joint memorandum with the Environment Court requesting changes to the proposed rules by consent, which are described further below. The Environment Court released its consent order, confirming the changes sought by the parties in July 2023. A summary of the rules as they apply to residential and rural zones is attached.

5.8 The Council is now being asked to approve that Plan Change 4 is made operative under clause 17 of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act.

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

5.10 The decision affects all the community board areas.

Changes from Council decision

5.1 The changes to the provisions in the Consent Order relative to Council’s decision of March 2022 are summarised below:

5.2 Policy 14.2.9.1

5.2.1 Changes in the Consent Order are marked in bold below. The amended policy is intended to provide greater certainty and clarity on how visitor accommodation is to be permitted, managed and avoided.

14.2.9.1 Policy – Visitor Accommodation in Residential Units

a. Permit visitor accommodation in a residential unit where:

i. ~~at least one permanent resident of the site is in residence for the duration of the stay;~~ the number of ~~visitors~~ guests, is comparable to use by a residential household;

ii. disturbance to neighbours is minimal;

iii. information on letting activity is recorded and provided to the Council on request;

iv. for unhosted visitor accommodation, adverse effects are managed in accordance with b. below.

b. Manage unhosted visitor accommodation ~~visitor accommodation~~ ~~in a residential unit where a permanent resident is not in residence~~ to ensure adverse effects on the residential character, coherence and amenity of the site and its immediate surroundings, and on the transport network, are minimised including through:

i. controlling the scale, ~~duration~~ frequency and extent of use to ~~ensure that is still predominantly used for residential activity~~;

ii. management of operations to minimise disturbance of neighbours and adverse effects on the transport network;

iii. ~~including~~ providing contact and site management information to guests and neighbours; and

iv. each residential block retaining a high proportion of residential activities, and each residential activity retaining a high proportion of residential neighbours.

c. Avoid visitor accommodation in a residential unit at a scale or extent that is inconsistent with any of the following:

i. retaining predominantly residential character and coherence in each residential block; or

ii. each residential activity retaining a high proportion of residential neighbours; or

iii. minimising adverse effects on the amenity of the site and its immediate surroundings, including the disturbance of neighbours; or

iv. protecting strategic infrastructure from reverse sensitivity effects.

5.3 Rules

5.3.1 The following table summarises the changes to activity status between Council’s decision and the Consent Order for residential and rural zones, noting changes are proposed for the Papakāinga/Kāinga Nohoanga Zone and Specific Purpose (Flat Land Recovery) zone as well.

	Council decision	Consent Order
Hosted visitor accommodation – Residential, Rural zones	Permitted subject to standards	Permitted subject to standards In residential zones, Restricted Discretionary Activity for 9 – 12 guests and Discretionary Activity for more than 12 guests
Unhosted accommodation – Residential zone	Controlled activity for 1 – 60 nights Full Discretionary for 61+ nights	Permitted for 1 – 60 nights with standards Restricted Discretionary Activity for 61+ nights and up to 12 guests Discretionary activity for more than 12 guests
Unhosted accommodation – Rural zone	Permitted activity for 1 – 60 nights Full Discretionary for 61+ nights	Permitted activity for 1 – 180 nights Restricted Discretionary for 180+ nights and exceeding 8 guests

The above table is a high-level summary and does not represent all the changes, nor should be relied on for determining compliance with the District Plan. Other rules apply to all activities e.g. noise standards, as well as rules that require resource consent for visitor accommodation within the airport noise contour, and rules specific to the use of a heritage building for visitor accommodation.

5.4 Standards

5.5 Other substantive changes in the Consent Order include:

5.5.1 Maximum permitted number of guests – The number of guests permitted in different zones has increased from 6 (Council decision) to 8 (Consent order).

5.5.2 Procedures for managing adverse effects of guests checking in late (Hosted accommodation)– A standard is deleted for hosted accommodation that required the owner of a unit to have procedures in place for managing adverse effects on neighbours from guests checking in between the hours of 22.00pm and 06.00am.
A standard for unhosted accommodation in a residential zone (now permitted) requires that guests are provided with clear instructions including maps/ diagrams/ photos/ signs for check-in procedures.

5.5.3 Notification on commencement of hosted accommodation – A standard for requiring the owner to keep records of the number of nights the unit is used has been amended such that it is from the date Council is notified of commencement, rather than commencing on 1 January.

5.5.4 Standards for unhosted accommodation – With the change in activity status for unhosted accommodation, standards for a permitted activity are introduced that effectively address what would otherwise be assessed for a controlled activity. These are copied below -

a. A maximum of eight guests shall be accommodated at any one time.

b. The number of nights a site is used for unhosted visitor accommodation shall not exceed 60 per year calculated from when Council are notified of commencement.

c. The Council shall be notified in writing prior to commencement.

d. The owner of the unit shall:

i. keep records of the number of nights it is used for unhosted visitor accommodation and provide those records to the Council on request;

ii. provide up-to-date contact information of a local person and/or organisation responsible for managing the property and responding to complaints, to all owners and occupiers of adjoining sites, on commencement, on request, or annually if not requested; and

iii. ensure guests are provided clear instructions including maps/diagrams/photos/signs for check-in procedures, building access and parking arrangements, constraints on the use of outdoor areas, rubbish and recycling procedures, controls on functions and events, any relevant hazards and safety procedures, prior to arrival, and within the unit.

e. There shall be a maximum of 16 vehicle movements per day associated with unhosted visitor accommodation.

f. Guests shall not hold functions or events where the number of additional attendees exceed the number of paying guests between 22.00pm and 07:00am.

g. Guest activities shall meet daytime and night time noise limits in Rule 6.1.5.2.1 and Rule 6.1.5.2.2.

5.6 The parties considered the changes as the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives of the Christchurch District Plan, and give effect to relevant higher order documents.

Implementation of the plan change

5.7 Under the new District Plan rules owners of short-term accommodation properties are required to notify the Council. They are also required to keep records of the number of nights the property is rented for. These records must be provided to the Council upon request. To assist parties in achieving compliance, we have created an online notification form for permitted short-term accommodation providers. This is available https://ccc.tfaforms.net/370.

5.8 We have also sought to improve the information and processes for anyone renting their house/ unit for visitor accommodation. For activities that require a resource consent we have a new application form specifically for short-term visitor accommodation, and a lower deposit of $1,000.

5.9 Previously, Council staff responded to complaints and if a property was deemed to be operating in breach of the short-term accommodation District Plan rules, a resource consent would be required if the owner wished to continue the activity.

Under the new rules we will be taking an educational approach in the first instance, reminding short-term accommodation providers that the rules have changed. The Council’s enforcement response follows a model of voluntary, assisted, directed, or enforced compliance (VADE). Our VADE policy allows us to apply a period of voluntary compliance enabling the property owner to either apply for approval or cease the activity. However, with any compliance, we assess the risk and nuisance effects of the activity which forms part of our compliance response. Council is currently recruiting for an additional staff member to enable proactive enforcement.

5.10 With short-term accommodation being permitted in some scenarios e.g. unhosted accommodation of less than 61 nights per year in a residential zone, we anticipate the level of compliance will increase. The restrictive policy framework of the previous plan has been lessened by this plan change for circumstances where effects can be adequately managed.

Other regulation

5.11 During the course of the plan change process, some submitters representing the formal accommodation sector have sought a ‘levelling of the playing field’ between informal and formal accommodation.

5.12 The District Plan can only manage environmental effects arising from an activity, such as short-term accommodation. A plan change process does not allow us to influence national legislation (e.g. the Building Act) nor address the effects of trade competition. A summary of what Council is doing in the context of other legislation is provided below.

Building Act

5.13 Our webpage ‘Providing visitor accommodation in a residential unit’ primarily provides guidance on our district plan rules under the Resource Management Act while referring to a change of use to make owners aware of any obligations they may have under the Building Act.

5.14 What is a change of use is defined in the Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use, and Earthquake-prone Buildings) Regulations 2005. The threshold for when a building that was constructed as a dwelling and starts to be used for short-term visitor accommodation undergoes a change of use is not straightforward to define. This is why our guidance states; ‘it is best to discuss your situation with the Duty Building Consent Officer’. We have provided an example when a situation would clearly be a change of use; ‘where rooms in a dwelling are rented out to different groups at the same time,’ as there would be more onerous requirements under the building code for fire safety.

5.15 National Registration

5.16 Despite a remit by LGNZ for investigation of a national registration system, we do not have any certainty over when, or if, a national registration system will be introduced. A requirement for properties to register would make it easier for the Council to monitor compliance of District Plan rules. For that reason, it is recommended that the Council continues to advocate for a registration system. Notwithstanding this, a national registration system would not enable the effects associated with short-term accommodation to be managed.

5.17 Rating

5.18 Council’s current rating policy is that any land used for a commercial purpose including “travellers accommodation” is rated as a business – that is, the business differential on the general rate is applied. Historically Council has had very little information to identify which properties are being used for short term visitor accommodation in a residential unit.

5.19 If Council becomes aware that a property is being used for unhosted short term visitor accommodation, that property will be rated as a business unless it remains primarily used for residential purposes. For properties used part time for that purpose, or for hosted accommodation, Council is currently considering a range of rating options for the next rating year.

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 Strategic Planning and Policy

6.2.1 Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

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

6.3 Plan Change 4 enables the District Plan to respond to issues arising in respect of short-term accommodation. In doing so, the District Plan provides clear guidance on how short-term accommodation is managed.

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 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 In the provisions for the Papakāinga/Kāinga Nohoanga Zone, hosted and unhosted visitor accommodation is permitted as per the version approved by Council, with the number of guests permitted increasing from 6 (Council decision) to 8 (Consent order). Non-compliance with standards for hosted and unhosted accommodation is changed from Discretionary to Restricted Discretionary, consistent with residential rules.

6.7 Consultation was undertaken with Mahaanui Kurataiao in the preparation of the Plan Change.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

6.9 The plan change is principally about managing the effects of short-term accommodation on surrounding neighbourhoods, rather than affecting how the city functions or how people travel within the city.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.10 This decision has no impact on accessibility.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

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

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – There are ongoing costs to monitor the effectiveness of the District Plan and compliance and enforcement of the provisions.

7.3 Funding Source – Funding for any resource consent applications is user-pays with costs on-charged.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The recommendation in this report is for the Council to take the procedural step to make Plan Change 4 operative. The Council has no other option.

8.2 The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that, following the end of the appeal period and the resolution of any appeals, a local authority must formally approve the changes to the plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 before the plan change becomes operative on a date that is nominated in a public notice. An agreement reached at mediation and consented to by the Court qualifies as resolving the appeal for the purposes of the Act.

8.3 Approving changes to the District Plan so that they can be made operative is one of the functions that cannot be delegated to staff under the RMA.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Council is statutorily required to have an operative District Plan at all times. The decision to be made is to reflect the Environment Court’s decision to allow the appeal on Plan Change 4. If this is not approved, the Council is in breach of its RMA obligations and there is a risk of further legal challenge.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Environment Court Consent Order (Under Separate Cover)	23/1657356
b ⇩	Plan Change 4 Summary of rules	23/1657357	269

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

Mark Stevenson - Manager Planning

Catherine Elvidge - Principal Advisor Resource Consents

Approved By

John Higgins - Head of Planning & Consents

Council

01 November 2023

15. Draft submission on the Emergency Management Bill
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1665084
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Brenden Winder, Manager Civil Defence and Emergency Management
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 this report is to seek approval of the draft Council submission on the Emergency Management Bill. Submissions are due with the Select Committee by 3 November 2023.

1.2 The Government has introduced an Emergency Management Bill to replace the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. This recognises that while there may be community interest in how the Council prepares for and responds to emergencies, the specific decision (to approve the draft submission) is of a lower level of significance.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approves the draft submission (Attachment A to this report) on the Emergency Management Bill.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The Council regularly makes submissions on proposals which may significantly impact Christchurch residents or Council business. Submissions are an important opportunity to influence thinking and decisions through external agencies’ consultation processes.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The alternative option would be to not submit on the Emergency Management Bill. This is not recommended as making a submission is a valuable opportunity to influence central government direction on proposals that have significant implications for Council.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

Emergency Management Bill

5.1 The Emergency Management Bill will create an updated legal and regulatory framework within which Aotearoa New Zealand can prepare for, deal with, and recover from local, regional and national emergencies. The Bill is not a fundamental transformation of the emergency management system, but instead makes practical improvements to ensure the system can meet current and future needs – many of these are technical changes.

5.2 Some of the key measures in the Emergency Management Bill include:

5.2.1 clarifying roles and responsibilities across the emergency management system

5.2.2 recognising and enhancing the role of Māori in emergency management

5.2.3 enhancing the resilience and accountability of critical infrastructure

5.2.4 enabling equitable outcomes for communities disproportionately impacted by emergencies

5.2.5 improving operational effectiveness

5.2.6 updating the legal and regulatory frameworks for the emergency management system

5.2.7 replacing the term ‘civil defence emergency management’ with ‘emergency management’.

5.3 Further information on the Bill can be found here: https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/legislation/emergency-management-bill/

Key submission points

5.4 As a district, we have experienced numerous emergencies, notably flooding, the Canterbury earthquake sequence, Port Hills fire and the Mosque attacks. Many of our communities are vulnerable to flooding and sea level rise and our coastal areas are also at risk of tsunamis. Being prepared for responding to these events and looking after our communities is a high priority for our Council.

5.5 The draft submission supports a review of the current legislation, the updated legal and regulatory framework needs to go further than just making limited practical improvements. New Zealand needs to have clear and effective emergency management legislation in place, especially as the climate is changing and we will face more frequent and more extreme weather events.

5.6 Māori participation in emergency management - Mana whenua already contribute significantly to emergency preparedness and support in emergency responses. We support the inclusion of iwi in Emergency Management Committees and Executive Groups. Representatives should have full voting rights and get paid. References to Māori and iwi in the Bill should be replaced with mana whenua

5.7 Increasing the resilience of critical infrastructure – the Bill seems to suggest that infrastructure that is ‘critical’ now will remain so into the future. In reality, ‘criticality’ will in part be determined by where populations are located, and over time retreat from hazards will require communities to move away from marginal and risky locations meaning that critical infrastructure will also have to move.

5.8 Lack of adequate provision for regional level of emergency response management - We support the proposed improved recognition and articulation of the three-layer model of emergency management governance, management, and operational coordination. But it is unclear why the Bill retains the two-level approach to declared states of emergency and transition periods as “local” and “national” respectively. A third tier of “regional” state of emergency for more than one local authority or unitary authority would enable controllers to carry out the roles more effectively.

5.9 Lack of statutory mandate for the Coordinated Incident Management System (CIMS) - In previous reviews the lack of consistent application of the Coordinated Incident Management System (CIMS) has been highlighted as a significant issue. We are concerned that the Bill does not address this, and it is unclear why the earlier feedback to mandate this has not been incorporated.

5.10 Emergency Powers not conferred automatically to Controllers - the Bill (and the 2002 Act) is unique in the New Zealand emergency legislative context as emergency powers are conferred on Emergency Management Committees and Recovery Managers, but not to Controllers. Despite this, it is Controllers who actually exercise the powers and it would be beneficial for Controller(s) to be empowered by the Bill.

5.11 The decision affects all wards/Community Board areas.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This decision aligns with the Council’s Strategic Framework.

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

6.3 Strategic Planning and Policy

6.3.1 Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

· Level of Service: 17.0.1.1 Advice to Council on high priority policy and planning issues that affect the City. Advice is aligned with and delivers on the governance expectations as evidenced through the Council Strategic Framework. - Triennial reconfirmation of the strategic framework or as required.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies. It is also consistent with the Canterbury Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan, which provides strategic direction on how comprehensive, risk-based emergency management will be implemented across the Canterbury region.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 Submitting on the Emergency Management Bill is not 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 however the decision to submit on the Bill will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

6.7 Council staff have shared the draft submission with Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu staff and provided an opportunity for feedback. No amendments were suggested. Ngāi Tahu is also making a submission on the Bill.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 There are no direct climate change implications associated with the decision to approve this submission. However, as the submission itself is on emergency management legislation, it is important that New Zealand has clear and effective emergency management legislation in place, especially as the climate is changing and we will face more frequent and more extreme weather events.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9 There are no direct accessibility implications associated with the decision to approve this submission.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 The cost of making this submission will be met from existing operational budgets.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The Select Committee’s consultation on the Emergency Management Bill is public and open to any person or organisation.

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 There are no significant risks associated with this decision to lodge submission. There is some uncertainty about the progress of this Bill with the new Government as neither National or Act supported it at first reading.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Draft submission on the Emergency Management Bill	23/1737333	276

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

Libby Elvidge - Principal Advisor Citizens & Community

Brenden Winder - Manager Civil Defence & Emergency Management

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

01 November 2023

16. Council submission on the inquiry into climate adaptation
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1381431
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Jane Morgan, Team Leader Coastal Hazards Adaptation Planning
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 seek approval of the draft Council submission on the inquiry into climate adaptation.

1.2 The Environment Committee Komiti Whiriwhiri Take Taiao has initiated an inquiry into climate adaptation, and is calling for public submissions. A draft Council submission has been prepared for consideration.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. This recognises that while there may be community interest in the inquiry and the subsequent development of the Climate Adaptation Act, the specific decision (to approve the draft submission) is of a lower level of significance.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approves lodging the attached draft submission (Attachment A) to the Environment Committee on the inquiry into climate adaptation.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The alternative option would be to not submit on the inquiry into climate adaptation.

4.2 This course of action is not recommended as making a submission is a valuable opportunity to influence central government direction on proposals that have significant implications for Council.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

Overview of inquiry into climate adaptation

5.1 The Environment Committee Komiti Whiriwhiri Take Taiao has initiated an inquiry into climate adaptation and is calling for public submissions.

5.2 For its inquiry, the committee is particularly interested in:

· The current approach to community-led retreat and adaptation funding, its strengths, risks and costs

· Lessons learned from severe weather events and natural disasters in Aotearoa New Zealand for community-led retreat and funding climate adaptation

· Effective mechanisms for community-led decision making

· The role of the private sector in managing climate risk

· Potential institutional arrangements, including roles and responsibilities of central and local government agencies, iwi and hapu

· Māori participation, Crown obligations, and how to best give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi, and integrate matauranga Māori and te ao Māori across the adaptation system

· Alignment and integration with existing legislation and regulatory framework, including the reformed resource management system and any changes needed to regulatory powers and potential economic or other incentives needed to support adaptation actions (both before and after extreme events)

· Funding sources, access to them and principles and criteria for cost sharing

· Targets or indicators for assessing progress to more resilient communities and infrastructure.

5.3 The inquiry is expected to report back in 2024, and its findings are expected to inform development of the Climate Change Adaptation Bill, which is the final piece of legislation for the Resource Management reforms.

Summary of submission content

5.4 The submission is focused on key themes emerging from the Report of the Expert Working Group on Managed Retreat. It draws heavily on Christchurch’s experience of retreat following the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, through the Crown’s red-zoning process, and the hard lessons learned during this time, as well as our experience delivering our current adaptation planning programme.

5.5 The submission welcomes this reform, noting that national policy on climate adaptation and managed retreat currently represents a large gap.

5.6 The following details key points outlined in the Council’s draft submission (Attachment A):

5.6.1 Timing and the need for urgency: the reform must be progressed urgently to provide clarity and avoid unnecessary rework.

5.6.2 Need for national direction: the submission urges the need for national direction to help set consistent expectations and enable communities to engage within a generally accepted framework. This is essential to reduce the existing uncertainty that impacts communities and their well-being and provide necessary direction to Councils to support long-term planning and future investment decisions.

5.6.3 Approaches to adaptation and managed retreat: the submission encourages a balance between ensuring the efficiency and certainty of adaptation processes (including managed retreat), and ensuring appropriate community involvement in, and ownership of, these processes. It reflects the tensions inherent in taking a purely ‘top down’ or ‘bottom up’ approach to adaptation and managed retreat and recognises the need for a nuanced approach.

5.6.4 People focused framework: the submission seeks that greater emphasis is placed on creating a framework that is people focused and prioritises community well-being. It details how more involvement from social service and health agencies is required to shift from a strict land-use planning approach to a social policy approach. It also notes how a greater focus needs to be placed on how we educate and prepare people for change to ensure community buy-in.

5.6.5 Funding and finance: the submission seeks that funding and financing must be adequate to enable adaptation, must create incentives that encourage risk reduction by the Crown, local government, private individuals, banks and insurers, and must avoid transfer of risk and cost onto local government. Notably, it seeks that funding should align with exposure and vulnerability to climate change induced hazards.

5.6.6 Rates cannot be relied upon to fund the scale of investment required: For the district, conservative estimates suggest with sea level rise of only 20cm the replacement value of our three waters network pipes and road networks is $3.2B. If exposure of all Council infrastructure was quantified, the costs would be far greater than this. Our assessments indicate the approximately $14B of private properties are exposed within the district, which would be unaffordable for Council to co-fund private property retreat. Our position is that local government remains responsible for public assets only, with central government taking responsibility for compensation for private asset owners.

5.6.7 Roles and responsibilities: the submission recognises the need for a simple and clear set of roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities to avoid inefficiencies, unnecessary complexity and fragmentation.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This decision aligns with the Council’s Strategic Framework.

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

6.2.1 Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

6.4 Staff have also endeavoured to ensure the content of the draft submission and accompanying feedback to be provided to the Environment Committee is consistent with previous Council submissions on related matters.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 The decision to lodge a Council submission on the inquiry into climate adaptation is not 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, however the decision to submit on the inquiry will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

6.7 The Report of the Expert Working Group details how recognition of Māori rights could be applied in any new system and acknowledges the importance of such. In particular, Chapter 2 of the Working Group’s report explores in greater detail how a new system needs to be developed to be consistent with te Triti.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 There are no direct climate change implications associated with the decision to approve this submission. However, the submission itself being on the inquiry into climate adaptation, considers implications regarding climate adaptation and managed retreat in detail.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9 There are no direct accessibility implications associated with the decision to approve this submission.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - the cost of making this submission will be met from existing operational budgets.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - as above

7.3 Funding Source - existing operational budgets

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The Select Committee’s consultation on the inquiry into climate adaptation is public and open to any person or organisation.

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 There are no significant risks associated with this decision to lodge submission.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Draft Council submission on the inquiry into climate adaptation	23/1735779	284

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

Helaina Gregg - Principal Advisor Policy

Katie McFadden - Senior Policy Analyst

Jessica Allison-Batt - Principal Advisor Climate Resilience

Jane Morgan - Team Leader Coastal Hazards Adaptation Planning

Approved By

John Higgins - Head of Planning & Consents

Council

01 November 2023

17. Hearings Panel report to the Council on the proposed replacement Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1512788
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt, Hearings Panel Chairperson
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 to present to the Council the Hearings Panel (the Panel) recommendations following the consultation and hearings process on the proposed replacement Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw and associated documents.

1.2 The Panel has no decision-making powers but, in accordance with its delegation, has considered the written and oral submissions received on the proposal and is now making recommendations to the Council. The Council can then accept or reject those recommendations as it sees fit bearing in mind that the Local Government Act 2002 s.82(1)(e) requires that “the views presented to the local authority should be received by the local authority with an open mind and should be given by the local authority, in making a decision, due consideration.”

1.3 The Council, as the final decision-maker, should put itself in as good a position as the Panel having heard all the parties. It can do so by considering this report which includes a summary of the submissions that were presented at the hearings, additional information received and the Panel’s considerations and deliberations. For the full set of written submissions considered by the Hearings Panel, and minutes of the Panel meeting refer to Section 9: Documents A – C below.

2. Hearings Panel Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu o Te Tira Taute

That the Council:

1. Note that public consultation on the following proposed replacement documents has been completed, and that submissions have been considered by the Hearings Panel:

a. Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw;

b. Register of Roads on which Cruising is Prohibited;

c. Prohibited Times on Roads Register; and

d. Prohibited Times on Roads Operational Policy

2. Does not change the proposed Bylaw or associated documents as a result of the consultation process.

3. Adopt the Christchurch City Council Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023 in its final form (Attachment A).

4. Note that the Bylaw will revoke and replace the Christchurch City Council Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2014.

5. Agree that, in accordance with section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council is satisfied that the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023:

a. is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems

b. is the most appropriate form of bylaw; and

c. gives rise to some implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, but none that are inconsistent with that Act (as is the required test).

6. Approve that the Bylaw comes into force on 15 November 2023, and that signs will be installed or removed to reflect the changes.

7. Notify the Minister of Transport that the Bylaw has been made (within one week of the Bylaw being made) to comply with section 22AB (4) of the Land Transport Act 1998.

8. Agree to revoke and replace the Register of Roads on which Cruising is Prohibited, effective from 15 November 2023 (Attachment B).

9. Resolve under clause 7 of the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023 that access to the following roads or parts of roads is prohibited to vehicles weighing less than 3,500kg during the days and times listed:

a. Establishment Drive, Depot Street, Headquarters Place, Quadrant Drive, Aruhe Road and Mania Road (Hornby South) - 10pm to 5am, 7 days a week

b. Part of Branston Street (Hornby) - section from Halswell Junction Road to Boston Avenue - 10pm to 5am, 7 days a week

c. Watts Road (Sockburn) - 10pm to 5am, 7 days a week

d. Weaver Place (Sockburn) - 10pm to 5am, Thursday to Monday, and public holidays

e. Part of Pound Road (Yaldhurst) - branch of Pound Road east of the main alignment - 10pm to 5am, Thursday to Monday, and public holidays

f. Aviation Drive (Yaldhurst) - 10pm to 5am, Thursday to Monday, and public holidays

g. Part of Syd Bradley Road (Yaldhurst) - Russley Road to Ron Guthrey Road - 10pm to 5am, Thursday to Monday, and public holidays

h. Jet Place (Harewood) - 10pm to 5am, 7 days a week

i. Lakes Way, Outlook Place and Lakeside Place (Harewood) - 10pm to 5am, Thursday to Monday, and public holidays.

10. Agree to revoke and replace the Prohibited Times on Roads Register, effective from 15 November 2023 (Attachment C).

11. Agree to revoke and replace the Prohibited Times on Roads Operational Policy 2023, effective from 15 November 2023 (Attachment D).

12. Authorise staff to make any typographical changes or to correct minor errors or omissions as the case may be, before the bylaw, registers and policy come into force;

13. Delegate to the Chief Executive the authority to amend any explanatory notes in the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023, as the case may be, and that this power may be sub-delegated.

14. Give public notice of the Christchurch City Council Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023, that it comes into force on 15 November 2023, and that copies of the Bylaw may be inspected and obtained at the Council’s offices or on its website, without payment, in accordance with section 157 of the Local Government Act 2002.

15. Notify the Canterbury Police District Commander of the adoption of the replacement Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023, and the changes to the roads regulated by the bylaw.

16. Note that issues outside the scope of the Bylaw were raised by residents in and around Branston Street (including heavy vehicle routes, potential use of security camera footage from private businesses, and other tools to reduce vehicle noise at the residential end of Branston Street), and that staff will discuss these matters with the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board at the next available Traffic Operations Update.

3. Background / Context Te Horopaki

3.1 A review of the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2014 was undertaken to comply with legislative requirements.^{^[1]} The results of the review were accepted by the Council on 21 June 2023 (refer to Section 9: Document E), and a replacement bylaw was proposed for consultation: the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023.

3.2 The Bylaw sets rules to reduce cruising and to restrict nighttime access to some roads in rural and industrial areas with a history of antisocial vehicle-related activities, such as racing and burnouts. It is made using bylaw-making powers in the following two pieces of legislation, with different bylaw-making requirements:

· the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA) for cruising; and

· the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) for prohibited times on roads.

3.3 The legislation places some limitations on what can be regulated, particularly in relation to freedoms protected by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.^{^[2]} The Bylaw regulates two very specific and localised matters, and only on specified roads in the district.

3.4 The following documents were part of the consultation process, together with the proposed replacement Bylaw:

· Register of Roads on which Cruising is Prohibited

· Prohibited Times on Roads Register

· Prohibited Times on Roads Operational Policy.

3.5 The Bylaw provides the legal mechanism for the Council to regulate roads, the registers list the roads the Bylaw regulates, and the policy sets outs how roads may be added or removed as new issues arise.

3.6 The Bylaw can only be enforced by the Police. It complements other powers the Police have to address associated activities. Transport laws already regulate antisocial driving behaviours, including excessive speed, street racing and sustained loss of traction. Modified vehicles (including loud exhausts) are also already regulated and are not covered by the Bylaw. While the Bylaw is associated with modified vehicles, it applies to all vehicles.

3.7 The Antisocial Road User Team at the Christchurch Police provided input into the review of the Bylaw and the roads it regulates.

3.8 The review focused on improvements to the Bylaw, and not on how to address wider antisocial vehicle-related activities. The Council has other tools to address related issues outside of this bylaw process, such as setting safe and appropriate speeds, and traffic engineering solutions to improve road safety.

4. Proposed changes to the bylaw, policy, and the roads the bylaw regulates

4.1 The Council adopted the proposed replacement Bylaw for consultation on 16 June 2023. The proposed changes included:

4.1.1 Proposed changes to the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Road Bylaw 2014:

· updating and modernising the format and language of the Bylaw;

· clarifying that the Bylaw is a “qualifying bylaw” under the Land Transport Act 1998, which means that warning notices can be issued for a breach of the bylaw, and that a further breach can result in a vehicle being seized and impounded by Police; and

· adding to the list of access exemptions that apply to the prohibited times on roads clauses to better reflect legitimate access during prohibited times and societal shifts (e.g., deliveries and the increasing use of ride share vehicles).

4.1.2 Proposed changes to the Prohibited Times on Roads Register:

(a) The addition of the following roads to the Prohibited Times on Roads Register:

· Establishment Drive, Depot Street, Headquarters Place, Quadrant Drive, Aruhe Road and Mania Road (Hornby South)

· part of Branston Street (Hornby) – section from Halswell Junction Road to Boston Avenue

· Weaver Place (Sockburn)

· Watts Road (Sockburn)

· part of Pound Road (Yaldhurst) - the branch east of the main alignment

· Syd Bradley Road (Yaldhurst) – Russley Road to Ron Guthrey Road

· Aviation Drive (Yaldhurst)

· Jet Place (Harewood)

· Lakes Way, Outlook Place, Lakeside Place (Harewood)

(b) The removal of part of Blakes Road (Belfast) from the Prohibited Times on Roads Register.

4.2 No changes were proposed to the Register of Roads on which Cruising is Prohibited.

4.3 The Prohibited Times on Roads Operational Policy gives guidance on the process to add or amend roads, or to remove existing roads from the coverage of the Bylaw. The policy was reviewed to ensure it is up-to-date and fit-for-purpose, and a replacement policy was proposed.

5. Consultation Process and Submissions Te Tukanga Kōrerorero / Ngā Tāpaetanga

Summary

5.1 Submissions opened on 27 June and closed on 25 July 2023. Consultation information was made available on the Council Have Your Say website (refer to Section 9 Document D). Emails were sent to 132 stakeholders, inviting submissions. A Newsline story was published on 16 June 2023 (Section 9: Document D). Posts on Council’s social media pages about the consultation had good engagement, including posts to neighbourhood groups where changes were proposed.

5.2 Forty-one submissions were received. Submitters included five community boards, three organisations, three businesses located in areas where nighttime restrictions are proposed, and 30 individuals.

5.3 Some of the individual submissions were focused only on one proposal. There was a cluster of submitters from Branston Street (eight submitters) who supported the addition of nighttime restrictions, a cluster from Blakes Road (seven submitters) who were opposed to removing the nighttime restrictions, and a number of submitters generally opposed to the Bylaw and all restrictions (seven submitters). Other submitters wanted the Bylaw to apply much more broadly than is possible, while others raised out of scope issues.

Submission Analysis

5.4 In briefing the Panel, staff provided an analysis of the submissions and comment on the key themes raised, the Panel noted the staff advice that:

5.4.1 The three submitters with businesses in areas where Council is proposing to add roads were all supportive, and they set out the negative impacts and damage they have been experiencing from nighttime antisocial vehicle-related activities.

5.4.2 The Community Boards who made a submission were broadly supportive of the changes to the Bylaw and policy, and supported the proposed additional roads in their areas, and some in neighbouring areas. Some asked that new roads be added to the coverage of the Bylaw. Some of these roads were residential or arterial roads, which are not appropriate for nighttime access restrictions, while activities on other roads were unlikely to fit the definition of cruising so would not be appropriate for cruising restrictions.

5.4.3 Of the organisations that submitted, the Disabled Persons Assembly was supportive of the changes to the exemptions to allow better access; the local Automobile Association was supportive of all the proposals; and the Summit Road Society asked for nighttime access restrictions due to concerns about damage and safety.

5.4.4 Nighttime access restrictions on the Summit Road were explored in 2018, and while there was overwhelming public opposition to restricting access, there was also widespread concern about antisocial and unsafe vehicle-related activities along the Summit Road. Many of the 2018 submissions did not want access for recreational activities to be reduced, or for a minority to ruin it for the majority.

5.4.5 Many of the submissions raised legitimate concerns about driver behaviour, particularly in residential areas. While the Panel acknowledged these concerns, it also noted that the legislation the Bylaw operates under means that the Bylaw is not the right tool to address these behaviours, and that the Police already have tools at their disposal.

5.4.6 Many of the behaviours that concerned submitters are already regulated by transport legislation – including modified vehicles (loud exhausts), sustained loss of traction (burnouts, donuts, and drifting), racing, and speeding. If drivers are undertaking these activities, they are already breaking the law, and the Police have powers to address them. The Panel noted that residents should continue to report incidents to the Police as they are occurring.

6. The Hearing Te Hui

6.1 The Hearings Panel consisted of Chair Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt and members Councillors Sam MacDonald and Tim Scandrett. The Hearings Panel convened on 13 September 2023 to consider and deliberate on all submissions received on the proposal.

6.2 Prior to hearing oral submissions Council officers presented the Hearings Panel with further clarification in relation to:

6.2.1 Bylaw limitations – noting that while many submitters raised legitimate concerns about noise, disruption, damage, stress, and safety from antisocial vehicle-related activities, especially at night and in residential areas, in many cases the Bylaw is not the right tool for regulating this behaviour.

6.2.2 Transport laws and role of the Police – transport laws apply to all drivers and roads. If drivers are breaking the law, there is no need for the Bylaw to apply. The Police have a range of tools they can use, and in some cases, the Bylaw is one of those tools, but it is only useful in some situations.

6.2.3 Cruising – noting a common misconception is that cruising involves driving around in a loud, modified vehicle with no particular purpose, but the legal definition of cruising is more specific - Driving repeatedly over the same stretch of road, in the same direction, in a way that draws attention to the sound or power of the engine, or that creates a convoy (paraphrased). This means the cruising part of the Bylaw would not address some concerns raised by submitters about nighttime vehicle noise, as drivers are driving a long route, not repeatedly driving the same stretch of road in the same direction, so would not meet the legal definition of cruising.

6.2.4 Prohibited Times on Roads - noting that this part of the Bylaw does not regulate antisocial driver behaviour but prohibits vehicle access at night. This means it should not be applied to frequently used roads, such as in residential areas or on arterial or collector roads. The nighttime access restrictions can appropriately be applied to roads in industrial or rural-city fringe areas where we would not reasonably expect drivers to be at night and where there is a history of antisocial vehicle-related activity. It applies to light vehicles^{^[3]}, so excludes heavy vehicles, such as trucks and buses.

6.2.5 Bill of Rights implications – because the Prohibited Times on Roads part of the Bylaw limits people’s freedom of movement (apart from exceptions for bona fide reasons, such as residents needing access to a property), this part of the Bylaw has New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 implications. The LGA requires a council to assess these implications when making a bylaw, and to only apply reasonable and proportionate limitations. This is one of the reasons this part of the Bylaw is only applied to roads not commonly used at night and with a history of antisocial issues.

6.2.6 Scope of the consultation - the Panel noted that if it were to recommend the addition of any roads that were not specifically consulted on, but that were raised through submissions, the Panel would need to refer the matter back to the Council. This would be for the Council to explore the matter further, and if the Council wished to proceed with additional roads, this would require further consultation with the public.

6.3 The Hearings Panel heard the following five oral submissions, with submitters taking the opportunity to emphasise key concerns expressed in their written submissions. For the original submissions and subsequent document tabled at the Hearing refer to Section 9: Documents A - C.

· Helen Broughton - Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board, Chairperson

· Paul McMahon - Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board Submissions Committee

· Kieran Brewster

· Marie Gray - Summit Road Society, Secretary

· Marc Duff

7. Consideration and Deliberation of Submissions Ngā Whaiwhakaaro o Ngā Kōrero me Ngā Taukume

7.1 The Hearings Panel considered and deliberated on all submissions received on the proposal as well as information received from Council Officers during the hearing.

7.2 The key matters that were discussed by the Hearings Panel were:

7.2.1 Antisocial driving behaviours on residential streets, including some that are near industrial properties, were a common concern in submissions. The Panel noted that the Bylaw is not an appropriate mechanism to use on residential or collector roads, as it prohibits all light vehicles at night, not just those causing issues.

7.2.2 Bylaw limitations - while noting that many of the issues raised by submitters cannot be addressed under the Bylaw, police resourcing to respond to calls continues to be a concern. Several submitters commented that by the time police respond to calls reporting antisocial driving behaviours, the vehicles have often moved on. The message that calls are logged and provide an indication of locations of concern needs to be reinforced to the public, by way of the Police.

7.2.3 Summit Road – the Panel noted that in 2018 the Council decided not to impose nighttime restrictions on Summit Road. This followed consultation on the proposal that resulted in overwhelming public opposition. Police enforcement is considered the most appropriate tool to address anti-social road user activity in this area, and staff will continue to work with Police on this.

7.2.4 Branston Street, Hornby – there was strong community support for the proposed nighttime restrictions at the industrial end of Branston Street. While accepting that antisocial driving behaviours in the residential area adjacent to the industrial zone are not able to be addressed under the Bylaw, the Panel encouraged submitters to work with the community board, local businesses, and the Police.

7.2.5 The Panel noted the potential to use security footage from private land in relation to antisocial driving behaviour at the industrial end of Branston Street. The Panel also noted the impact that nighttime noise from heavy vehicles in this area has on residents. The Panel asked that staff discuss these matters with the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board at the next available Traffic Operations Update.

7.2.6 Blakes Road, Belfast – while accepting that submitters did not want the restrictions removed, the Panel noted that residential development in the area meant prohibiting vehicles was no longer appropriate. The Panel also noted that the Police have other tools they can use to address antisocial driving behaviour, and residents are encouraged to continue reporting issues to the Police as they are occurring.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

8.1 The Panel was advised by staff that there are several legal matters that need to be included in its recommendations to Council to ensure that the requirements of legislation are properly reflected and met.

8.2 This consists of the section 155 determinations required by the Local Government Act 2002 (including the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 considerations), notifying the Minister of Transport of the Bylaw (because part of the Bylaw is made under the Land Transport Act 1998), and giving public notice of the Bylaw.

8.3 As the enforcer of the Bylaw, the Panel has included a recommendation to the Council to notify the Police Canterbury District Commander of the replacement bylaw and the roads it regulates.

9. Reference Documents

Document	Location
*Document A* Hearings Panel Agenda including all submissions	https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2023/09/BHPCC_20230913_AGN_9627_AT.PDF
*Document B* Hearings Panel Minutes	https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2023/09/BHPCC_20230913_MIN_9627_AT.PDF
*Document C* Hearings Panel Minutes Attachments	https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2023/09/BHPCC_20230913_MAT_9627.PDF
*Document D* Have Your Say Webpage	https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/604
*Document E* Council report Review of the Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw and proposed consultation on replacement bylaw	https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2023/06/CNCL_20230621_AGN_8428_AT_WEB.htm – Council meeting, 21 June 2023, Agenda item 7

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author Ann Fitzgerald – Democratic Services Advisor

Approved By Councillor Tyla Harrison - Hunt - Chair of Hearings Panel

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Christchurch City Council Cruising and Prohibited Times on Roads Bylaw 2023	23/1612460	303
b ⇩	Register of Roads on which Cruising is Prohibited	23/1619360	308
c ⇩	Prohibited Times on Roads Register	23/1610943	311
d ⇩	Prohibited Times on Roads Operational Policy 2023	23/1610736	315

[1] The Local Government Act 2002 requires bylaws to be reviewed at least once every ten years. A review follows the same process as making a bylaw. See sections 155, 159 and 160 of the LGA.

[2] The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 implications of any bylaw made under it, see section 155 of the LGA.

[3] Light vehicle is transport term, meaning vehicles under 3,500kg. This applies to most private passenger vehicles, such as cars, utes, SUVs and 4WDS.

5. Council Minutes - 4 October 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1631833
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Katie Matheis, Team Leader Hearings & Committee Support (Katie.Matheis@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive (Dawn.Baxendale@ccc.govt.nz)

6. Council Minutes - 18 October 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1715380
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Katie Matheis, Team Leader Hearings & Committee Support (Katie.Matheis@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive (Dawn.Baxendale@ccc.govt.nz)

7. Audit and Risk Management Committee Minutes - 3 August 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1719593
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Luke Smeele, Democratic Services Advisor (luke.smeele@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

8. Monthly Report from the Community Boards - October 2023
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/1631392
Report of Te Pou Matua:	The Chairpersons of all Community Boards
Senior Leader Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager, Citizens and Community mary.richardson@ccc.govt.nz

Reserve Revocation 112R Bridle Path Road
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1660608
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Stuart McLeod, Property Consultant, stuart.mcleod@ccc.govt.nz
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Jane Davis, General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services (jane.davis@ccc.govt.nz)

9. Woodham Road / Gloucester Street - Intersection Improvements
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/1662651
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Gautham Praburam, Traffic Engineer, gautham.praburam@ccc.govt.nz Lachlan Beban, Senior Transportation Engineer, lachlan.beban@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Leader Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board Consideration Te Whaiwhakaarotanga
	The Board took into consideration a deputation made by Anne Scott on behalf of Spokes Canterbury whilst making their recommendation to Council and Part C decision.

11. Reserve Revocation 112R Bridle Path Road
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/1693993
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Stuart McLeod, Property Consultant, stuart.mcleod@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Leader Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

12. Christchurch Wastewater Treatment Plant Independent Review
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1542706
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Nicholas Hill, Head of Risk & Assurance (Nicholas.Hill@ccc.govt.nz), Pat Dougherty, Consulting Partner (Pat.Dougherty@tregaskisbrown.co.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

ITEM NO.	GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED	SECTION	SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT	PLAIN ENGLISH REASON	WHEN REPORTS CAN BE REVIEWED FOR POTENTIAL RELEASE
11.	Reserve Revocation 112R Bridle Path Road
	Attachment b - 304/6434 signed agreement for sale and purchase dated 17 July 2023	s7(2)(h)	Commercial Activities	Contains a purchase price that is confidential to the parties until after settlement.	26 February 2027
19.	Public Excluded Audit and Risk Management Committee Minutes - 3 August 2023			Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.
20.	Public Excluded Council Minutes - 4 October 2023			Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.