Agenda of Council - Tuesday, 12 December 2023

Karakia Tīmatanga

Whakataka Te hau ki Te uru

Whakataka Te hau ki Te tonga

Kia makinakina ki uta

Kia mataratara ki Tai

E hi ake ana te atakura

He tio, he huka, he hau hu

Tihei Mauri Ora

External Recognition for Council Services

The Mayor, on behalf of the Council, will acknowledge the following external award for Council services:

· The Council’s Regional Parks Ranger Project Manager was awarded the Ian Galloway Memorial Cup at Aotearoa’s 2023 Recreation Awards.

· The Council received the following silver awards at the 2023 IAB New Zealand Digital Advertising Awards, for the Trash Talking kerbside campaign they developed with our partner media agency OMD:

o The best multi-channel integration campaign.

o The best use of programmatic.

1. Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

2. Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant and to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

3. Public Participation Te Huinga Tūmatanui

3.1 Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

3.1.1

Christchurch City Mission

Melissa McCreanor and Josh Gardiner will speak on behalf of the Christchurch City Mission to provide an update on the Inner-City Street Project – The City Mission Outreach Service, including relationships, themes and next steps.

3.1.2

Community Energy Action

Robert Linterman, Chief Executive Officer of Community Energy Action (CEA) will speak to provide an overview of the various activities and community contributions of CEA and the outcomes achieved.

3.1.3

Central City Business Association

Annabel Turley and Nicki Carter will speak on behalf of the Central City Business Association (CCBA) to provide an update on the CCBA’s work and progress this year and regarding the value of tourism, cruise and events to the businesses within the city.

3.1.4

Toi Ōtautahi Advisory Group

Audrey Bauldwin, Sol Smith, Josaih Morgan and Brendan Meek will speak on behalf of Toi Ōtautahi Advisory Group will speak regarding:

· Why continued investment in arts and creativity has broad community benefits.

· Events, projects and work achieved with supported by the Council and partners in delivery of the strategy. A celebration and acknowledgement of a busy and productive year across the sector.

3.1.5

New Zealand Opera

Annabel Holland and Brad Cohen will speak on behalf of New Zealand Opera to provide an update on the launch of the 2024 season.

3.1.6

Andrew Hamlin

Andrew Hamlin will speak regarding whether a bylaw can be passed to regulate cats.

3.2 Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Deputations may be heard on a matter or matters covered by a report on this agenda and approved by the Chairperson.

3.2.1

Christchurch International Airport Limited

Jess Aimer and Nancy Vance will speak on behalf of the Christchurch International Airport Limited regarding item 6 - Pūharakekenui Styx Stormwater Management Plan.

3.2.2

Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board

Chairperson Paul McMahon will speak on behalf of the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board regarding item 6 - Pūharakekenui Styx Stormwater Management Plan.

3.2.3

Styx Living Laboratory Trust

Selena Coombe will speak on behalf of the Styx Living Laboratory Trust regarding item 6 - Pūharakekenui Styx Stormwater Management Plan.

3.2.4

Jan Burney

Jan Burney will speak regarding item 6 – Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan.

3.2.5

Pauline McGuigan

Pauline McGuigan will speak regarding item 6 – Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan.

4. Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

There were no Presentation of Petitions at the time the agenda was prepared.

Council

12 December 2023

6. Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1678173
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Paul Dickson, Drainage Engineer, Three Waters Unit Paul.Dickson@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 Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) is presented for Council adoption ahead of its submission to Canterbury Regional Council by the deadline of 20 December 2023.

1.2 The stormwater management plan is a requirement of the Comprehensive Stormwater Network Discharge Consent CRC231955 Condition 4 that requires the Council to develop SMPs in those parts of the District where there are stormwater networks.

1.3 The decision in this report is of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by considering the requirements under the comprehensive consent, the significance of stormwater management to mana whenua, the degree of expressed public interest in stormwater management, previous Councillor interest, and the quantum of funding during the term of the Stormwater Management Plan (SMP).

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Adopt the Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan (Attachment A to this report).

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 So that the Council can submit the finalised Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan to Canterbury Regional Council by 20 December 2023, as required by Consent Variation number CRC231955.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 It is a condition of the resource consent that the Council prepare SMPs by specified dates. Not complying is not an option. Two complying options were considered. Option A – compliance and aspirational and Option B - compliance.

4.2 A plan corresponding to Option A would develop aspirational storm-water quality and quantity management contaminant load reduction targets to be effected by a range of measures. Measure could include controls at source such as specified, non-steel roofing materials, mandatory roof painting, and controls near-source such as downpipe filters and on-road stormwater filtration devices. This option was generally preferred by consultees.

4.3 However, Option A involved committing the Council to:

· currently unfunded actions;

· water quality and quantity improvement programmes that while ideal are not practicable or definitely attainable; and

· contaminant reduction methods that would need regulatory change. Officers consider that the risks for the Council of adopting this option were too high.

4.4 The SMP has been developed from the second (compliance) Option B, which:

· complies with all consent conditions;

· achieves a good level of contaminant reduction;

· adopts a programme of capital work already in the Long Term Plan; and

· introduces regulatory processes that are within the Council’s powers under the Local Government Act.

4.5 The SMP does not preclude additional Council funding to achieve enhanced levels of storm-water treatment.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The SMP was developed in consultation with parties specified in the conditions of the Comprehensive Consent:

· Te Ngai Tūahuriri Rūnanga.

· The Christchurch-West Melton Water Management Zone Committee.

· The Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board.

· The Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board.

· The Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

· The Department of Conservation.

· The Canterbury Regional Council Regional Engineer.

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

5.2.1 Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board.

5.2.2 Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board.

5.2.3 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

5.3 Early engagement with Styx Living Laboratory Trust started in July 2023. A meeting was held to explain the purpose of the SMP and discuss plans for consultation. The Styx Living Laboratory Trust agreed to share the consultation with their network.

5.4 The Styx Living Laboratory Trust requested information on how the water quality index (WQI) was measured. Staff advised that the index amalgamates data from 11 individual water quality parameters.

5.5 Public consultation started on 25 July and ran until 4 September 2023.

5.6 An email was sent to 159 key stakeholders, including Spencerville Residents Association, Belfast Community Network, Department of Conservation, Environment Canterbury, New Zealand Salmon Anglers, Avon Heathcote Estuary Ihūtai Trust, ECO Canterbury Environmental Network, Ōpāwaho Heathcote River Network, Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society and Mahaanui Kurataiao (MKT).

5.7 Key local businesses were contacted through this process, identified as those who could significantly impact local stormwater quality, including construction companies, golf courses, manufacturing industries, car repair shops, agricultural businesses, and landscaping companies.

5.8 The consultation was posted on the council’s Facebook page, and local Facebook pages including the Brooklands community, Bishopdale/Papanui/Bryndwr & Surrounds Community, Avonhead/Burnside/Bishopdale/Ilam Community Page, Bishopdale Community Group, Redwood Belfast and Surrounds, and the Papanui/Redwood Community Page, inviting submissions on the Let’s Talk webpage.

5.9 Consultation documents were delivered to Papanui Service Centre, Bishopdale Community Library, Redwood Library, Civic Offices, Spencerville Community Hub and Belfast Community Network on 4 August 2023.

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

5.10 The Let’s Talk page was viewed 725 times, with the Summary Stormwater Management Plan document downloaded 120 times and the Full Stormwater Management Plan document 80 times.

5.11 Eight submissions were made from the following:

5.11.1 Two Community Boards - Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board and the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board.

5.11.2 Three recognised organisations - Christchurch International Airport Limited, Styx Living Laboratory Trust, and Department of Conservation.

5.11.3 Three individuals.

5.12 Key issues raised by submitters are addressed by staff in Attachment B. All submissions were unique with no overarching themes able to be drawn from them. It is advised that elected members read submissions in their entirety.

5.13 Material supplied by the Christchurch International Airport Company Limited has been included in the SMP as Appendix G (bird strike management advice). This was the only submission which introduced content into the plan.

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 Stormwater Drainage

6.2.1 Activity: Stormwater Drainage

· Level of Service: 14.0.2.1 Council manages the stormwater network in a responsible and sustainable manner: Number of abatement notices regarding Council resource consents related to discharges from the stormwater networks per year - 0 abatement notices

6.3 Flood Protection and Control Works.

6.3.1 Activity: Flood Protection and Control Works

· Level of Service: 14.1.7.1 Reduce pollution of waterbodies from discharge of urban contaminants to waterways: Annual rolling average reduction in the discharge of zinc/copper/Total Suspended Solids (TSS) to be equal or greater than that required to meet the reduction set in the Comprehensive Stormwater Network Discharge Consent (CSNDC) for 2023 and 2028, derived through contaminant load reduction modelling of the stormwater treatment facilities which have been installed – Pass.

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, being a plan generated for the purpose of statutory compliance.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 The Council has committed itself where possible to work in partnership with Papatipu Rūnanga, with assistance from Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd, to implement the Comprehensive Consent. The Comprehensive Consent deals with a wide range of significant decisions to be made in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

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

6.7 The impact on Mana Whenua can be assessed with reference to Policies and Issues in the Maahanui Iwi Management Plan which states expected outcomes for activities covered by the SMP. The SMP acknowledges the Iwi Management Plan policies but cannot deliver on some issues due to constraints on its scope. This may limit Mana Whenua support as indicated by Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd in early commentary in relation to its Position Statement.

6.8 A position statement is to be supplied by Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd on behalf of Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga in lieu of consultation. The Position Statement is awaited.

6.9 The Council is working, with assistance from Maahanui Kurataiao Ltd, to ensure that implementation of the plan enhances mana whenua values where possible as outlined in the Maahanui Iwi Management Plan objectives.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.10 Climate change is taken into account in design rainfall intensities.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.11 Accessibility is not relevant to this plan.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - this SMP does not initiate any additional capital projects.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - operational costs are business as usual, however operating costs will increase as new treatment basins are built.

7.3 Funding Source – The funding for implementing the SMP is held within existing projects and programmes in the current 2021-31 Long Term Plan.

Other He mea anō

7.4 Not applicable.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The Local Government Act 2002 provides the statutory power for the Council to make this decision.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 The other crucial legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision is that the stormwater management plan is produced to enable the Council to comply with a resource consent issued under the Resource Management Act.

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 The Canterbury Regional Council may question aspects of the stormwater management plan including how targets were set for contaminant load mitigation. In this case the two organisations can discuss how targets could be revised. This could also happen at any stage after the plan has been submitted within its ten year review period as more effective treatment/mitigation options become available.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Pūharakekenui-Styx Stormwater Management Plan	23/63671	34
b ⇩	Pūharakekenui Styx SMP - Submission Table (Public)	23/1718187	169

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

Paul Dickson - Drainage Engineer

Samantha Smith - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Kevin McDonnell - Team Leader Asset Planning

Brent Smith - Head of Three Waters

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

12 December 2023

7. New Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Area - QEII Park
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1647891
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Evangeline Dispo, Policy Analyst (Evangeline.Dispo@ccc.govt.nz) Jenna Marsden, Senior Policy Analyst (Jenna.Marsden@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 This report recommends the Council amend Schedule 2 of the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018 to include Queen Elizabeth II Park (QEII) as a Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Area.

1.2 The report has been written in response to the Council resolution CNCL/2023/117 of 4 October 2023 asking staff to investigate establishing an alcohol ban at QEII following the recommendation of the Waitai Coastal-Burwood- Linwood Community Board.

1.3 The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy 2019. The level of significance was determined by the benefits and opportunities to the Council and the community, the minimal cost, and by the low number of people affected or with an interest.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Agree that there is sufficient support for including QEII as an alcohol ban area for large events.

2. Amend Schedule 2 (Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Areas) of the Christchurch City Council Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018, as set out in Attachment A, to include QEII as an area to which a large-scale event alcohol ban can apply under clause 6 of the bylaw, noting that the ban will only apply to specific events, nominated on a case-by-case basis.

3. Agree, as set out in Attachment A, that the QEII large-scale event alcohol ban will apply to the area bounded by both sides of the roads: Frosts Road, Beach Road, Ascot Avenue, Bower Avenue, Travis Road and back to Frosts Road as Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Area, for 24 hours on specified event days.

4. Determine, in accordance with section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, that the amendment is the most appropriate way of addressing the problem; the most appropriate form of bylaw; and that it is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

5. Determine, in accordance with section 147A (1)(a) of the Local Government Act 2002 that the amendment can be justified as reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.

6. Approve the amendment listed recommendation 2 coming into force on 18 December 2023.

7. Approve that staff are otherwise authorised to make any typographical changes or correct minor errors before the amendment comes into force.

8. Give public notice as soon as practicable that the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018 has been amended, that it comes into effect on 18 December 2023, and that copies of the bylaw may be inspected and obtained at the Council’s offices, or on its website, without payment.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Staff consider a bylaw amendment to include QEII as a large-scale event alcohol ban area is appropriate because:

· there is evidence of nuisance and antisocial behaviour because of public drinking when there have previously been large-scale events held at QEII;

· there is general support for the proposal, including strong support from the Police. The Police are responsible for enforcement of alcohol bans and consider them necessary for many large events to help minimise the risk of antisocial behaviour and alcohol-related harm;

· it brings large-scale events at QEII into alignment with those held in Hagley Park and Rawhiti Domain, so the alcohol ban requirement can be applied consistently across these venues; and

· there is evidence that application of similar alcohol bans at Hagley Park and Rawhiti Domain for large-scale events has improved the behaviour of people outside the event venue.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 No change to the bylaw (no alcohol bans for large events at QEII). Staff do not recommend this option noting that QEII has experienced antisocial issues at past events. This option does not address the identified issues, nor aim to improve safety for QEII facility users and attendees whenever a licensed large-scale event is on.

4.2 Include QEII in Schedule 2 when the Bylaw is reviewed in 2026. The current bylaw is scheduled for review in 2026^{^[1]}. The Council could choose to delay making this amendment until that time. However, this option would mean that any upcoming events at QEII could not have alcohol bans applied. Staff note there is an immediate identified need for an alcohol ban at three upcoming large-scale events at QEII in January and February 2024. The Police and event organisers would like these events to have an alcohol ban to help mitigate and manage any potential issues that arise from antisocial behaviour related to public drinking while these events are on.

4.3 Impose a temporary alcohol ban at QEII under Clause 5 of the Bylaw. Staff considered the ways an alcohol ban could be applied at QEII. An alternative option is to impose a temporary ban by way of a Council resolution made under Clause 5 of the bylaw. Staff do not recommend this option because:

· it does not align with how we manage alcohol bans at other large-scale event venues in Christchurch, including Hagley Park and Rawhiti Domain; and

· it is not the most efficient approach. A temporary alcohol ban under clause 5 would only apply to the known event date(s) specified at the time of decision in the Council resolution. Any future events of a similar nature at the same location would require a subsequent temporary alcohol ban via Council resolution.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 QEII will host three large-scale events in January and February 2024 with over 4,000 attendees per event. These events will be licensed to sell alcoholic drinks within the event venue.

5.2 Event organisers MultiEvents Ltd presented to the Waitai Community Board on 7 August 2023 requesting a 24-hour temporary alcohol ban at QEII Park and its surrounding streets on event days. They consider an alcohol ban will provide an additional security measure, prevent antisocial behaviour around the event site during an event, minimise the occurrence of intoxication, and will generally help their events to run safely and smoothly.

Ability to impose alcohol bans at events.

5.3 The Council specifies large-scale event alcohol ban areas under the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018. These are specific areas where an alcohol ban can be applied temporarily when the venue hosts large-scale events. Schedule 2 of the bylaw identifies Hagley Park and Rawhiti Domain / Thomson Park as current alcohol ban areas for large-scale events.

5.4 Large-scale event alcohol bans are applied on a case-by-case basis in these locations. Clause 6 of the bylaw provides for events to be nominated as a ‘Large-Scale Event’ so that a 24-hour temporary alcohol ban can be imposed, taking into consideration the nature of the event, number of attendees, and history of the event.

History of Large-Scale Event Alcohol Bans (Hagley Park)

5.5 The first 24-hour large-scale event alcohol ban under clause 6 of the bylaw was put in place in 2019 for the Electric Avenue Music Festival event held in Hagley Park. The bans at Hagley Park have improved the general behaviour of people congregating and drinking in areas around an event venue.

5.6 Prior to the introduction of alcohol bans for large-scale events at Hagley Park, the Police observed problematic preloading in the vicinity of the Hagley Park event venue, causing significant alcohol-related problems including misbehaviour by intoxicated people, littering, fighting, and trespassing onto private properties to urinate and defecate. The Police recommend the consistent application of alcohol bans on areas around an event venue, which they actively enforce in order to reduce alcohol-related misbehaviour and keep park users safe.

5.7 This summer period, seven events have been nominated as large-scale events subject to an alcohol ban at Hagley Park.

Issues at QEII and its surrounding area

5.8 In November 2022, large-scale events were brought back to QEII Park. The football fields at the park hosted several events including Groove Armada, the Golden Festival, Fat Boy Slim and Netsky, each attracting over 4,000 attendees. These events were licensed to serve alcohol within event premises. The Police reported that a stabbing occurred at one of the February events. This incident was a serious concern, particularly for event staff, facility users and neighbouring residents.

5.9 The Police strongly support a 24-hour temporary alcohol ban at QEII on large-scale event days. The Police report that preloading and sideloading are prevalent ahead of many large events and recommend a temporary alcohol ban at QEII on event days as necessary. An alcohol ban provides a tool for the Police to help manage and minimise the risk of antisocial behaviour and alcohol-related harm at these large-scale events.

5.10 Staff have sought the views of relevant stakeholders. Their concerns include:

· alcohol-associated risks and incidents of intoxicated people urinating in the car park after events.

· significant amount of litter (bottles or cans) left in the surrounding areas after events and the associated clean-up costs; and

· the stabbing reported earlier, which raised concerns about potential violence associated with large numbers of intoxicated people.

5.11 The decision affects the New Brighton ward. The Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board strongly support alcohol bans at large-scale event days at QEII.

Public Consultation Te Tukanga Kōrerorer

5.12 Early engagement with key stakeholders started in mid-October 2023. Staff met relevant stakeholders working in surrounding areas of QEII to discuss the proposed ban and seek early feedback. The Police and New Brighton Project supported putting in place an alcohol ban at QEII during large-scale events to improve community safety and to keep the Park area clean.

5.13 Staff also consulted with relevant council staff that manage QEII Park and facilities. The Council’s Events Team, Parks Team and QEII Facility Centre staff all support an alcohol ban on large-scale events to keep staff and customers using QEII facilities safe.

5.14 Public consultation ran from Monday 16 October to Monday 6 November 2023. Emails were sent to 43 key stakeholders, including NZ Police, Avonside Girls’ and Shirley Boys’ High Schools, St Johns, Te Whatu Ora, ReNew Brighton, New Brighton Project, New Brighton Residents’ Association, North New Brighton/North Beach Residents' Association, New Brighton Business and Landowners Association, and Parklands Residents’ Association Inc. Consultation was also posted on the Council Facebook, Newsline, and local community Facebook pages inviting submissions through the Council’s Let's Talk webpage.

5.15 A feedback stand was set up at Taiora QEII reception with token voting boxes to collect feedback on community sentiment throughout the consultation.

5.16 Staff spoke with local businesses, who were largely supportive of the proposal. Many businesses also agreed to advertise the consultation at their premises by displaying provided consultation posters.

5.17 Consultation documents were delivered to approximately 205 local residents who are within the proposed ban area or bordering the ban area.

5.18 Consultation documents were also available in Civic Offices and Parklands Library.

Summary of feedback Ngā Tāpaetanga

5.19 A total of 48 submissions were made, four from organisations, and 44 from individuals including those with businesses on affected streets. Of these submitters, 9 live or have a business on affected streets, 21 live in local suburbs, and 18 live elsewhere.

5.20 Twenty-nine submitters support (60%), and 18 oppose (38%), the proposal for an alcohol ban at QEII during large events. One submitter was neutral.

5.21 Of the 29 submitters who support the proposal, feedback included that an alcohol ban would help address alcohol-associated issues (unruly behaviour from intoxicated people, drunkenness, urinating on car park and on fences of private residents); and littering problems (discarded empty alcohol cans and bottles including broken bottles on footpaths) when a large-scale event is happening at QEII. One organisation said they would always like an alcohol ban at QEII.

5.22 A number of those against a ban on event days believe the ban is not necessary, and commented they haven’t heard of any issues that would require an alcohol ban. A number misunderstood that the alcohol ban would apply inside the event venue.

5.23 Those who live or have a business within the affected ban area had a clear preference for a ban (8 in favour, 1 against). Submitters in local suburbs were split (12 in favour, 9 against), and those who live elsewhere were also split (9 in favour, 1 somewhat in favour, 8 against):

5.24 Key themes raised by submitters are described below:

Theme	Description	Mentions (# of submitters)
General support for the idea	Felt this was a great idea and would help with current issues such as antisocial behaviour and littering and would help assist the police in managing those issues, so long as there is adequate signage and bins.	13
Wanting to reduce noise, rubbish, loitering, and other antisocial behaviour	Mentions negative behaviours and how an alcohol ban would potentially reduce them, including loitering, noise, littering (including drinks and cans), unruly behaviour, drunkenness, public urination, urination on private property, and other antisocial behaviour.	8
Misunderstanding about an alcohol ban within the event	A comment which misunderstands that alcohol is still able to be consumed within the event within licensed areas.	6
An alcohol ban would prevent events coming to the east	Concern that an alcohol ban would prevent event organisers from wanting to host concerts in the east, prevent the community from being able to enjoy these events, and speaking about the benefits of these events for the east and how well they are run.	6
Lack of an issue with alcohol or antisocial behaviour	Mentioned not seeing any negative impacts for the area when events are run, including lack of issues with alcohol.	5
Concern about how alcohol ban would be enforced	Mentioned being unsure about how this would work, who would be policing it, that enforcement wouldn’t work, or that it would require adequate police resources.	4
Concern about impact on people wanting to enjoy the park during an event	Do not punish those who are peacefully enjoying the event outside, who may be drinking alcohol but are not displaying antisocial behaviour.	4

Note: This table reflects the comments provided by some submitters to supplement their indication of support or opposition. Individual submitters may be represented in multiple theme categories.’.

5.25 A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment B.

5.26 In addition to submissions, there were 790 votes via the token box at Taiora QEII. Token box results show that 447 people (57%) thought the proposal was a ‘great idea’, 326 (41%) were ‘not a fan’, and 17 (2%) were ‘not sure’. Customer service staff noted there was confusion around whether the ban will be applied within the event venue, which will not.

5.27 Staff note the support and views expressed by stakeholders, businesses and community residents who have an interest in the alcohol ban at QEII Park and surrounding streets on event days. Community views highlighted some of the issues that have been occurring and a number expressed the benefits in terms of safety for community residents, event goers and users of QEII facilities and staff.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This report is aligned to the priorities of the Christchurch Alcohol Action Plan which seeks to create safer public space in the city.

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

6.3 Strategic Planning and Policy

· Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

· Level of Service: 17.0.19.4 Bylaws and regulatory policies to meet emerging needs and satisfy statutory requirements - Carry out bylaw reviews in accordance with ten-year bylaw review schedule and statutory requirements

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The decision aligns with the approach taken to alcohol bans for large-scale events in Hagley Park and Rawhiti Domain and is consistent with the intent of clause 6 of the Council’s Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018. It also supports the Council’s strategic priority on building trust and confidence in the Council through meaningful partnerships and communication, listening to and working with residents.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 The decisions in this report address alcohol-related antisocial behaviour linked to public drinking and do not have direct relevance to climate change.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.8 The Council decision does not raise any accessibility considerations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – The estimated cost of $176.00 to cover the Public Notice for the Bylaw amendment, as required by section 147C of the Local Government Act 2002. There will be costs for signage and installation when the first event is nominated as Large-Scale Event under clause 6 of the bylaw. There is an indicative cost of $50 per sign, excluding installation.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – There are no ongoing costs for the Council in relation to this decision. Enforcement of the alcohol ban rests with the New Zealand Police and only applies if an event is nominated to be a Large-Scale Event under clause 6 of the bylaw. Event organisers will be responsible for any costs to install/remove signs.

7.3 Funding Source – The costs of the Public Notice for the bylaw amendment will be covered from the existing budgets of the Strategic Policy Team. The signage production costs will be covered by existing budgets of the Parks and Transport teams.

Other He mea anō

7.4 None identified.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Section 147 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) allows the Council to make a bylaw for alcohol control purposes. The Christchurch City Council Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018 prohibits the consumption and possession of alcohol in designated public places. The term ‘public places’ is defined in section 147 to mean a place that is open to or is being used by the public, whether free or on payment of a charge, and whether any owner or occupier of the place is lawfully entitled to exclude or eject any person from it; but it does not include licensed premises.

8.2 Clause 6 and Schedule 2 deal with large-scale event alcohol ban areas. A large-scale event alcohol ban will only apply when the Chief Executive has nominated an event to be a large-scale event. To add new areas to the large-scale alcohol ban area in Schedule 2 the Council must undertake a bylaw amendment.

8.3 When the Council is amending or making a new bylaw, it must complete an analysis under section 155 of the Act. In addition, under section 147A(1)(a) of the Act the Council must be satisfied that the impact of doing so can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.

8.4 Under section 155 of the Act, the Council must be satisfied that the bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing a perceived problem. If it is the most appropriate way of addressing a problem, the Council must decide whether it is the most appropriate form of bylaw and where or not the bylaw gives rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA).

8.5 The Legal Services Unit is satisfied that section 155 requirements are met as below:

Whether the bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the problems

· There are three music events scheduled to take place in January and February at QEII where the expected number of attendees will exceed 3000 people. It is anticipated that these events will attract large crowds that will preload in the surrounding areas. Event organisers, with the support of local stakeholders, have requested that Council implement a large-scale event alcohol ban on the day of these events following the success of this type of ban at other venues in the city.

· While Police have other legislative powers to deal with disorder and alcohol-related offending, the bylaw provides that a police officer may, without a warrant, for the purposes of ascertaining whether alcohol is present, search a container (bag) or vehicle in or entering the event/ban area subject to informing the person that they have the opportunity to remove the container or vehicle from that place (section 169 of the Act). Adding QEII to Schedule 2 of the bylaw permits staff to nominate the scheduled events as large-scale events alcohol bans areas. Once an event is nominated as a large-scale event and is publicly notified in accordance with section 170(3) of the Act, the obligation for Police to give prior warning no longer applies.

· Although Council staff have no powers of search and arrest, this amendment will allow the Council, with the assistance of the Police, to effectively manage and reduce the alcohol related harm that might occurs at the QEII during events that attract huge numbers of attendees where drinking is likely to occur.

Whether the bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw

· The form of the current bylaw is generally appropriate to be used for large-scale events at QEII. The bylaw is relatively straight forward, and the prohibitions, restrictions, exceptions and details of the Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Areas are all contained in Schedule 2 of the bylaw.

· Schedule 2 is intended to provide a mechanism whereby the bylaws set out all the detail of any such Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Areas. Alcohol restrictions will only apply when the Chief Executive has nominated an event to be a large-scale event. If the Council wishes to add new areas, then these will need to be added by way of a Bylaw amendment.

Whether the bylaw is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

8.6 Making QEII Park a Large-Scale Event Alcohol Ban Area by amending Schedule 2 of the bylaw could give rise to some implications in relation to NZBORA, in particular, the right to freedom of movement. However, as the proposed amendment does not completely prohibit people with alcohol from being in, or moving about in all public places, and is specific to only one location on the day of large-scale events, it provides demonstrably justifiable limits in a free and democratic society, and is therefore consistent with NZBORA.

8.7 The Legal Services Unit is satisfied the proposal can be justified as a reasonable limitation on rights and freedoms based on the following:

· The amendment itself only provides the ability to implement an alcohol ban at this QEII during large-scale events, rather than making the area a permanent alcohol ban area.

· Any future alcohol ban applied at QEII under this provision will only apply on the day of the nominated event and it will only directly affect small group of people who enjoy drinking alcohol outside the event venue vicinity. Staff anticipate alcohol bans will likely only apply for a total of three days over the 2023/24 summer period, based on the current resource consent conditions known events planned.

· The ban has benefits to surrounding residents and businesses, and the wider public who are users of the park and Taiora QEII.

8.8 The decision in this report has been assessed has having low significance. Based on this, section 156(1)(b) of the Act applies, and requires that Council consult the affected parties and those who likely have interest on the Council decision in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of section 82 of the Act.

8.9 The Legal Services Unit is satisfied the above legislative requirements have been complied with as set out in paragraphs 5.12 to 5.27.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.10 There is legal context, issue, or implications relevant to this decision which are detailed below.

8.11 The alcohol bans do not apply to areas or activities that are covered by an alcohol licence issues under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. This includes public places that are part of a licenced premises’ outdoor area, where permission to occupy that area has been granted by the Council. Also, the ban does not prohibit the consumption of alcohol in private land such as licenced premises or private residences.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 People could misinterpret the alcohol ban at QEII will cover licensed premises and prevent event attendees from purchasing and consuming alcohol within the event venue. To mitigate this, staff will reiterate the key messaging that this applies to the public spaces surrounding events only, and not the event itself, (which will often hold its own alcohol licence); or private property such as residences and businesses.

9.2 People not knowing about the alcohol ban when one is in place. This will be mitigated with signage around the ban area installed as per legislative requirements and Public Notice published, if needed.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Draft amendment to Schedule 2 of the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2018	23/1888768	227
b ⇩	Attachment B - Submissions received on QEII as alcohol ban area for large events	23/1888779	229

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

Evangeline Dispo - Policy Analyst

Jenna Marsden - Senior Policy Analyst

Maryem Al Samer - Legal Counsel

Elizabeth Wilson - Team Leader Policy

Samantha Smith - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

David Griffiths - Head of Strategic Policy & Resilience

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Council

12 December 2023

8. Suburban Regeneration Biannual Report - April to September 2023
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1458981
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Janine Sowerby, Senior Planner, Urban Regeneration (janine.sowerby@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Bruce Rendall, Head of City Growth & Property (bruce.rendall@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 This is an information only report advising the Council of progress implementing suburban regeneration projects in the period April to September 2023.

1.2 Staff have been reporting on suburban regeneration implementation progress on a biannual basis, as part of delivering on the Urban Place Making Levels of Service performance targets.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receive the information in the Suburban Regeneration Biannual Report for April to September 2023.

3. Brief Summary

3.1 Attachment A provides details and images of multiple regeneration projects across the suburban parts of the city. The attachment:

· Addresses locations and projects which saw activity during the reporting period.

· Summarises information from across the Council and from other organisations (including ChristchurchNZ and the Council’s city-making partners).

· Is structured around the currently agreed prioritisation of suburban regeneration locations, while acknowledging that recently developed Community Board Plans have also prioritised specific suburban regeneration initiatives in several of these locations.

3.2 A few highlights include:

3.2.1 Higher priority suburban regeneration locations

• New Brighton: Having acquired 56 Brighton Mall, the Council began demolition of the former Westpac building in late September, in anticipation of a future extension to Oram Ave.

• Linwood Village: Artwork for the interactive play art in Doris Lusk Reserve is now in production, anticipating installation this calendar year.

• Bishopdale: Resource Consent was granted for alterations and extensions to the former Mitre 10 building, for retail and healthcare uses.

3.2.2 Other master plan locations

• Main Road: A Resource Consent application to convert Redcliff’s disused supermarket building into a residential apartment complex progressed to hearing stage.

• Edgeware Village: A redevelopment comprising four commercial tenancies progressed on the NE corner of the Cranford St/Edgeware Rd intersection.

• Sumner Village: Progress continued on four private developments, including two significant mixed-use redevelopments.

• Sydenham: ChristchurchNZ progressed a vision and framework for transforming the wider Sydenham and Lancaster Park area into a green and thriving future, mixed-use neighbourhood.

• Lyttelton: The upgraded Lyttelton Information Centre public toilets were completed, to a lot of positive feedback from visitors.

3.2.3 Other suburban locations/grant funding

• Diamond Harbour: Staff progressed initial information gathering, technical analysis and concept planning for a large Council-owned site in Hunters Rd.

• City-making partners Life in Vacant Spaces (LiVS) and The Green Lab continued supporting projects in multiple locations across the city, including a Backyard Resilience workshop at the Tiny Shops site in Linwood Village.

• Community led initiatives (such as murals, a Tool Lendery and an upcoming local Christmas Parade) were supported through Place Partnership, Enliven Places Rates Incentive and Shape Your Place Toolkit funding. These collectively enabled creativity, site activation and external technical advice for projects in Linwood Village, Birdlings Flat, Richmond, Belfast, Phillipstown, New Brighton and Sydenham.

3.3 Annual Plan consultation resulted in public support for extending the City Vacant Differential rating to relevant suburban centres. Staff surveyed and confirmed New Brighton, Linwood Village, Sydenham and Lyttelton centres as potential candidates. Decisions will be made via the process of preparing the new Long Term Plan.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Council Suburban Regeneration Biannual Report - April to September 2023 12 December 2023 - Attachment A	23/1966261	242

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Janine Sowerby - Senior Planner

Approved By

Carolyn Bonis - Team Leader Urban Regeneration

Bruce Rendall - Head of City Growth & Property

Council

12 December 2023

9. Better Off Funding - Ferrymead Heritage Park Second Tranche
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1272309
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Joshua Wharton, Community Funding Team Leader, (Joshua.Wharton@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 to enable the Council to consider approving the payment of the second tranche of Better-Off funding allocated to Ferrymead Heritage Park.

1.2 This report relates to the following 21 June 2023 Council resolution (CNCL/2023/00076):

1.2.1 $400,000 to the Ferrymead Trust to accelerate or enhance their projects or operations so they continue to contribute to important community experience and subject to the following terms and conditions:

· Joint funding with the Ferrymead Trust on a 50:50 basis for the operation of the Ferrymead Trust from 1 July 2023 to 21 December 2023;

· Ferrymead Trust retaining a suitable qualified entity to develop a business plan that substantively implements the February 2023 BDO Christchurch Limited Report “Final Strategic and Opportunities Review Summary Report” by November 2023 with sufficient detail to clearly demonstrate how Ferrymead Trust will achieve ongoing financial sustainability including what actions will be taken, by whom, when, and at what cost. This is to inform Council’s consideration of long-term funding in the Long-Term Plan;

· Milestones that recognise progress implementing the BDO Christchurch Limited Report;

· That staff work with Ferrymead Trust to agree to funding terms and conditions and, if necessary, identify any milestones for grant payments, prior to making the grant payments to the Trust.

1.3 $111,700 of the total $400,000 grant was allocated as a first tranche to support business-plan development until 31 December 2023. Any future tranches are to be considered by Council in context of the Trust’s performance against key milestones. This report covers the second tranche.

1.4 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the fact that the decision concerns the allocation of existing funding against set criteria and pre-existing outcomes. As such this has been discussed amongst staff and immediate stakeholders impacted by this decision.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve a second tranche payment of $140,000 from the Metropolitan Better Off Fund to The Ferrymead Trust towards business plan implementation.

2. Provide the following advice to the Ferrymead Trust on their business planning process to date:

a. Any expectation of future financial support from the Council should be limited to an application to the contestable Strengthening Communities Fund for an amount no greater than historical norms.

b. The Ferrymead Trust should consider the impacts of climate change in their future planning primarily their response to adverse events, sea level rise and emissions.

c. The business plan should contemplate how the Ferrymead Trust will work with its stakeholder organisations to secure the future of vulnerable buildings on site, be this repair, removal, or demolition.

3. Request that staff bring a report to the Council for consideration of a third tranche payment in 2024 for allocation of the remaining $148,300. Noting that Council will take into consideration the degree to which the Ferrymead Trust has incorporated the advice provided in resolutions 2.a, 2.b and 2.c. (above) into its business planning process.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The Ferrymead Trust have demonstrated the achievement of key milestones through progress updates to Council staff namely:

· Continued to operate the Park throughout the period. There has been an increase in visitation that will be communicated to Councillors in early December 2023 when figures are available.

· Engaged with Lyttelton Port around encouraging Cruise Ships to offer travel packages that include visits to the Heritage Park.

· Developing a comprehensive business plan, demonstrating implementation of the BDO (Business Advisory) strategic report recommendations, and peer-reviewed by Flourish Consulting.

· Conducted a governance review. This embedded a new structure with the Trust as the most senior body at the Park, overseeing the Company, and supported by an advisory board with membership across societies at the Park. This is a significant element of the immediate improvement initiatives required. Momentum will continue with support from the NZ Institute of Directors to ensure proper training for new and remaining Trustees.

· Developed a range of propositions for a new operating model at the Park, which will minimise costs for the company without significantly disrupting the member-society activities or general public. These proposals have been co-designed with the societies at the Park over a number of months and will be one of the first pieces of work to be implemented by the Trust in 2024.

· Built a new cohesive strategic vision for the park as a “living museum of crafts, technology and heritage”. Details of this vision, and alignment with Council Strategic Objectives are outlined in Attachment A.

· Identified three immediate projects to directly benefit the offerings and management of the Park, which they aim to implement immediately. These are: Good Governance, Te Ao Māori Partnership, and Environmental Sustainability.

· Planned three distinct future improvement projects for long-term organisational sustainability. These are: Infrastructure Improvements, Guardianship of Resources, and Creation of a World-Class Visitor Experience.

3.2 The recommended second Tranche will allow the Park to operate, continue their business planning process and address Council feedback. It will leave $148,300 from the allocation of the initial $400,000 in June, for Council to consider paying as a third tranche in mid-2024.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 To award $288,300 to The Ferrymead Trust, which is the entirety of the remaining allocation agreed by the Council for the development of the Park on the 21^st of June, 2023.

4.1.1 This option is not recommended as it would disincentivise the change process and the response to Council’s feedback to date.

4.2 To decline to award of any of the remaining $288,300 allocated to The Trust.

4.2.1 This option is not recommended as it withdraws financial support part way through a transformative process. The Trust have indicated that this approach may result in staff-layoffs in early February-2024 and imminent closure of Ferrymead Heritage Park for community access.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Following Council’s initial resolution on 21 June 2023, staff worked with representatives from the Ferrymead Trust to agree funding terms and key milestones. The following agreement was reached:

5.2 The grant of $400,000 will be paid in a minimum of two tranches, with any future tranche(s) contingent on key milestones being met and with Council direction.

· The first tranche will support, (on a 50:50 or dollar-for-dollar basis with the Ferrymead Trust). The Park’s general operational expenses, business case development; and the implementation of key actions in consideration of the February 2023 BDO Christchurch Limited Report.

5.3 Any future tranches will be considered and agreed at the end of the 2023 calendar year. Any future tranches will be agreed in context of the following milestones:

· Regular reporting from the Trust, highlighting progress against objectives in the development programme (Attachment C).

· A completed business plan, peer reviewed by an external body, clearly detailing a realistic route to future stability for the Park.

· A completed financial plan for the coming twelve months, including a potential quantum to the Long Term Plan.

· A completed roadmap for governance structure improvements, including a facilitated workshop between Ferrymead Trust, Ferrymead Park Limited and any other pertinent organisations at the park.

5.4 Having agreed the above funding terms and milestones, staff processed a first grant payment of $111,700 to the Trust in early August 2023.

5.5 The Ferrymead Trust have heard from member societies at the park that they wish the Trust to pursue an ‘ambitious’ development and change programme. To implement this ambitious approach to Park development, The Ferrymead Trust plan to approach Council’s Long-Term Plan with a request of up to $1,000,000 per annum an ongoing financial support.

5.5.1 Staff have advised that in the current financial climate, such a request would be difficult for Council and hard to reconcile with the shared goal of financial sustainability.

5.5.2 Conversely the Trust have advised that if Council’s funding continued at historical levels they would be unable to pursue some of the bolder change-proposals of their business plan but would continue to enact smaller iterative changes where and when possible.

5.6 Having reviewed correspondence to date, staff propose Council provide the following feedback to the Trust in relation to any approval of tranche two:

5.6.1 That the reliance of an annual subsidy of $1,000,000 from the Council does not meet the requirement of financial sustainability. Any expectation of future financial support from the Council should be limited to an application to the contestable Strengthening Communities Fund for an amount no greater than historical norms.

5.6.2 That the Trust consider the impacts of climate change in their future planning primarily their response to adverse events, sea level rise and emissions.

5.6.3 That the Trust consider how it will work with its stakeholder organisations to secure the future of vulnerable buildings on site, be this repair, removal or demolition.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This report supports the Te Haumako, Te Whitingia - Strengthening Communities Together Strategy:

· Objective 1.5: Support groups involved in providing access to arts, culture, heritage, recreation, and those who care for the environment.

· Objective 1.6: Facilitate and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

· Objective 1.7: Work with others to reduce loneliness and social isolation, with particular focus on intergenerational approaches.

· Objective 2.3: Support the community activation and kaitiakitanga of public places and spaces.

· Objective 3.4: Increase volunteering opportunities across the Council and the wider community and support the organisations providing such opportunities.

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

6.3 Communities and Citizens

6.3.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

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

· Level of Service: 2.3.1.2 Build volunteer participation through the effective administration of the community grant schemes. - Strengthening Communities Fund supports 2,185,000 volunteer hours annually, subject to eligible applications

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 The decision does 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 is not a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga. This is because the decision concerns the allocation of pre-approved community funding. While the Park have indicated a commitment to improving their Mana-Whenua partnership (specifically Ngāi Tūāhuriri and Ngāti Wheke), it is unknown at this stage how this may manifest.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 It is proposed that Council ask the Trust to consider the impacts of climate change in their future planning primarily their response to adverse events, sea level rise and emissions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.8 The decision does not have accessibility considerations because the decision primarily concerns the allocation of pre-approved community funding.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – the cost of implementing the decision will be met within existing operational budgets.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – as above.

7.3 Funding Source – existing operational budgets. Grants will be paid from the Community Partnerships programme - Better Off Funding.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

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

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There is a material risk that the implementation of the transformative business plan will require substantial ongoing Council community funding that is not affordable or acceptable to the Council.

9.1.1 This risk is partially mitigated by Council clearly communicating to the Trust that the reliance of any substantial annual subsidy from the Council does not meet the requirement of financial sustainability. Additionally, any expectation of future financial support from the Council should be limited to an application to the contestable Strengthening Communities Fund for an amount no greater than historical norms.

9.1.2 This remains a material risk, will be monitored and will be used to inform any future decision making advice provided to the Council.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Ferrymead Heritage Park Redevelopment Programme Update	23/1909595	261
b ⇩	Ferrymead Business Plan Progress - November 2023	23/1909550	263
c	Ferrymead Heritage Park - Development Programme - Confidential	23/1100330

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Josh Wharton - Team Leader Community Funding

Approved By

Gary Watson - Manager Community Partnerships

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Council

12 December 2023

10. 2023-24 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund - Tenant Protection Service Collaboration, Kingdom Resources Ltd.
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1927462
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Joshua Wharton, Team Leader Community Funding (Joshua.Wharton@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of Report - Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider two applications for funding from its 2023/24 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund for the organisations listed in 3.1 below.

2. Officer Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Makes a grant of $40,000 to the Social Service Council of the Dioceses of Christchurch from its 2023/24 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund towards the Tenant Protection Service Collaboration.

2. Makes a grant of $30,000 to Kingdom Resources from its 2023/24 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund towards their Equipping Those in Need project.

3. Key Points - Ngā Take Matua

3.1 As outlined in the Decision Matrix (Attachment A), the below applications are being recommended to the Council for consideration for funding from the 2023/24 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund:

Funding Request Number	Organisation	Project Name	Amount Requested	Amount Recommended
00066849	Social Service Council of the Dioceses of Christchurch	Tenant Protection Service Collaboration	$40,000	$40,000
00066850	Kingdom Resources	Money, Food, Transport – Equipping Those in Need	$38,100	$30,000

3.2 There is currently a balance of $251,164 remaining in the fund.

Strategic Alignment - Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

3.3 The recommendations are aligned to the Strategic Framework and in particular the strategic priority of managing ratepayers' money wisely, delivering quality core services to the whole community and addressing the issues that are important to our residents. It will contribute to the community outcome of a collaborative confident city and is consistent with Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy.

Decision Making Authority - Te Mana Whakatau

3.4 Council can determine the allocation of the Discretionary Response Fund for each community.

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

3.6 The Fund does not cover:

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

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

Assessment of Significance and Engagement - Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

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

3.8 The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and/or with an interest. It is also due to the decision required being the allocation of an existing funs using approved criteria.

3.9 Due to the assessment of low significance, the applications have been discussed with the applicants and other stakeholders in the course of providing an assessment; no further community engagement and consultation is required.

Discussion - Kōrerorero

3.10 At the time of writing, the balance of the 2023-24 Discretionary Response Fund is as below.

Total Budget 2023-24	Granted to Date	Returns made to the DRF	Available for allocation	Balance if Staff Recommendation adopted
$585,679	$334,515	$0.00	$251,164	$181,164

3.11 $103,215 of the Metropolitan DRF funding pool this financial year has been approved to 16 organisations under delegation of the Head of the Community Governance and Partnerships Unit.

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

3.13 The Decision Matrixes in Attachment A provide detailed information regarding each application. This includes organisational details, project details, financial information and a staff assessment.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Discretionary Response Fund Decision Matrices	23/1924262	276

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

Josh Wharton - Team Leader Community Funding

Approved By

Gary Watson - Manager Community Partnerships

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Council

12 December 2023

11. Plan Change 5 - Final Approval
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1917877
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Abby Stowell, Policy Planner (Abby.Stowell@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	John Higgins, Head of Planning & Consents (John.Higgins@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek a decision by the Council to make Plan Change 5 operative. This follows Council's decisions to accept recommendations of the Hearings Panel and two appeals.

1.2 Plan Change 5 was notified in October 2020. This is the final step in the process for Plan Change 5.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve the changes to the District Plan as set out in the attached Plan Change 5 decision reports, Consent Orders of the Environment Court dated 1 February 2023 and 15 May 2023 and supplementary reports, pursuant to Clause 17(2) of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act, to become operative on 19^th December.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The staff recommendation is that Council approve making the plan change operative in accordance with the recommendations and supplementary reports of the hearings panel and the Consent orders issued by the Environment Court. The plan change has been subject to a robust process in accordance with the Resource Management Act.

3.2 The recommendations of the Hearings Panel are attached in Attachment A, the supplementary reports subsequently issued by the Hearings Panel with corrections to their earlier recommendations are in Attachment B and the Court orders from the Environment Court are in Attachment C.

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 5 operative. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that, following the end of the appeal period and the resolution of any appeals, a local authority must formally approve the changes to the plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 before the plan change becomes operative on a date that is nominated in a public notice.

4.2 There are no reasonable alternatives, having regard to the Council’s earlier decision to approve the plan change and the Court issuing consent orders to allow the appeals, consistent with what was agreed between the parties.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Plan change 5 amends the District Plan over 9 different topics:

· PC 5A reinforces the direction that offices and shops are to be primarily located in the Central City and commercial centres as well as clarifying the role of these centres as commercial focal points.

· PC5B clarifies and better reflects the intent and outcomes sought in the commercial chapter, including the role of centres and the types and scale of retail, offices and other activities that are anticipated in centres amongst other changes including definitions.

· PC5C clarifies what is sought and/or required in the Industrial chapter, including clearer direction for the redevelopment of former industrial land for residential and mixed uses that support good neighbourhood design amongst other changes including definitions.

· PC5D ensures that home-based businesses are of a type and scale appropriate in residential and rural areas through various changes including to definition.

· PC5E simplifies a rule for noise insulation near roads and railways.

· PC 5F changes zoning and overlays on the planning maps for identified sites, including to reflect what is already happening or anticipated, zone new roads and open spaces for their intended purpose, as well as realigning the zone boundaries between Christchurch and our neighbouring Districts, amongst other changes.

· PC 5G makes changes from the implementation of national direction that requires removal of car parking requirements. This includes consequential changes arising such as a landscaping rule for car parking areas, which is based on the number of car parks required.

· PC 5H provides for antenna associated with telecommunications at an appropriate scale.

· PC 5I enables temporary signs associated with general and local government elections (candidate and party) and referendums.

5.2 The plan change was publicly notified on 22 October 2020 and the submissions period closed on 30 November 2020. The summary of submissions was notified for further submissions on 28 January 2021, closing on 12 February 2021.

5.3 A hearings panel considered PC5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, 5F, 5G and 5H, with a hearing in December 2021. PC5I was not considered as there no submissions or consequential matters on this plan change. PC5E was heard separately on 13 February 2023.

5.4 Following the Council’s approval of the hearings panel’s recommendations on PC5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, 5F, 5G and 5H on 28 July 2022, two appeals were made to the Environment Court on PC5F and PC5B by Belfast Village Centre Limited and Retirement Villages Association of New Zealand respectively. The parties on both appeals reached agreement and Consent Orders were subsequently issued by the Environment Court. The consent orders are attached in Attachment C.

5.5 A Council decision was also made on 23 November 2022 to amend the earlier decision in respect of the zoning of 159 Main North Road from residential to industrial (Refer to Attachment B for the supplementary report of the hearings panel). There were no appeals on this matter.

5.6 Following the Council’s approval of the hearings panel’s recommendations on P5E on 3 May 2023, no appeals were received. Thereafter, Council staff noticed an omission in the activity status tables and an error in the numbering of a new matter of discretion in rule 6.1.8. In response to this, the hearings panel issued a supplementary report (attached in Attachment B) correcting their earlier recommendations. The Council subsequently approved amendments to its earlier decision on 18 October 2023 and no appeals were received.

5.7 The decision affects the whole city.

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

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.7 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 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 5 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 an 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 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. If this is not approved, the Council is in breach of its RMA obligations and there is a risk of legal challenge.

10. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

10.1 This is the last step in the plan change process.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇨	Attachment A Hearings Panels Recommendations (Under Separate Cover)	23/1917880
b ⇩	Attachemnt B Supplementary Reports	23/1917885	284
c ⇩	Attachment C Consent Orders	23/1917886	294

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Abby Stowell - Policy Planner

Darren Bridgett - Team Leader City Planning (E)

Approved By

Mark Stevenson - Manager Planning

Brent Pizzey - Senior Legal Counsel

Council

12 December 2023

12. Potential Sale of 14 Hasketts Road, Templeton to Pillaiyar Kovil Trust
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1839116
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Bruce Rendall, Head of City Growth and Property (Bruce.Rendall@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Jane Parfitt, Interim General Manager Infrastructure, Planning and Regulatory Services (Jane.Parfitt@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 This report seeks Council approval for a departure from policy.The Council has declared land surplus and delegated authority to officers to sell it. As the sale method departs from Council policy,the departure is being brought to Council for consideration.

1.2 The report is staff generated in response to the policy inconsistency.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by consideration of the level of impact of the policy departure.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approves a departure from the Disposal of Council Property Policy 2000 and the normal practice of an open, market process for 14 Hasketts Road, Templeton and notes that;

a. The inconsistency with policy is that Council is not proposing to publicly tender the disposal of this property.

b. The reason for the inconsistency is that dealing directly allows for achievements of Council’s strategic aims and allows for consideration of the impacts of use restrictions on value.

c. The Council has no intention to change the policy.

2. Approves unilateral dealings with Pillaiyar Kovil Trust for 14 Hasketts Road, Templeton.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 While Council’s policy and normal practice is to sell land using an open, market process, from time to time there are good reasons to depart from this policy. In the case of the disposal of 14 Hasketts Road, Templeton the good reasons include supporting achievement of Council's goals, a response to restrictions on use and rights, and achieving the timely disposal of land that was originally declared surplus in 2021.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Council could decide not to depart from policy. In this case officers would run an open market process.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 As part of the 2021 to 2031 Long Term Plan, the Council declared a property at 14 Hasketts Road surplus and approved its disposal subject to "ensuring that protections relating to noise and a restriction on quarrying are a condition of sale".

5.2 The Council has been approached by the Pillaiyar Kovil Trust, a charitable organisation set up for building a Hindu Temple and other purposes. The Trust is looking for land for the temple.

5.3 Staff indicated that Council had declared land in Hasketts Road surplus to requirements and suggested that the Pillaiyar Kovil Trust consider these properties. The group have inspected the property and undertaken their own due diligence about the noise issues. The group has now indicated that they would be interested in purchasing the property.

5.4 Acting under delegation, Council Officers have entered into a conditional sale and purchase agreement with the Pillaiyar Kovil Trust. The conditions are in the Council’s favour and allow for the final decision to made by the elected Council. The Sale and Purchase agreements contains terms that restrict the use of the land in line with the Council’s original resolution. These restrictions include covenants to be placed on the title.

5.5 When selling land, officers follow the requirements of legislation and the Council’s “Disposal of Council Property Policy 2000”. This policy states that:

· the Council's policy of publicly tendering properties for sale unless there is a clear reason for doing otherwise be confirmed as applying to all areas of the City ….

5.6 Normal practice is to treat the statement “clear reason for doing otherwise” as a policy inconsistency under Clause 80 of the Local Government Act 2002. This clause requires the Local Authority to clearly identify any significant inconsistencies with policy including the reasons for the inconsistency. The specific clause is:

A close-up of a document

Description automatically generated

5.7 In this case the proposed inconsistency is to not publicly tender 14 Hasketts Road. The proposed clear reasons for not publicly tendering this property are:

5.7.1 The proposed use of the land by the Hindu community (recognising that like all communities, the Hindu community will be pluralistic and diverse) is consistent with the Council's Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together and Multicultural Strategies. A private treaty transaction will support achievement of Council's goals in these strategies;

5.7.2 The land has restrictions that will reduce its attractiveness in the market (noise and quarrying). A private treaty transaction will guarantee a return at the market valuation; and

5.7.3 The timely disposal of land, which was declared surplus in 2021. Disposal has been delayed due to the lack of a clear strategy that allowed reasonable returns while still achieving the community responsive restrictions on use.

5.8 The relevant clauses of the Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy are:

5.8.1 Pillar 2: Place We support and help build connections between communities and their places and spaces to foster a sense of local identity, shared experience and stewardship.

· Objective 2.1: Encourage communities to create and sustain a sense of local identity and ownership.

· Objective 2.2: Work with new and changing communities in both rural and urban areas to build a sense of belonging.

5.9 The relevant clauses of the Multicultural Strategy are:

· Goal 4: Ōtautahi/Christchurch is a city of cultural vibrancy, diversity, inclusion and connection.

· Strengthen and connect all Christchurch people and communities.

· Support the programmes and other work undertaken by communities that seek to strengthen and/or connect Christchurch people and communities and celebrate what we have in common.

5.10 There are many ways to support communities including advice, funding and research. The proposal in this report proposes support by facilitating access to land through direct negotiation. It simplifies the process for the community groups while also allowing the council to achieve its objectives.

5.11 The use restrictions in clause 0 above include:

5.11.1 The site must be used as a Hindu Temple and Culture Centre and associated activities;

5.11.2 The property cannot be used for residential or quarrying purposes;

5.11.3 A restriction on complaining about noise, vibration, odour, dust or any other adverse effects from the adjacent land occupied by the Ruapuna Speedway;

5.11.4 A covenant on title reflecting the restriction in 0 and also including complaining about or objecting to motorsport.

5.12 The Council has disposed of properties with use restrictions (e.g. Flood Intervention Properties) or on an “as is, where is” basis (i.e. where the Council has not undertaken vendor due diligence). In a small number of cases purchasers have come back to Council seeking removal of restrictions or with buyer’s remorse when they find that restrictions stop them doing what they planned. Dealing directly with the group in this case has means that they have no doubts about the impact of the use restrictions on what they wish to achieve. This is an additional benefit of the approach, but not considered a key reason to depart from policy.

5.13 The decision is for a property in the following wards/Community Board areas:

5.13.1 Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board.

5.14 This matter has not been raised with the Community Board as the authority to depart from policy is a matter reserved for the Council. Also, the decision is procedural and, as it is consistent with the Council’s existing proposal for the land, does not affect the local community.

5.15 If Council does not support this departure from policy, then we would cancel the sale and purchase agreement and proceed to market the land. The Trust would have the option to purchase the land through this process.

5.16 There is no reason to change the policy. The general direction of using public open market processes except where there is good reason not to do so allows the Council to balance transparency and fairness with achieving policy outcomes (e.g. support for community housing) and pragmatism (e.g. in some cases there is only one sensible and obvious purchaser for land). The policy provides clear direction on preferences, flexibility for dealing with specific circumstances, and a useful “check” mechanism before making disposal decisions.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 The recommendations in this report help achieve Council’s strategic direction as outlined in Clause 0.

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

6.3 Citizens and communities

6.3.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

· Level of Service: 4.1.27.4 Community development and recreational initiatives identified through Key Council Strategies are prioritised and delivered, primarily, Strengthening Communities, Multicultural, youth, safety and Alcohol harm. - 80% of the targets in the agreed implementation plan are delivered and reported Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The decision is inconsistent with Council’s Plans and Policies as discussed in Clause 0.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.6 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

6.7 The site is not impacted by cultural significance overlays.

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 reductions.

6.9 The matters being considered relate to decision making processes and will not have any material impact on either adaptation or emissions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.10 There are no accessibility considerations in this report.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – There are no costs to implement this decision over and above staff time.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – Ther are no ongoing costs associated with this report.

7.3 Funding Source – Funding for staff is covered through existing budgets.

Other He mea anō

7.4 There are no other resource implications of this decision.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Council has the statutory power to undertake the proposals in this report.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 The legal consideration relates to the policy inconsistency under Clause 80 of the Local Government Act.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There are no significant risks associated with this decision.

10. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

10.1 Depending on the Council’s decision officers will either confirm the conditional Sale and Purchase Agreement or cancel it and take the property to market.

10.2 Officer’s will work to implement the Council‘s 2021 previous resolution on the matter in a timely manner.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Bruce Rendall - Head of City Growth & Property

Approved By

Elizabeth Neazor - Manager Legal Service Delivery, Commercial & Property

Jane Parfitt - Interim General Manager Infrastructure, Planning and Regulatory Services

Council

12 December 2023

13. Appointment of Recess Committee 2023/2024
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1556261
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Samantha Kelly, Team Leader Hearings and Committee Support (samantha.kelly@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Council to appoint a Recess Committee to consider any issues that require a Council decision in the recess period.

1.2 This report is staff generated to allow the Council to consider any urgent matters between ordinary meetings in December 2023 and January 2024.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the fact that this relates to administrative matters to ensure a continuation of governance meetings during the recess period.

2. Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Appoints a Recess Committee comprising of the Mayor or Deputy Mayor and Councillor [enter name] and a minimum of any three Councillors (quorum to include Mayor or Deputy Mayor and Councillor [enter name]), to be authorised to make any urgent decisions of the Council required during the period 16 December 2023 and 14 January 2024 (both days inclusive).

2. Notes that any meeting of the Recess Committee will be publicly notified, and the details forwarded to all Councillors, all of whom can participate.

3. Notes that any decisions made will be reported to the Council for record purposes.

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

3.1 It is standard practice, that the Council establish a Recess Committee to deal with any urgent business during the recess period time in December 2023 and January 2024.

3.2 The Council has previously established a Recess Committee, comprising of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor or another named Councillor and a minimum of any three Councillors. The Mayor, Deputy Mayor or named Councillor are required to make the quorum of the Committee. In accordance with legislation the meeting will be publicly notified, all Councillors advised and all able to participate in the meeting.

4. Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 A Recess Committee will allow the Council to consider any urgent matters between ordinary meetings in December 2023 and January 2024. Alternatives available to the Council under the Local Government Act 2002 and Standing Orders is the calling of an Emergency meeting or Extraordinary meeting to consider any urgent business required. These are not recommended due to the possibility of not being able to convene a quorum to enable a meeting of this type to take place.

5. Detail / Te Whakamahuki

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

5.1.1 All wards of Christchurch City. The Council should ensure that it has arrangements in place to consider any matters requiring consideration during the recess period.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.2 Governance

6.2.1 Activity: Governance and decision-making

· Level of Service: 4.1.22 Provide services that ensure all Council, Committee and Community Board meetings are held with full statutory compliance. - 98% compliance

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

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

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

6.6 The recommendations of this report relate to the establishment of a Recess Committee, and not any matters that the Recess Committee could potentially consider.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 There are no accessibility considerations related to this decision.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.8 There are no accessibility considerations related to this decision.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – There are no additional costs associated with this decision.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – Not applicable.

7.3 Funding Source – Not applicable.

Other / He mea anō

7.4 Not applicable.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 The Council can appoint a Recess Committee to consider any matters that require an urgent decision between ordinary meetings.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 The provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 and Council’s Standing Orders are relevant to this decision.

8.3 This report has been approved by the Legal Services Unit.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There is no identified risk associated with the decision sought.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments for this report.

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

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

(a) This report contains:

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

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

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

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Samantha Kelly - Team Leader Hearings & Committee Support

Approved By

Megan Pearce - Manager Hearings and Council Support

Helen White - Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Council

12 December 2023

14. Youth Portfolio Lead Report
Reference Te Tohutoro:	23/2015342
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Councillor Harrison-Hunt, Youth Portfolio Lead

1. Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 This is the first Youth Portfolio report to Council since the establishment of portfolios.

1.2 This report has been prepared by Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt, Youth Portfolio lead in collaboration with staff.

2. Elected Member Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receives the information in the Youth Sector Portfolio Report.

2. Approves the renewal of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Christchurch Youth Council as detailed in Attachment A.

3. Resolves to write to Central Government in support of maintaining the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act amendments currently planned for repeal. Noting that this is in line with Canterbury Mayoral Forum submission which Christchurch City Council supported.

4. Notes that the Council will work in partnership with the Christchurch Youth Council on the arrangements, terms, and future of Te Pae Pikari and its standing membership, with the final and amended terms to come to Council in 2024.

5. Notes that the youth sector support future initiatives that promote safer environments, reliable transport infrastructure and public transport shelters that are inclusive and welcoming.

3. Brief Summary

3.1 Youth are defined as persons aged between 12 and 24 years. A population made up of approximately 850,000* young people across Aotearoa New Zealand, making up 17% of the population.

3.2 The number of people aged under 15 years in Christchurch is expected to slightly decrease between 2018 and 2048, falling from 65,100 to 61,700. As a proportion of the city's population, this age group will likely decrease from 17% to 14% (Source: Statistics New Zealand, Subnational Population Estimates and Projections 2018).

3.3 The Youth Portfolio was created in November 2022 after the triennial election. The Mayor established the committees of the Council under Section 41A (3) of the Local Government Act 2002. Portfolios were introduced to ensure Council engages appropriately with specific population groups/issues. Portfolios holders were to be the champion for a particular population group or issue.

3.4 Council work in this space is guided by the Te Haumako; Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy. This strategy acknowledges and commits to building authentic and trusted relationships with the youth sector to ensure Ōtautahi Christchurch and Banks Peninsula is a place of opportunity for all.

3.5 The draft ‘Equity and Inclusion Policy’ will be adopting principles of the Childrens Policy 1998 and Youth Policy 1998 which is associated to this portfolio. The policy is currently undergoing consultations and deliberations with the hearings panel. Council will be seeking to adopt the policy in early 2024.

3.6 The Christchurch City Council and the Christchurch Youth Council have a unique relationship. For most Territorial Authorities in New Zealand, the Youth Council is an internal Committee of Council, ensuring youth voice on Council Decisions. In Christchurch however, the Christchurch Youth Council decided to create a legal entity, separate from the City Council so that it could provide objective and external advice to Council on several matters, as well as pursue its own initiatives, events, research, and advocacy work.

3.6.1 In support of the work that the Youth Council delivers, Council considers annual applications to its contestable Strengthening Communities Fund, regularly awarding the Youth Council a grant of between $25,000-$40,000 towards operational costs.

3.6.2 The current Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment B) with the Christchruch Youth Council was signed in 2015, and without an end date specified, remains in effect.

3.6.3 The revision of this memorandum aims to refresh and restate the unique relationship between the Council and the Christchurch Youth Council, while also allowing for a more regular period of review between the two entities and formalising expectations.

4. Events, Organisations and Providers

4.1 The Christchurch Youth Council (CYC) / Runanga Taiohi o Ōtautahi

4.1.1 CYC have been working closely with Councillor Harrison-Hunt on furthering the mechanisms involved in youth engagement and participation. CYC have worked across the city particularly focused on the youth voice and their thoughts on various issues that young people face.

4.1.2 Their large project was focused on civic engagement working in 7 schools and 3 community groups on the process of voting, how to engage with MPs and giving a voice to the issue. They have started a podcast series and held multiple events over the year. They are advocates for civic rights which include the Smokefree legislation (Attachment B) and the spatial planning submission.

Home (chchyouthcouncil.org.nz)

4.2 Rerenga Awa / Canterbury Youth Workers Collective NZ

4.2.1 Rerenga Awa are the voice for youth workers across Canterbury who strive to build networks and positively influence young peoples lives through development. They connect young people to organisations and champions in the region. Council use young peoples expertise to provide ‘youth audits’ across the city which is under the banner of ‘ReVision’ in collaboration with Youth Voice Canterbury. They have completed a youth audit on many projects including Te Kaha and the Christchurch Multicultural Centre.

ReVision (youthvoicecanterbury.org.nz)

Rerenga Awa | Canterbury Youth Workers Collective New Zealand | 4 Ash Street (cywc.org.nz)

4.3 YCD / Youth & Cultural Development

4.3.1 YCD are strong advocates for the city’s youth, particularly Māori and Pasifika rangatahi. They have run events across the city which are in collaboration with the Council such as the FRESH pool parties, basketball events and the Christchurch Hip-Hop Summit held at Tūranga. YCD have been instrumental in working with rangatahi to enhance their overall wellbeing through whanaungatanga and manaaki by reinstating their cultural identities.

Youth & Cultural Development | To support young people to achieve a sense of wholeness. (ycd.co.nz)

A couple of men standing in front of posters

Description automatically generated

4.4 Mō Kā Uri / Ngai Tahu 2050

4.4.1 Ngai Tahu are currently surveying across generations to gain perspective on what matters to Ngai Tahu whānau. The intention of the campaign is to ‘Create the next chapter in our story’ by gaining insight into the minds of tomorrow who hold a cultural, Ngai Tahu centric lens. You can follow them on Instagram: @mokauri

4.5 Te Whare Awhero / Hope House

4.5.1 A Hornby Youth Survey was undertaken by Te Whare Awhero after seeing a residents meeting which spurned a need for further work in the youth space. The residents meeting bore a lot of questions towards young people; however, no youth were present. Council worked with Carey at Te Whare Awhero who undertook the survey which garnered 319 youth participants and 15 workshops. Councillor Harrison-Hunt was the MC at the Hornby Youth Voice Hui on November 28. There were many in attendance including Councillor Mark Peters, Hon. Dr Megan Woods, Dame Sue Bagshaw, NZ Police and various youth organisations. Young people also participated on the panel to answer burning questions from the audience. The issues were varying, but common amongst other findings across the sector. The report is attached.

A group of people sitting in a room

Description automatically generated

4.6 Te Tahi Youth / Youth Hub Christchurch

4.6.1 Dame Sue and Phil Bagshaw are currently undertaking construction of the Youth Hub Christchurch located on Salisbury Street. They are fundraising on givealittle, you can access the page below. The hub is intended to be a wraparound service for youth aged 10-24 which has accommodation, a social enterprise café, social workers, clinicians and much more. Councillors Harrison-Hunt, Donovan, McLellan, Henstock and Cotter visited the site earlier in the year.

The Youth Hub Trust Te Hurihanga o Rangatahi - Givealittle

Youth Hub CHCH | Te Hurihanga ō Rangatahi

Youth Support | Youth Services | Te Tahi Youth

Construction site with construction equipment and blue sky

Description automatically generated

4.7 Te Ora Hou

4.7.1 Councillor Harrison-Hunt was invited to Te Ora Hou to see the new developments around the wraparound services they offer which include education, youth social services and hauora initiatives. Community Board Deputy Chair Simon Britten guided the tour and gave an insight into the organisation.

4.8 Sport Canterbury / Rangatahi Insights

4.8.1 Councillor Harrison-Hunt met with Josh from Sport Canterbury who gave insight into the current state of sport for rangatahi/youth. The ‘Rangatahi Insights Pack 2022’ gave a comprehensive view into the state of youth in sports. There were strong correlations between deprivation and participation where disadvantaged youth are more likely to be Māori, aged 19-25 years and living in high-deprivation areas. The report helped people understand the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead in the sector, a strong enabler for young people to participate in sport involved encouraging informal activities. The relationship between rangatahi and organised sport is weakening quite significantly. This is affiliated to the seriousness of the sport once it gets to a certain age bracket, the role of adults in the lives of our young people is important.

4.8.2 Lastly, referring to page 30 of the report ‘Key Strategies and Philosophies to Enable’ it says “Given the varied and unique ways rangatahi participate, one size doesn’t fit all when it comes to designing programmes and initiatives that will see participation success. Initiatives designed specifically to cater for rangatahi needs are most likely to succeed, and an aligned and educated approach is important to ensure the wellbeing of rangatahi is at the forefront of decision making.”. The full report is available in the attachments.

(Source: Page 10, Rangatahi Insights Pack 2022, Sport Canterbury)

4.9 SS4C / School Strike 4 Climate

4.9.1 SS4C held two strikes in 2023 at Council. The key messages they have pushed as of 2021 include the phasing out of fossil fuels, invest and implement renewal energy sources, investing in a just transition which includes building cycle infrastructure and modal shifts, that the government honour their responsibility to their pacific neighbours, cut emissions dramatically and provide climate education. There were thousands of young people who came to Council to demand action. They placed post-it notes across the building which had messages to our council. Council would like to thank staff for saving every note and collating them to give to Council to consider the findings. The strike left a strong message to Council to keep working towards our 2030 goal of carbon zero. You can follow them on Instagram: @schoolstrikeforclimatechch.

A group of people holding signs and placards

Description automatically generated

School Strike 4 Climate NZ

5. Te Pae Pikari/Youth Advisory Committee

5.1 Te Pae Pikari is a standing committee of Council which has historically included Councillors, Youth Councillors, PYLAT and Ngai Tahu representation

5.2 The Council currently have a Tuakana/Teina (Older sibling/Younger sibling) relationship which provides guidance to one another in imparting knowledge and to learn about issues that affect young people

5.3 The committee provides guidance and advice to Council on all matters relating to youth through the mechanism of council meetings and recommendations to staff

5.4 The Christchurch Youth Council have engaged with Cr. Harrison-Hunt on the state of Te Pae Pikari and it was recommended that a review of the terms of reference and representation is necessary.

5.5 The Council passed a resolution passed on November 15 to review the structure of the committees in light of the Ombudsman report on Local Government. As Te Pae Pikari is still operational, the work in reviewing of the terms and conditions can continue.

6. General State of the Youth Sector

6.1 The ‘Christchurch Youth Action Plan’ is a comprehensive document that highlights the needs and aspirations of youth throughout the city. The action plan is purposed to turn ideas into action, develop a series of considerations to be taken in from key stakeholders, create an inclusive, vibrant community for our young people and empower young people to be active citizens. (Christchurch Youth Action Plan, 2017)

6.2 The document covers various topics such as transport, wellbeing, employment, and education. It defines the issue, aspiration, and consideration within each topic.

6.3 The issues defined in the report, although 5 years old, are common issues regarding young people in Christchurch. The issues range from a lack of sexual and mental health facilities, the need for more equitable engagement in civics, frequent and reliable public transport, separated cycleways, accessible public toilets and more space for young people aged between 12-24 years old.

6.4 The considerations of each issue defined in the Action Plan showed great promise; however, the decision-making mechanism bares difficultly, due to the limited power of individual elected members in addressing these issues. Council could implement the achievable aspects within the action plan but must work in collaboration to gain positive outcomes for youth and the community.

7. Smoking and Vaping

7.1 The Christchurch City Council has historically taken a proactive approach to it’s local support of Smokefree/Vapefree legislation; seen best in its 2020 Smokefree and Vapefree Public Places Policy. This policy allowed for additional caveats of the inclusion of vaping in smoke-free areas, and all outdoor areas (including Gardens, sportsgrounds, and bus passenger shelters) to be listed as smoke and vape-free areas in the City.

7.2 More recently Christchurch City (as a member of the Canterbury Mayoral forum) wrote to Government in support of the Smokefree Amendment Bill, which was later adopted.

7.3 Many public health experts are calling for a halt to the reform which research would suggest, if repealed, would have a negative impact on our health system over the span of 20 years and cost New Zealand 1.3 billion over 3 years. The mortality rates will also rise which Māori are disproportionally represented at 19%.

7.4 Last year the Christchurch Youth Council and Youth Voice Canterbury, consulted with over 200 young people regarding the smokefree legislation and overwhelmingly the young people we spoke to were concerned about smoking and vaping in New Zealand and were in support of the law changes. CYC and YVC would like the Council to consider advocating to stop the repeal of the Smokefree legislation.

7.5 Aotearoa's youth smoking rates are falling. The ASH Year 10 Snapshot Survey published in February 2022 shows that the daily youth smoking rates among students aged 14-15 years have declined from about 2% between 2015-19 to 1.3% in 2021. This is the lowest rate ever recorded since the survey began in 1999.

7.6 The New Zealand Health Survey also confirms that the smoking rates among adults and young adults have been decreasing over the years. In 2021/22, the daily smoking rate for adults (15+) was 8%, down from 9.4% in 2020/21 and 16.4% in 2011/12. The daily smoking rate for young adults (18-24) was 8.2%, down from 13.1% in 2020/21 and 25% in 2006/07. The smoking rates for Māori adults and Pacific peoples have also declined, although they remain higher than the national average.

7.7 These results suggest that the efforts to reduce smoking and achieve the Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 goal are having a positive impact. The Ministry of Health has recently launched the Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan, which aims to empower people to lead smokefree lives and make decisions that are in the best interest of their health and wellbeing¹. The plan also includes new vaping regulations that restrict the access, appeal, and exposure of vaping products to young people¹.

8. Changing the Narrative – Our future generation

8.1 There is often a negative stigma attached to young people, with media homing in on youth crime which has often been highlighted. According to the ‘Youth Justice Indicators Summary Report, April 2023’, it shows the rates for children and young people decreased by 63% 64% respectively over a 10 year period.

8.2 The strengths in the future generation paint a colourful picture which is bold in creativity, technological nuance, their connection to social issues and their active engagement in things that matter to them. The SS4C part refers to the above.

8.3 Digital Natives: Today’s youth are often referred to as “digital natives” due to their high level of comfort and familiarity with technology.

8.4 Global Connectors: They stay in touch with global issues and cultural norms through social media content.

8.5 Enviro-champions: Young people care for their environment, and they often talk on their climate anxiety which is portrayed through their messaging and communication to council. They care about climate action, sustainability and conservation.

8.6 Social Activism: Youth are becoming more engaged in social and political issues that matter to them. They advocate for strong, peaceful, positive change. Nationally and internationally.

8.7 Cultural Ambassadors: Our youth of today are more accepting of others and promote diversity and inclusion. They use various forms of art, music and creativity to include those who may be less engaged.

8.8 Educational Achievers: Through technological advances, information has become accessible on an unprecedented level which provides equitable access to resources.

8.9 Entrepreneurial Spirit: Business is strong with youth, they want to create sustainable, efficient, and socially conscious enterprises. This is prevalent in high schools which create start-ups in business.

9. Background information

· Vape-Free Kids NZ (vapefreekidsnz.org)

· Vaping & Young People | KidsHealth NZ

· https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/young-new-zealanders-want-tobacco-free-future-new-research

Media, Facts and Figures:

· Statistics on the population. Facts, stats and figures : Christchurch City Council (ccc.govt.nz)

· Daily youth smoking rates at all time low in Aotearoa. https://www.health.govt.nz/news-media/media-releases/daily-youth-smoking-rates-all-time-low-aotearoa.

· Facts & figures | Smokefree. https://www.smokefree.org.nz/smoking-its-effects/facts-figures

· Te Ao: Health survey shows people are smoking less https://www.hapai.co.nz/content/te-ao-health-

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Proposed Christchurch Youth Council Memorandum of Understanding	23/1975632	341
b ⇩	Signed Memorandum of Understanding Christchurch Youth Council - 2015	15/224780	344
c ⇩	Canterbury Mayoral Forum submission - Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (smoked tobacco) Amendment Bill	22/1152292	347
d ⇩	Submission on Smokefree Legislation, YVC & CYC	23/2012702	351
e ⇩	Hornby Youth Voice Report, Te Whare Awhero	23/2012168	363
f ⇩	Rangatahi Insights Pack 2022, Sport Canterbury	23/2012171	399
g ⇩	Te Pae Pikari; Ways of Working	20/1597490	442
h ⇩	LYFE Report - CYC 2021	23/2012719	444
i ⇩	Combined CDN Reports - Riccarton Bus Lounge	23/2014225	462
j ⇩	Youth Action Plan	23/2014232	471
k ⇩	Youth Justice Indicators Summary Report April 2023	23/2014240	490

[1] The bylaw must legislatively be reviewed by no later than November 2028. This bylaw review is scheduled to begin in 2026.

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
9.	Better Off Funding - Ferrymead Heritage Park Second Tranche
	Attachment c - Ferrymead Heritage Park - Development Programme	s7(2)(h)	Commercial Activities	Contains detailed financial information of the Trust.	12 May 2024

5. Triannual Water Management Zone Committee Update
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1762650
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Gina Waibl, Chairperson, and Trudi Bishop, Deputy Chairperson, Banks Peninsula Zone Committee Annabelle Hasselman, Chairperson, and Mike Patchett, Deputy Chairperson, Christchurch West Melton Zone Committee Les Wanhalla, Chairperson, and Matt Dodson, Deputy Chairperson, Selwyn Waihora Zone Committee
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)