Agenda of Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board

A black text on a white background

Description automatically generated

Waipuna

Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board

Open Minutes

Date: Thursday 9 May 2024

Time: 4.30 pm

Venue: Rārākau: Riccarton Centre,
199 Clarence Street, Christchurch

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Helen Broughton

Marie Pollisco

Sarah Brunton

Henk Buunk

Gamal Fouda

Tyla Harrison-Hunt

Andrei Moore

Debbie Mora

Mark Peters

Principal Advisor

Jess Garrett

Manager Community Governance, Halswell Hornby Riccarton

Tel: 941 6289

Faye Collins

Community Board Advisor

941 5108

faye.collins@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Part A Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B Reports for Information

Part C Decisions Under Delegation

Karakia Tīmatanga

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1. Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

There were no apologies.

2. Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

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

Part C

Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00040

That the minutes of the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board meetings held on Tuesday 9 April 2024 and Thursday, 11 April 2024 be confirmed.

Henk Buunk/Mark Peters Carried

4. Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

4.1 Provision for growth in Halswell

Robin Wynne Williams, local resident, spoke to the Board about various matters relating to Halswell, including the need for provision for facilities and infrastructure to cater to growth in the Halswell area.

After questions from members the Board Chairperson thanked Ms Wynne Williams for her presentation.

4.2 Traffic management

Wayne Keen, local resident, spoke to the Board expressing concern about proposed traffic management measures to be implemented, including a proposed redirection of traffic from Aidanfield Drive to Euphrasie Drive and Augustine Drive for a period.

Mr Keen suggested that the Wigram Road entrance to Ngā Puna Wai could be opened and used as a detour to ease congestion over this time. Mr Keen further stated that the implementation of a 40 kilometre per hour speed limit in the Aidanfield suburb will improve safety in the area.

After questions from members the Board Chairperson thanked Mr Keen for his presentation.

4.3 Board decision making process

Adele Geradts, Secretary and John Bennett, Chairperson of the Halswell Residents’ Association, addressed the Board expressing concern about the use of the Notice of Motion process to revoke previously made Board decisions without the opportunity for additional public input.

After questions from members the Board Chairperson thanked Ms Geradts and Mr Bennett for their presentation on behalf of the Halswell Residents’ Association.

4.4 Community Board Chairperson position

Marc Duff, local resident, addressed the Board about the position of Chairperson. Mr Duff said he considers that it is not appropriate for this position to be held by a Council staff member as it could give rise to a perception of a possible conflict of interest.

After questions from members the Board Chairperson thanked Mr Duff for his presentation.

5. Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

6. Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

7. Notice of Motion - Wigram Hayton Intersection
	Community Board Consideration Debbie Mora moved a revised notice of motion which removed the reference to the raised platform across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point and added a note. The motion was seconded by Andrei Moore.
	Notice of Motion to the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board He Pānui Mōtini That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board: 1. Revokes Resolution 3 (as detailed below) in respect to the decision to install a raised safety platform at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection and across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point, made at its meeting on 12 October 2023: 3. All kerb alignments, road surface treatments, lane changes, raised safety platforms (at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection and across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point), coloured pavement surfacing and road markings as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to this report as Attachment A. 2. Approves All kerb alignments, road surface treatments, lane changes, coloured pavement surfacing and road markings as detailed on plan RD3830S8, dated 16/04/2024 and attached to this Notice of Motion 3. Notes that the following information will be provided at the meeting to satisfy the decision-making process of sections 77-82 of the Local Government Act 2002, including: a. The original Officer report, b. Updated Officer advice containing the implications of revoking the decision to install a raised safety platform at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection and across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point.
	Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00041 Part C That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board: 1. Revokes Resolution 3 (as detailed below) in respect to the decision to install a raised safety platform at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection made at its meeting on 12 October 2023: 3. All kerb alignments, road surface treatments, lane changes, raised safety platforms (at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection and across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point), coloured pavement surfacing and road markings as detailed on plan TP359001, dated 21/09/2023 and attached to the report on the meeting agenda as Attachment A. 2. Approves all kerb alignments, road surface treatments, lane changes, raised safety platform across Nga Puna Wai Access Road adjacent to the proposed pedestrian / cyclist crossing point, coloured pavement surfacing and road markings as detailed on plan RD3830S8, dated 16/04/2024 and attached to the Notice of Motion on the meeting agenda as Attachment D. 3. Notes that the following information was provided at the meeting to satisfy the decision-making process of sections 77-82 of the Local Government Act 2002, including: a. The original Officer report, b. Updated Officer advice containing the implications of revoking the decision to install a raised safety platform at the Wigram Road / Hayton Road intersection. 4. The Board notes its preference of the saved funds being used for road safety improvements in line with the Board’s priorities. Debbie Mora/Andrei Moore Carried

The motion was carried unanimously.

8. Proposed Road Name - 50S Shands Road

Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00042 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receive the information in the Proposed Road Name - 50S Shands Road Report.

2. Note that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Approves the following new road name for 50S Shands Road (RMA/2023/702)

a. Road 1 - Akoranga Place

Mark Peters/Gamal Fouda Carried

9. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton - Better-Off Fund Applications for Consideration

Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00043 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receive the information in the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton - Better-Off Fund Applications for Consideration Report.

2. Note that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Approves a grant of $30,000 from its Better-Off Fund to Te Korowai o Grannies towards the Establishment of Hornby Community Garden(s) and Tangi Pack Project.

4. Approves a grant of $40,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to Halswell Community Church towards the Halswell Youth Activations Project.

5. Approves a grant of $50,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to Halswell Community Patrol Incorporated towards the Patrol Car and Operational Costs project.

6. Approve setting aside $119,500 from its Better-Off-Fund towards the Mobile Youth Centre (MYC) Project subject to the development of a sustainable project plan.

7. Approves a grant of $10,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to Wharenui Amateur Swimming Club Inc towards the Reducing Barriers – Learning to Swim Project.

8. Approves a grant of $40,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to the CCC Parks Team in partnership with Woodland Escape Limited/Matatiki Hornby Centre towards the Matatiki Play Space Project.

9. Approves a grant of $34,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to the CCC Parks Team towards the Wycola Park Playground Sunshades and Picnic Benches Project.

10. Approves a grant of $5,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to Halswell Residents Association Incorporated (Halswell ANZAC Committee) towards the Halswell War Memorial Improvements Project.

11. Approves a grant of $6,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to the Lions Club of Halswell District Inc towards the Gazebo Replacement Project.

12. Approves a grant of $33,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to South West Sport and Recreation Hub Incorporated towards the Halswell Basketball Court Project.

Mark Peters/Gamal Fouda Carried

Debbie Mora requested that her abstention from voting be recorded.

10. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Discretionary Response Fund Applications - Oak Development Trust, St Marks Retired Peoples Fellowship, Canterbury Malaysian Society, Halswell Small Dogs Owners Group, Hornby Combined Probus

Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00044 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receive the information in the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Discretionary Response Fund Applications - Oak Development Trust, St Marks Retired Peoples Fellowship, Canterbury Malaysian Society, Halswell Small Dogs (Owners Group), The Hornby Combined Probus Club Incorporated Report.

2. Note that the decisions in this report are assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Approves a grant of $2,117 from its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund to Oak Development Trust towards the Community Street Lighting Project.

4. Approves a grant of $1,000 from its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund to Canterbury Malaysian Society Incorporated towards Older Adults trip and Malaysian Independence Day.

5. Approves a grant of $420 from its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund to Halswell Small Dogs (Owners Group) towards the winter dog walk project.

6. Approves a grant of $700 from its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund to The Hornby Combined Probus Club Incorporated towards the 40 Year Jubilee Celebration.

7. Approves a grant of $1,000 from its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund to St Mark’s Retired Peoples Fellowship towards the Monthly Outings Project.

Tyla Harrison-Hunt/Sarah Brunton Carried

11. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Area Report - May 2024

Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00045 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part B

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Area Report - May 2024 Report.

Mark Peters/Debbie Mora Carried

12. Election of Community Board Chairperson
	Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board: 1. Receives the information in the report. 2. Adopts, by resolution, whether it will use System A or System B to elect a Chairperson. 3. Proceeds to elect a Community Board Chairperson. 4. In the event that the current Deputy Chairperson is elected as Chairperson, elects a Deputy Chairperson.
	Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00046 Selection of Voting System Part C That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board: 1. Receives the information in the report. 2. Adopts System B for the election a new Chairperson and, if necessary, a Deputy Chairperson. Mark Peters/Andrei Moore Carried
	Nominations for the position of Chairperson were called for. Henk Buunk was nominated by Mark Peters and seconded by Debbie Mora. Marie Pollisco was nominated by Andrei Moore and seconded by Tyla Harrison-Hunt. There being no further nominations, the two candidates nominated and seconded were put to a vote, resulting in the election of Marie Pollisco.
	Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00047 Election of Chairperson Part C That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board: 3. Elects Marie Pollisco as Chairperson of the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board. Andrei Moore/Tyla Harrison-Hunt Carried
	The Chair called for nominations for the position of Deputy Chairperson. Helen Broughton was nominated by Gamal Fouda and seconded by Mark Peters. Sarah Brunton was nominated by Andrei Moore but was not seconded. There being no further nominations, the nomination was put to the vote.
	Community Board Resolved HHRB/2024/00048 Election of Deputy Chairperson Part C That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board: 4. Elects Helen Broughton as Deputy Chairperson of the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board. Gamal Fouda/Mark Peters Carried
	Marie Pollisco completed her oral and written declarations as Chairperson in the presence of Jessica Garrett, Community Governance Manager, on behalf of the Chief Executive and assumed the Chair.
	Attachments a Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Chairperson Declaration - Marie Pollisco - 9 May 2024

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

Part B

The following information was shared:

· A meeting was held at Templeton recently with NZTA to discuss interaction between Kirk and Marshes Roads and the state highway.

· NZTA have provided information regarding projects in the state highway improvement proposals related to The Hub and corridor through Hornby.

· Central Riccarton has seen a spate of low level motor vehicle break ins.

· It was noted that the Upper Riccarton War Memorial Library has now been demolished with proposals for a pocket park to be considered.

· It was noted that there are currently a number of roadworks in and around Riccarton associated with upgrading water infrastructure.

· The Deans Avenue Precinct Society Annual General Meeting was held recently. Concern was expressed that the cycleway from Deans Avenue to Blenheim Road is proposed to not go ahead.

· It was noted that the hearings on Plan Change 14 have now concluded with a right of reply from Council to be provided.

· It was noted that the hearings on the Long Term Plan are currently underway with a large number of people speaking to submissions and expressing a range of views.

· It was noted there are many roadworks currently underway in the Halswell area, including upgrades to Halswell Road that are expected to last for two and a half years.

Debbie Mora left the meeting at 6.07pm.

Karakia Whakamutunga

Meeting concluded at 6.18pm.

CONFIRMED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2024

Chairperson

Marie Pollisco

7. Tree Planting plans for 2024 Urban Forest Tree Planting Projects
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/495509
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Toby Chapman (Urban Forest Manager)
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 To seek the approval for planting in a number of parks as part of the Councils Urban Forest Tree Planting Programme.

1.2 The Christchurch Urban Forest Plan has a focus on increasing the size of the urban forest across the city. These plans are part of the implementation of the Plan to increase the canopy cover across the city through tree planting within parks.

1.3 All plans have been out for consultation and staff have used this feedback to make alterations as appropriate.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Tree Planting plans for 2024 Urban Forest Tree Planting Projects Report.

2. Notes that the decisions in this report are assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Approves the planting of trees in Runnymede Reserve, Marcella Reserve, Harrington Park and Fanshaw Reserve as per the plans attached to the report on the meeting agenda.

4. Approves the planting of trees in Scotts Park and Jones Reserve as per the plans attached to the report on the meeting agenda.

5. Approves the planting of trees in Holmes Park, Showgate Reserve and Denton Park as per the plans attached to the report on the meeting agenda.

6. Approves the planting of trees in Franco and Evora park as per the plans attached to the report on the meeting agenda.

7. Approves the planting of trees in Tautoru Reserve as per the plans attached to the report on the meeting agenda.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 Over the last six months, staff have put out a number of parks planting plans for Consultation which have in most cases been met with positive feedback.

3.2 In some cases, where concerns have been made by a resident, staff have undertaken a site meeting to discuss the concerns and made adjustments in order to address the residents concerns.

3.3 In the case of Harrington Park, Denton Park, Franco Park and Evora Park, staff met with the local residents to hear their feedback with particular regards to how the park is used and the impact the tree planting will have on them. This has resulted in a number of adjustments to the plans which have been feedback to the residents.

3.4 Staff also met with the residents of Bishops Green as a number of residents expressed concerns about the planting. Due to the feedback provided by some of the residents, staff have decided not to proceed with this plan.

3.5 In 2023, staff took a report to the Board for planting in Delange Reserve, Tautoru Reserve and Marama reserve. The board requested that further consultation should take place to address concerns raised. Staff have engaged with the residents near Tautoru Reserve and made changes to the plans at their request. These plans have been sent back to the residents and they have expressed their approval.

3.6 If all plans are approved, the Community Board area would see an additional 520 specimen trees planted.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 In 2023 the Christchurch City Council (Council) adopted an Urban Forest Plan which has a key focus on increasing the city’s canopy cover. The Urban Forest Tree Planting program was established in the same year as part of the implementation of this plan.

4.2 Planting plans for parks and reserves highlighted in this report have been developed to significantly increase the number of trees (and canopy cover) within these parks in alignment with the Urban Forest Plan.

4.3 The plans have a strong focus on ensuring that the trees selected, and their placement will be suitable for the full life of the tree and takes account of the impact they will have. This is represented in the plans through showing the trees at their mature size as well as the inclusion of shade mapping.

4.4 The following related memos/information were circulated to the members of the meeting:

Date	Subject
18 July 2023	Engagement of 14 Tree Planting Plans
10 Aug 2023	Community Parks Urban Forest Planting Plan

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

4.5 The following reasonably practicable options were considered and are assessed in this report:

· Adoption of consulted plans with changes.

· Adoption of consulted plans with no changes.

· Status quo – plans are not approved.

4.6 The following options were considered but ruled out:

· Planting of Bishops Green – Due to the feedback from the local residents, we do not think this plan should proceed.

· No planting – The planting plans are in alignment with the Councils adopted Urban Forest Plan. We must plant trees if we are going to meet the Plans objectives.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.7 Preferred Option: Adoption of consulted plans with changes.

4.7.1 Option Description: Staff have produced plans for a number of parks within the Boards area. These plans have been designed in alignment with the Urban Forest Plan with a focus on increasing the city’s canopy cover, in particular within the open space environment. Post feedback from the consultation has led to a number of adjustments to the plans to help address concerns raised by residents.

4.7.2 Option Advantages

· The implementation of the proposed planting plans will see an increase in the canopy cover across the Community Boards area.

4.7.3 Option Disadvantages

· The implementation of the plans will incur costs however these costs are currently budgeted for within the Councils current funding.

4.8 Option Two - Adoption of consulted plans with no changes.

4.8.1 Option Description: Remove any changes that have been made to the plans as a result of the feedback through the consultation phase.

4.8.2 Option Advantages

· Plans will be the same as those that went out for consultation.

4.8.3 Option Disadvantages

· Staff made a number of changes to the plans in an attempt to address some of the concerns raised through the submissions such as reducing the heights of trees, taking away some proposed plantings to provide more open space and creating grass paths to retain existing walkway usage. If the original consulted plans are approved, these alterations will be lost.

4.9 Option Three - Status quo – plans are not approved.

4.9.1 Option Description: Plans are rejected by the board and no planting is undertaken.

4.9.2 Option Advantages

· If the Community Board have significant concerns with the plans they would have the opportunity make changes.

4.9.3 Option Disadvantages

· Staff have a limited tree planting season. If plans are not approved, we risk not being able to plant this year. Further Consultation may have to be undertaken with affected residents which will put further pressure on staff time and resources.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.10 Increase in canopy cover.

4.11 Response to public feedback.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option	Option 2 – No alterations to plans	Option 3 – Decline plans
Cost to Implement	$260k	$265k	Nil
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	nil	nil	Nil
Funding Source	Better off funding	Better off funding	N/A
Funding Availability	yes	yes	N/A
Impact on Rates	no	no	N/A

5.1 Funding for this project has already been acquired through the Better Off Fund.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

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

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

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

6.3 Statutory and/or delegated authority to undertake proposals in the report:

6.3.1 Council has the delegation to plant trees within the park.

6.4 Other Legal Implications:

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

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.5 The required decisions:

6.5.1 Align with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework.

6.5.2 Are assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the number of properties that will be impacted and how it will alter the park for those who use it.

6.6 This planting plan is in alignment with the City’s Urban Forest Plan, in particular the following objectives:

· Objective 1.1: Grow our urban forest and achieve and maintain canopy cover targets;

· Objective 1.2: Distribute canopy cover equitably, with no ward having less than 15% total canopy cover;

· Objective 2.4: Increase the visibility of native tree species and create ecological corridors; and;

· Objective 2.5: Select and design planting sites to enable a tree to reach maturity and minimise conflicts with the surrounding area.

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

6.8 Parks, heritage and coastal environment

6.8.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.8.10.1 Appropriate use and occupation of parks is facilitated - Formal approval process initiated within ten working days of receiving complete application - 95%

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

Public Consultation from 15 December 2023 to 1 February 2024 Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.9 An email was sent to 86 key stakeholders.

6.10 The consultation was hosted on Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk. The landing page for the tree planting plans had 2,577 views throughout the consultation period. The individual planting plan pages had the following number of views:

· Runnymed Reserve – 132 views

· Marcella Reserve - 109 views

· Harrington Park - 85 views

· Fanshaw Reserve - 29 views

6.11 A Newsline article published on 15 December 2023 and posted on the Council Facebook page reached 10,958 people. The relevant tree planting plan was also posted in the Halswell/Westlake/Wigram/Aidanfield/Kennedys Bush, Halswell, Wigram Skies, Templeton (N.Z) Community & Residents Facebook pages.

6.12 Flyers were delivered to properties neighbouring the park to notify them about the consultation. Signage was installed in the park with a QR code to the consultation webpage.

6.13 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

Marcella Reserve

6.14 Submissions were made by six individuals and one organisation (Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand). One late submission was also received which was not included in the analysis. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment B.

6.15 All six individual submitters somewhat or strongly supported the plan.

6.16 The majority of submitters (5, 83.3%) feel it is important or very important to plant more trees in Marcella Reserve.

6.17 A colorful rectangular bars with text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence
Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 3, the top aspects were attracting birds and insects, planting native trees, and providing enough shade.

Figure 3

6.18

Submitters were asked how concerned they were about various aspects when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 4, the top concern was damage (e.g. footpaths).

Figure 4

Fanshaw Reserve

6.19 Submissions were made by three individuals and one organisation (Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand). Of the individual submissions, two identified as living or working in the local area and one identified as living out of the local area.

6.20 Two submitters somewhat or strongly supported the plan. One submitter somewhat opposed the plan. Additionally, all submitters felt it was somewhat or very important to plant more trees in Fanshaw Reserve.

6.21 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.21.1 The top aspects were attracting birds and insects, and autumn colouring.

6.21.2 The top concerning aspects were potential loss of view, and too much shade.

6.22 A full table of submission feedback including submitters comments is available in Attachment D.

Runnymede Reserve

6.23 Submissions were made by three individuals and one organisation (Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand). Of the individual submissions, all identified as living or working in the local area.

6.24 All submitters strongly supported the plan. Additionally, all submitters felt it was somewhat or very important to plant more trees in Runnymede Reserve.

6.25 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.25.1 The top aspects were attracting birds and insects, and native trees.

6.25.2 The top concerning aspects were damage (e.g. footpaths), hazards (e.g. roots, falling branches) and debris (e.g. footpaths).

6.26 A full table of submission feedback including submitters comments is available in Attachment F.

Harrington Park

6.27 Submissions were made by one organisation (Oak Development Trust), and two individuals. All submitters identified as living or working in the local area. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment H.

6.28 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.29 Of all submitters, two (66.7%) strongly support the plan, and one (33.3%) strongly opposes the plan. Of those who are in support of the plan, two (66.7%) feel it is very important to plant more trees in Harrington Park, and one (33.3%) feels that it is not important at all.

6.30 Staff met with the organisers of the Oak Development Trust to discuss there concerns. During this meeting it became clear that we had not accounted for the way the park was used. Staff worked with the Oak Development Trust and have made a number of alterations to the planting plan which have been included in the attached planting plan for Harrington Park. This was sent back to the Oak Development Trust and has since received their support.

6.31 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.31.1 The top aspects were providing enough shade, attracting birds and insects, and Autumn colouring.

6.31.2 The top concerning aspects were damage (e.g. footpaths), potential increase of hazards (e.g. roots or falling branches), and debris (e.g. dropping leaves).

Public Consultation from 12 March to 9 April 2024 Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.32 An email was sent to 86 key stakeholders.

6.33 The consultation was hosted on Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk. The landing page for the tree planting plans had 1,709 views throughout the consultation period. The individual planting plan pages had the following number of views:

· Scott Park – 57 views

· Jones Reserve – 34 views

6.34 Flyers were delivered to properties neighbouring the park to notify them about the consultation. Signage was installed in the park with a QR code to the consultation webpage.

Jones Reserve

6.35 Submissions were made by one individual. This submitter identified as living or working in the local area. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment J.

6.36 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.37 The submitter somewhat supports the plan and feels that it is somewhat important to plant more trees in Jones Reserve.

6.38 The submitter requested that some of the existing trees need to be pruned, this has been handed onto our tree maintenance team to execute.

6.39 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.39.1 The top aspect for this submitter was planting native trees.

6.39.2 The top two concerning aspects were too much shade, and potential loss of view.

Scott Park

6.40 Submissions were made by 5 individuals. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment K.

6.41 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.42
The majority of submitters (4, 80%) strongly support the plan, with one (20%) strongly opposing the plan as shown in Figure 1.

6.43 The majority of submitters feel it is important to plant more trees in Scott Park. Of these submitters, four feel is it somewhat important (2, 40%) or very important (2, 40%), and one (20%) feels that it is not important at all to plant more trees in Scott Park, as seen in

Figure 2.

6.44 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 3, the top aspects were attracting birds and insects, planting native trees, and providing enough shade.

6.45 Submitters were asked how concerned they were about various aspects when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 4, the top concerns were potential damage (e.g. footpaths), potential hazards (e.g. roots, falling branches), debris (e.g. dropping leaves), and potential loss of open spaces.

Figure 4

6.46 Key themes and requests raised by submitters are listed in the table below.

Theme	Mentions (# of submitters)
Money should be spent elsewhere	1
Concern about tree maintenance	1
Request for more native trees	1

Public Consultation from 29 April to 20 May 2024 Te Tukanga Kōrerorero

6.47 An email was sent to 64 key stakeholders.

6.48 The consultation was hosted on Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk. The landing page for the tree planting plans had 2,985 views throughout the consultation period.

6.49 Social media was published on 29 April 2024 in the Halswell / Westlake / Wigram / Aidanfield / Kennedys Bush Community, Halswell Community, Russley / Avonhead / Yaldhurst Community and the Avonhead / Burnside / Bishopdale / Ilam Community Facebook groups.

6.50 Flyers were delivered to properties neighbouring the park to notify them about the consultation. Signage was installed in the park with a QR code to the consultation webpage.

Denton Park

6.51 Submissions were made by 14 individuals. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment N.

6.52 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.53
The majority of submitters somewhat support (6, 42.9%) or strongly support (4, 28.6%) the plan, as shown in Figure 1. Three submitters somewhat oppose (2, 14.3%) or strongly oppose (1, 7.1%) the plan.

6.54
More than half of submitters (11, 61.1%) feel it is somewhat important or very important to plant more trees in Denton Park, as seen in Figure 2.

6.55
Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

As shown in Figure 3, the top aspects were attracting birds and insects, planting native trees, providing flowering plants and shade.

6.56
Submitters were asked how concerned they were about various aspects when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 4, the top concerns were damage to infrastructure and trees dropping debris followed by increased hazards.

6.57 Key themes and requests raised by submitters are described below, ordered from most to least mentioned.

Theme	Mentions (# of submitters)
Request to improve the park’s trees - Plant more fruit tree (2) - Plant more natives (2)	4
Full support for the plan with no suggestions	3
Concerned about value for money	2
Concern about potential damage to footpath from trees	1
Concern about debris	1
Concern about damage to surrounding buildings from trees (e.g. pollen)	1
Concern about visibility from Main South Road	1

Franco Park

6.58 Submissions were made by one organisation (Halswell Commons Group), and three individuals. Of the individual submissions, two identified as living or working in the local area and one did not provide a response. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment T.

6.59 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.60 All submitters support the plan, either strongly (2, 50%) or somewhat (2, 50%). Additionally, all submitters felt it was very important to plant more trees in Franco Park.

6.61 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.61.1 The top aspects were Autumn colouring, providing enough shade, and attracting birds and insects.

6.61.2 The top concerning aspects were potential increase of hazards (e.g. roots or falling branches), potential loss of open spaces, and potential loss of view.

6.62 As part of the consultation process, staff met with the residents association around Franco and Evora park to discuss the plans. The key concerns raised were a row of small trees on the western edge of the park and a medium tree on the south east corner. Staff have made adjustments to the plans to address this. The residents also highlighted that they want to be involved in the tree selection and planting process. Staff will continue to work with the local residents association during the implementation of this plan.

Holmes Park

6.63 Submissions were made by one individual. The submitter identified as living outside of the local area.

6.64 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.65 The submitter strongly supports the plan and feels that it is very important to plant more trees in Holmes Park.

6.66 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.66.1 The top aspects for this submitter were native trees, attracting birds and insects, and climbable trees / trees to play in.

6.66.2 The submitter was slightly concerned about the potential for damage (e.g. footpaths).

Showgate Reserve

6.67 Submissions were made by six individuals. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment P.

6.68 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.69
The majority of submitters (5, 83.3%) support or strongly support the plan, and one submitter is neutral (16.7%) as shown in Figure 1.

6.70
All submitters feel it is somewhat important (1, 16.7%) or very important (5, 83.3%) to plant more trees in Showgate Reserve, as seen in Figure 2.

6.71

Support for the plan differed depending on where the submitter lives in relation to the park. Submitters were more likely to support the plan if they live/work next to the park, and live/work in the local area than those who live out of the local area, as seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3

6.72

Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 4, the top aspects were attracting birds and insects, planting native trees, and Autumn colouring.

Figure 4

6.73

Submitters were asked how concerned they were about various aspects when increasing the tree cover in this park. As shown in Figure 5, the top concerns were too much shade, debris (e.g. dropping leaves), and loss of view.

Figure 5

6.74 Key themes and requests raised by submitters are listed in the table below.

Theme	Mentions (# of submitters)
Concern about shade	1
Concern about loss of view	1
Positive comment with no further detail	1
Request for a cycle and walking path	2
Request for more security in the park	1
Request for regular maintenance	1
Request for trees to be moved	1
Request for more trees beneficial to birds and insects	1
Request for more fruit trees	1

Evora Park

6.75 Submissions were made by one organisation (Halswell Commons Group), and four individuals. Of the individual submissions, two identified as living or working in the local area and two identified as living outside of the local area. A full table of submission feedback is available in Attachment R.

6.76 Submitters were asked how important it was to them to increase the number of trees in the park, what factors should be considered in the plan, how they felt about the overall plan, and the level to which they would be impacted.

6.77 All submitters strongly support the plan. Additionally, all submitters feel it is very important to plant more trees in Evora Park.

6.78 Submitters were asked to rate how important various aspects were to them when increasing the tree cover in this park.

6.78.1 The top aspects were providing enough shade, flowering, and attracting birds and insects.

6.78.2 The top concerning aspects were potential increase of hazards (e.g. roots or falling branches), damage (e.g. footpaths), debris (e.g. dropping leaves), and potential loss of spaces.

6.79 As part of the consultation process, staff met with the residents association around Franco and Evora park to discuss the plans. The key concerns raised were a row of small trees south of the community garden. The residents also highlighted some other areas of tree planting they would like focused on and expressed a strong desire to assist in the species selection and planting process. Staff will continue to work with the local residents association during the implementation of this plan.

Tautoru Park

6.80 Between 30 June and 17 July 2023 staff released 14 tree planting plans for public consultation. To help raise awareness of the consultations, we emailed some key stakeholders, promoted the consultation via a story on Newsline, and put up signage at key points in each park with a link to the Have Your Say page.

6.81 Tautoru Park received five submissions - three of which were specifically concerned about the proposed species selection for the park. Staff have taken this on board and will be altering the species.

6.82 A report was taken to the board along with plans for Marama and Delange Reserve which was put on hold as the Board felt more feedback was required from the local residents.

6.83 Staff have since engaged with the residents near Tautoru and have made some adjustments to the plan. These adjustments were sent back to the residents who have expressed their approval.

7. Impact of decision

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

7.1.1 Waipuna Halswell–Hornby–Riccarton Community Board

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

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

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.5 The decisions in this report are likely to:

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

7.5.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

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

8. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

8.1 Using the feedback from the members of the public, tree species will be allocated to the locations within the planting plans.

8.2 Trees will be ordered from the Christchurch City Council nursery and planting will commence during planting season 2024. Where possible, public will be advised when we will be planting in case, they would like to assist.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Marcella Reserve Planting Plan	24/903992	34
b ⇩	Marcella Reserve tree planting plan submissions - public	24/938755	36
c ⇩	Fanshaw Park Planting plan	24/903993	60
d ⇩	Fanshaw Reserve tree planting plan submissions - public	24/944566	62
e ⇩	Runnymede Planting plan	24/903995	76
f ⇩	Runnymede Reserve tree planting plan submissions - public	24/944567	78
g ⇩	Harrington Park Planting Plan	24/903996	92
h ⇩	Harrington Park tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891127	94
i ⇩	Jones Reserve Planting Plan	24/903999	95
j ⇩	Jones Reserve tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891128	97
k ⇩	Scott Park tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891132	98
l ⇩	Scotts Park Planting Plan	24/904000	99
m ⇩	Denton Tree Planting	24/906995	101
n ⇩	Denton Park tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891121	104
o ⇩	Showgate Reserve Tree Planting	24/906997	106
p ⇩	Showgate Reserve tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891752	107
q ⇩	Evora Tree Planting Plan	24/906998	109
r ⇩	Evora Park tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891122	110
s ⇩	Franco Park Planting Plan	24/906999	112
t ⇩	Franco Park tree planting plan submissions - public	24/891123	113
u ⇩	Tautoru Park Planting Plan	24/907838	115

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Toby Chapman - Manager Urban Forest

Krystle Anderson - Engagement Advisor

Samantha Smith - Engagement Advisor

Kiran Skelton - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Rupert Bool - Acting Head of Parks

8. Epsom Road / Middlepark Road Intersection - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/742629
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Edwin Tiong, Transport Engineer, Traffic Operations
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Brent Smith, Acting General Manager City Infrastructure

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 For the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board to consider approval of the installation of No Stopping restrictions on Middlepark Road, approaching the intersection with Epsom Road.

1.2 This report has been written in response to a concerned member of the public about parked vehicles impeding visibility near the intersection.

1.3 Following investigations it was noted that this parking behaviour caused limited visibility and resulted in safety risks to drivers when approaching the intersection.

1.4 The recommended option is to Install No Stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A. The length of No Stopping in this option is the minimum length needed to provide Minimum Gap Sight Distance, allowing a driver entering the intersection sufficient visibility of approaching traffic to make the desired turn safety.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Epsom Road / Middlepark Road Intersection - Proposed No Stopping Restrictions Report.

2. Notes that the decisions in this report are assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Revokes any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking or stopping restrictions described in resolutions 4 – 7 below.

4. Approves, pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the northeast side of Middlepark Road, commencing at its intersection with Epsom Road, and extending in a north-easterly direction for a distance of 13.0 metres.

5. Approves, pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the southeast side of Middlepark Road, commencing at its intersection with Epsom Road, and extending in a north-easterly direction for a distance of 11.5 metres.

6. Approves, pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the northeast side of Epsom Road, commencing at its intersection with Middlepark Road, and extending in a north-westerly direction for a distance of 18.0 metres.

7. Approves, pursuant to Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at all times on the southeast side of Epsom Road, commencing at its intersection with Middlepark Road, and extending in a south-easterly direction for a distance of 14.0 metres.

8. Approves that these resolutions take effect when parking signage and/or road markings that evidence the restrictions described in 3-7 are in place (or removed in the case of revocations).

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 Safety concerns have been identified/raised at the intersection of Epsom Road and Middlepark Road due to restricted visibility caused by on street parking close to the intersection. Implementing the noted recommendations will lead to a reduction in the risk of a crash by improving sightlines at this intersection.

3.2 Middlepark Road is a direct route to the St Thomas of Canterbury College. Epsom Road and Middlepark Road intersection is heavily used by school traffic from parents and students, particularly during before and after school.

3.3 Although currently there is no priority control at this intersection, there is marked intersection white lines and staff believe this layout configuration is sufficient. This is strengthened by the fact that there were no reported crashes at this intersection in the past 10 years.

3.4 The recommended option is to Install No Stopping restrictions in accordance with Attachment A. The length of No Stopping in this option is the minimum length needed to provide Minimum Gap Sight Distance, allowing a driver entering the intersection sufficient visibility of approaching traffic to make the desired turn safely.

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

3.6 Options within this report have been assessed against relevant industry-standard design guidance including the sight distance requirements of Council’s Infrastructure Design Standard.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 A local resident referred to the effects of parked vehicles close to the intersection of Epsom Road and Middlepark Road, causing limited visibility and safety risks to other drivers approaching the intersection.

4.2 Staff agreed to investigate the matter and observed driving conditions at this intersection.

4.3 Within the Christchurch City Council District Plan Epsom Road is classified as Collector road, whereas Middlepark Road functions as a Local road. At present the tee-intersection is uncontrolled without any parking restrictions, with priority given to Epsom Road.

4.4 Although currently there is no priority control at this intersection, the intersection is marked with white centre lines and staff believe this layout configuration is sufficiently marked to warn drivers of approaching intersection. This is strengthened by the fact that there have been no crashes reported at this intersection over the past ten years. While no crashes have been reported, the proposal is intended to reduce the risk of a crash and address an ongoing concern regarding access and visibility in this location.

4.5 Visibility can be limited by parked vehicles on Epsom Road. There are high parking demands in the area as commuters working in the nearby industrial sites prefer to park their vehicles close to their workplaces.

4.6 There have been no crashes in the last ten years. Middlepark Road is classified as low medium risk while Epsom Road is classified as Medium risk under Council’s risk mapping system.

4.7 Approval is required by the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board.

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

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

4.9 The following reasonably practicable options were considered and are assessed in this report:

· Option 1 – Proposed no stopping restrictions.

· Option 2 – Proposed Give Way priority control at Middlepark Road in addition to Option 1 above.

· Option 3 – Maintain the status quo – do nothing – retaining five on-street parking spaces.

4.10 The following options were considered but ruled out:

· Option 2 – Proposed Give Way priority control at Middlepark Road – the intersection is currently marked with white centre lines and is sufficiently marked to warn drivers of approaching intersection. There has been no reported crashes at this intersection over the past ten years.

· Option 3 – Maintain the status quo – Do Nothing - Does not address the identified safety issue about parked vehicles close to intersection restricting visibility of approaching traffic to turn safely.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.11 Preferred Option: Option 1 – Proposed no stopping restrictions.

4.11.1 Option Description: Install no stopping restrictions on north and southeast corners of Epsom Road / Middlepark Road intersection.

4.11.2 Option Advantages

· Restrict parked vehicles close to intersection and provide Minimum Gap Sight Distance, allowing a driver entering the intersection sufficient visibility of approaching traffic to make the desired turn safely.

4.11.3 Option Disadvantages

· Removing five on-street parking spaces.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.12 Options within this report have been assessed against relevant industry-standard design guidance including the sight distance requirements of Council’s Infrastructure Design Standard.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option – No Stopping	Option 2 – Give Way + No Stopping	Option 3 – Do nothing
Cost to Implement	$600	$1,500	No cost
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	$200	$400	N/A
Funding Source	Traffic Operations Signs and Markings budget	Traffic Operations Signs and Markings budget	N/A
Funding Availability	Immediate	Immediate	N/A
Impact on Rates	Minimal	Minimal	N/A
Cost to prepare report	$750	$750	$750

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 Not applicable.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

6.2 Statutory and/or delegated authority to undertake proposals in the report:

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

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

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

6.3 Other Legal Implications:

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

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

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The required decision:

6.4.1 Align with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework.

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

6.4.3 The decisions in this report are assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the low level of impact and low number of people affected by the recommended decision.

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

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

6.7 Transport

6.7.1 Activity: Transport

· Level of Service: 10.0.6.1 Reduce the number of death and serious injury crashes on the local road network - <=96 crashes

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

6.8 Five affected property owners and residents were advised of the recommended option by letter and invited to make a submission. There were no submissions received.

6.9 The Team Leader Parking Compliance supports the preferred option.

6.10 The do nothing option is inconsistent with community requests to improve safety at the intersection.

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

6.11.1 Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.12 The decision does not involve a significant decision concerning 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.

6.13 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.

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

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

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 Subject to the Board approval, the no stopping retrictions would be implemented, generally around four weeks after the contractor receives the request, but this is subject to other factors such as resourcing and prioritisation beyond Council’s control.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Epsom Road Middlepark Road Proposed No Stopping Restrictions drawing TG146877 For Board Approval	24/23401	123

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Edwin Tiong - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Katie Smith - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

9. Wigram Road maintenance depot and staff facilities
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/877725
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Guy Williams, Project Manager, Parks Richard Gibbs, Senior Project Manager, Parks
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek land owner approval through the delegation of the Community Board to build a new maintenance depot and staff facility on a parcel of land off Wigram Road.

1.2 The origin of this report is staff generated in response to the Council decision on 25 July 2023 to implement general parks maintenance services through internally resourced teams.

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 the site has minimal impact on residents, being located in a semi-industrial part of the city but will meet operational requirements for the Parks Unit.

1.4 The recommended option is to grant approval to build the Wigram Road maintenance depot on the parcel of land identified in this report.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. receives the information in the Wigram Road maintenance depot and staff facilities report;

2. notes that the decision in the report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy;

3. approves the building of a new maintenance depot and staff facility at 141 Wigram Road as outlined in the report on the meeting agenda.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 A concept design has been prepared for the proposed new maintenance and staff depot to be built at 141 Wigram Road. This facility is needed to house the Parks Unit’s inhouse operational machinery, vehicle wash down facilities, office space and locker/ changing space.

3.2 This report presents the recommended design and seeks approval by the Community Board to use the parcel of land on which to build the new facilities.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 On 25 July 2023 the Christchurch City Council Finance and Performance Committee approved the following officer recommendations without change:

· agrees to implement general parks maintenance services through internally resourced teams, effective from 1 of July 2024, noting the rates increase avoidance detailed within this report.

· agrees that each community board area shall have a dedicated team exclusively responsible for the maintenance of parks within their respective areas. Resource allocation for these teams shall be based on the asset volumes present in each area, to enable adequate and tailored service provision

· acknowledges the capital investment required to transition to a full internal service provision. To facilitate timely mobilisation and effective internal service provision commencing in July 2024, $ 7.4M of additional capital funds will be allocated into the Parks capital programme for FY 24 for the acquisition of plant and equipment.

4.2 The Wigram Road Maintenance and Staff Facility will mostly operate Monday to Friday. The depot will experience the heaviest traffic between 7 – 8am and 3 – 5pm as vehicles leave for the day and return.

4.3 The facility requires:

4.3.1 Storage, parking and charging for parks operational vehicles and trailers

4.3.2 Tool storage and charging stations

4.3.3 Male, female and accessible toilet and shower facilities

4.3.4 Office space and staff lunch/ meeting area

4.3.5 It is anticipated that staff car parking will be available within the secure perimeter surrounding the new facility

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

4.4 The following reasonably practicable options were considered and are assessed in this report:

· 141 Wigram Road maintenance depot and staff facilities

4.5 The following options were considered but ruled out:

· Building the depot on a parcel of land next to the new Christchurch Netball Centre at Ngā Puna Wai was considered. However local residents expressed concern during a public meeting in 2023 that the staff facility would create more traffic and noise in an already very busy area.

· Purchasing an existing built facility was considered but would have had an impact on rates so was not considered further.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.6 Preferred Option: 141 Wigram Road depot and staff facilities

4.6.1 Option Description: 141 Wigram Road is an existing park but currently in grazed pasture which is owned by Christchurch City Council and which has good road and transport access. A new purpose-designed facility will be able to be built on this land.

Concept design location

Site layout

A blueprint of a building

Description automatically generated

4.6.2 Option Advantages

· Convenient location to provide services for required parks

· Site is appropriate for required transport requirement

· Site is owned by Christchurch City Council

4.6.3 Option Disadvantages

· There are no specific disadvantages to this option as the building and its location will meet the requirements in terms of design, layout and construction cost.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.7 The analysis criteria included ownership and zoning of the land, proximity to major road networks, location and size.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option	Option 2	Option 3
Cost to Implement	$4,806,000	n/a	n/a
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	c. $30,000 p.a.	n/a	n/a
Funding Source	61805 (Parks Maintenance Depots Development)	n/a	n/a
Funding Availability	FY24 $628,531 FY25 $5,288,489 FY26 $2,568,000 FY27 $3,015,564	n/a	n/a
Impact on Rates	Nil	n/a	n/a

5.1 The funding for this project is already accounted for in the current LTP.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 The risk of not constructing the facility would affect the operation of the parks maintenance internally resourced teams.

6.2 In terms of actual construction, there are no risks specifically identified beyond risk management associated with a standard construction.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

6.3 The Maintenance Depot and Staff Facilities will require Resource Consent to be granted.

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The required decision:

6.4.1 Aligns with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework. In particular this recommendation is strongly aligned with the community outcomes of a thriving prosperous city and a green, liveable city. The depot allows the Christchurch City Council to maximise efficiency when providing maintenance for Christchurch City Council parks by having its operations centralised. The depot will provide the resources to house and charge electric plant for park maintenance, reducing emissions and contributing to climate resilience.

6.4.2 Is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the fact that the site has minimal impact on residents, being located in a semi-industrial part of the city but will meet operational requirements for the Parks Unit.

6.4.3 Is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

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

6.6 Parks, heritage and coastal environment

6.6.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.8.1.9 Value for money Controllable Cost per hectare - cost of Provision Per Annum does not increase in respect to the total hectares of land managed.

· Level of Service: 6.8.2.3 Parks are managed and maintained in a clean, tidy, safe, functional and equitable manner (Asset Performance) - at least 90% of parks and associated public recreational assets are available for safe public use during opening hours.

· Level of Service: 6.8.5 Satisfaction with the overall availability of recreation facilities within the city's parks and foreshore network - resident satisfaction with the availability of recreation facilities across the parks and foreshore network: >= 70%.

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

6.7 The recommendation for the building location is consistent with community feedback obtained during a public meeting in 2023 when the alternative site next to the existing Christchurch Netball Centre at Ngā Puna Wai was not supported by the local community.

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

6.8.1 Waipuna Halswell Hornby Riccarton Community Board

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.9 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.

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

6.10 The proposal in this report is unlikely to contribute significantly to adaptation to the impacts of climate change or emissions reductions. However, the design brief and Principal’s Requirements for the new buildings will contain a requirement to maximise sustainable design and operational efficiency considerations relating to sustainability, approached from a whole-building, whole-of-life perspective.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 If approved, the project will require a resource consent prior to construction which is due for completion in late May 2025.

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

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Guy Williams - Project Manager - Community Parks

Richard Gibbs - Senior Project Manager

Approved By

Rupert Bool - Acting Head of Parks

12. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Area Report - June 2024
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/734625
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Jessica Garrett, Community Governance Manager
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose of Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

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

1.2 This is a monthly staff-generated report.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Area Report - June 2024.

3. Community Support, Governance and Partnership Activity

3.1 Community Governance Projects

Activity	Detail	Timeline	Strategic Alignment
Huritini Student Council	The Huritini Student Council gathered on Wednesday, May 15th, at Wigram Primary School. Representatives from four schools were present: Wigram Primary, Halswell, Aidanfield, and Oaklands. During the meeting, the Student Council decided to prioritise food security for its focus in 2024.	15 May 2024	Te-Haumako-Te Whitingia- Strengthening Communities Together Strategy
Youth and Cultural Development – FRESH Matatiki Pool Party	For the first time YCD hosted a FRESH Pool Party event in Hornby at the Matatiki Centre. Held as the finale of their series of Youth Week events the free event provided kai, drinks, live music, free haircuts and braids, spot prizes and more. Staff are working with YCD to enable more events at Matatiki for rangatahi.	26 May 2024	Te-Haumako-Te Whitingia- Strengthening Communities Together Strategy
Gear Up Ōtautahi	Formerly, Give Gear Get Great, we are excited to introduce ‘Gear Up Ōtautahi’, the community led initiative with a fresh approach and renewed enthusiasm. The re-launch for Gear Up Ōtautahi occurred on Monday 27^th May at MacFarlane Park, coinciding with ‘The Listening Post’, a Shirley Village Project after school activation for local tamariki and whānau. The event was a big success with a free BBQ and the Gear Up Ōtautahi Committee giving our donated sports gear to local tamariki and whānau. If you have any used or outgrown sports gear in good condition, please think about donating. The gear will be recycled back into the community! The bins will be back out into the community soon. For when this will be and for an updated list of bin locations, please visit our Facebook or email gearup@ccc.govt.nz.	Ongoing	Te-Haumako-Te Whitingia- Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

3.1.1 Huritini Student Council

A group of Huritini Student Council members sitting at a table.

3.1.2 Youth and Cultural Development – FRESH Matatiki Pool Party

A bright blue and white poster with details of the Youth and Cultural Development – FRESH Matatiki Pool Party.

3.1.3 Gear Up Ōtautahi Relaunch Event

Gear Up Ōtautahi collage of 4 images. Images at the outdoor event at MacFarlane Park are, 8 Gear Up Ōtautahi collection bins in a line, a group of children and adults with sports gear laid out on the ground, an attendee standing with a Gear Up Ōtautahi corflute and a Gear Up Ōtautahi poster

3.2 Community Funding Summary

3.2.1 For information, a summary is provided on the status of the Board's 2023-24 funding as at May 2024 (refer Attachment A).

3.2.2 Off the Ground Fund – Under authority delegated by the Community Board the following allocation was made in May 2024:

· $300 to Peter Simmonds towards the We Heart Harrington Park – Mulching and BBQ Social Event.

The successful event was held on Saturday 25 May 2024 with the community working together to add mulch to the pathway area near the Piko Crescent entrance to Harrington Park. A sausage sizzle was also provided for attendees to enjoy.

A group of people moving mulch, raking and clearing ground at an entrance pathway to Harrington Park.

3.2.3 Youth Development Fund

Under authority delegated by the Community Board the following allocation was made on 30 April 2024:

· $500 to Badminton Canterbury Incorporated towards Eben Anil, Keisha Wong, Kelly Shen, Zooni Butterfly Ahuja, Janie Wang, Kate Duffield and Pat Weng to participate in the New Zealand Junior Team Badminton Championships 2024 in Palmerston North.

Asia Pacific Canoe Sprint Cup 2024

Youth Development Fund recipient Stella Crossan competed at the Asia Pacific Canoe Sprint Cup 2024 in Australia from 5 to 12 May 2024.

There was a busy schedule of races with Stella and her team working well together in the K4. They were rewarded for the efforts with a gold medal, a great way to start the Asia Pacific Cup. With a confidence boost and eagerness to get another gold, Stella and her K2 partner Jaqueline pushed hard in the K2 500m final to convincingly take first place.

Over the competition Stella added to her tally with a bronze in the K1 500m and 200m, silver in the U16 relay and gold in the U16 mixed K4.

Stella’s first international regatta was a great learning experience and she thanked and acknowledged the Board for their support of her first international journey.

3.2.4 Better Off Fund Update

At its meeting on 9 May 2024 the Board resolved to approve the following grants from its Better-Off Fund:

· $30,000 to Te Korowai o Grannies towards the Establishment of Hornby Community Garden(s) and Tangi Pack Project.

· $40,000 to Halswell Community Church towards the Halswell Youth Activations Project.

· $50,000 to Halswell Community Patrol Incorporated towards the Patrol Car and Operational Costs project.

· $10,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to Wharenui Amateur Swimming Club Inc towards the Reducing Barriers – Learning to Swim Project.

· $40,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to the CCC Parks Team in partnership with Woodland Escape Limited/Matatiki Hornby Centre towards the Matatiki Play Space Project.

· $34,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to the CCC Parks Team towards the Wycola Park Playground Sunshades and Picnic Benches Project.

· $5,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to Halswell Residents Association Incorporated (Halswell ANZAC Committee) towards the Halswell War Memorial Improvements Project.

· $6,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to the Lions Club of Halswell District Inc towards the Gazebo Replacement Project.

· $33,000 from its Better-Off-Fund to South West Sport and Recreation Hub Incorporated towards the Halswell Basketball Court Project.

And approved setting aside $119,500 from its Better-Off-Fund towards the Mobile Youth Centre (MYC) Project subject to the development of a sustainable project plan.

3.3 Participation in and Contribution to Decision Making

3.3.1 Report back on other Activities contributing to Community Board Plan [for items not included in the above table but are included in Community Board Plan]

· Westlake Reserve - pathway renewals

The footpath leading up to the toilets at Westlake Reserve is damaged. Work is to be undertaken late May/early June to renew the footpath. This accords with the priority in the Community Board Plan to “Advocate for safe, accessible pedestrian connections to significant community destinations in the Halswell Ward’.

· Consultation on new plans for tree planting in reserves and parks across the city, including Hornby is ongoing. See 3.3.2 contributing to the priority in the Community Board Plan to “Advocate for the revitalisation of greenspaces in the Hornby Ward including the increase of the tree canopy in the ward.

3.3.2 Council Engagement and Consultation.

· Tree Planting Plans

There has been consultation on 16 new plans for tree planting in reserves and parks across the city, including:

- Denton Park – Hornby

- Evora Park – Halswell

- Franco Park – Halswell

- Holmes Park - Upper Riccarton

- Mandeville Reserve – Riccarton

- Showgate Reserve – Sockburn

Consultation was open for feedback between 29 April 2024 and 20 May 2024.

A community meeting regarding the Denton Park Planting plan was held on the 15th of May with residents, elected members and staff in attendance.

· Information session at Ngā Puna Wai Sports Hub

A group of people in a room sitting and standing, having discussions with one another.

A community information session was held at Ngā Puna Wai on Tuesday, May 21st, to discuss the Access Review Management Plan.

The review, which has been completed, provided a snapshot in time of access management in and around the venue. The plan includes actions assigned into three phases: Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3. The meeting was divided into two parts: the first half was an information session about the review and updates from the sports codes, and the second half allowed the community to have one-on-one conversations with various council staff, including those from parks operations, sports hub and events operations, transport staff, as well as representatives from the five sports codes. Community Board members were also present.

· The Proposed Housing and Business Choice Plan Change (PC14)

The Proposed Housing and Business Choice Plan Change (PC14) was introduced to bring the District Plan in line with the government direction given via the National Policy Statement-Urban Development and the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act to enable more development in the city’s existing urban footprint. The Board lodged a submission on behalf of the Board and subsequently made further submissions on the submissions made by others.

Hearings on PC 14 commenced in October 2023 and concluded on 24 April 2024. The Board Chairperson presented to the Independent Hearings Panel in relation to the Board’s submission.

The Council Reply was filed on 17 May 2024. The Panel will deliver its report and recommendations on PC14 by 26 July 2024.

3.4 Governance Advice

3.4.1 Ngā Puna Wai

Staff have provided an update on the current status of the Wigram/Hayton Intersection project and the associated timetable. Earlier this year the Council planning team identified that the current District Plan does not allow through traffic to Ngā Puna Wai. Parks has since submitted a resource consent application that is currently being processed under the Resource Management Act.

The tender process for the intersection upgrade will not proceed until a resource consent for the Ngā Puna Wai access is granted and may also be delayed until the final Government Policy Statement (GPS) is released in September, which will provide a clearer picture of New Zealand Transport Agency's funding contribution.

3.4.2 Halswell Domain sports field mowing

At its meeting on 15 June 2023 the Board noted that there is local concern that the length of the grass on sports fields at Halswell Domain often impedes play on these and requested staff advice on the mowing schedule of the sports fields at Halswell Domain and whether an increase in the mowing frequency could be implemented, including if sports clubs are permitted to mow the fields themselves.

Staff have advised that currently the frequency for sports field mowing sits at 1 cut a week. Throughout the year this frequency fluctuates to match seasonal requirements. In peak growth times there will be extra cuts if required, this is on a case by case basis.

All sports field mowing must be undertaken by a council approved contractor or by council staff to keep park users safe while machinery is in operation.

4. Advice Provided to the Community Board Ngā Kupu Tohutohu ka hoatu ki te Poari Hapori

4.1 Nash Reserve

As previously advised to Board members, staff have been working with representatives of Aidanfield Christian School to address problems of vehicles driving and parking on the adjacent Nash Reserve, including vehicles dropping off or picking up school students.

It is now proposed that bollards will be erected around the perimeter of the reserve to prevent vehicular access and pedestrian paths will be formed across the reserve. The work is programmed to begin in the last week of May 2024.

4.2 Public Forum - Residential development on Ayr Street, Riccarton

At its meeting on 11 April 2024 4.1 the Board received a public forum presentation from a local resident regarding a residential development that is currently under construction on Ayr Street, Riccarton and expressed concern about the potential odour effects the communal bin area on the development could have on her adjacent property.

The Board referred the issues raised in the presentation to staff and requested advice on any assessment of odour undertaken as part of the consideration of the resource consent for the development on 5-9 Ayr Street and any District plan rules relating to rubbish storage in multi-unit developments.

Planning staff have now responded advising that there are no rules in the District Plan specific to odour. There are provisions in relation to bin storage.

In the case of the development on 5-9 Ayr Street the area proposed for bin storage was smaller than required without resource consent. This required assessment against the matters in clause 14.15.19 ‘Service, storage and waste management spaces’ in the District Plan. The assessment (on page 7 of the ‘Land Use s95/104 decision’ report see Attachment D) was:

“In terms of the adequacy of the bin space, it is noted that 24 residential units would be entitled to the following volumes of kerbside waste and recycling capacity via the Council’s kerbside collection system:

5,760 litres recycling.

3,360 litres rubbish.

1,500 litres green waste.

Expressed in terms of the 660 litre wheeled rubbish bin skips provided by the Council this equates to 16 skips. If these bins were collected by the CCC kerbside system, the rubbish and recycling bins would only be emptied fortnightly. The applicant’s planner outlines that the spaces proposed would be sufficient to accommodate up to four 660L bins. The applicant’s AEE states that the number of bins provided is based off advice from a private waste management provider, and note that the site will be serviced at least weekly. I consider it appropriate to impose a condition in relation to this, including requiring that the bins be emptied more than once per week if needed. Subject to that condition, which the applicant has accepted, and taking into account the matters within clause 14.15.19 ‘Service, storage and waste management spaces’. I consider that sufficient provision has been made for bin storage on the site and any effects of the shortfall of service space will be less than minor.”

More broadly, multi-unit developments typically trigger assessment against the matters within Clause 14.15.1 ‘Residential design principles’ in the District Plan. This is assessed on pages 5-6 of the ‘Land Use s95/104 decision’ report (see Attachment D). The applicant also provided assessment against these matters by their Urban Design expert. There is no specific discussion of odour within those assessments.

The resource consent has the following condition on it: “The communal bins shall be emptied by a waste management contractor a minimum of once per week, or more frequently if necessary.” This means the bins will be emptied more frequently than typical Council bins, which will assist in reducing odour effects. In terms of any noise associated with additional emptying of bins, this will need to comply with District Plan noise standards. If these standards are not met, further resource consent would be needed.

4.3 Community Patrols

Community Patrols of New Zealand is dedicated to helping build safer communities in partnership with NZ Police and other organisations. Patrols in the Board area include the Hornby and Riccarton community patrols. Their Monthly Patrol Statistics can be found on the Community Patrols of New Zealand website:

Hornby Community Patrol Inc statistical information

Riccarton Community Patrol Inc statistical information

4.4 Graffiti Snapshot

For the Board’s information, attached is a Graffiti Snapshot, an update on graffiti as of April 2024 (refer Attachment B).

4.5 Customer Service Requests/Hybris Report

For the Board’s information, attached is a copy of the April 2024 Hybris Report (refer Attachment C).

The report provides an overview of the number of Customer Service Requests that have been received, including the types of requests being received and a breakdown of how they are being reported.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board Funding Update - May 2024	24/907256	154
b ⇩	Graffiti Snapshot - April 2024	24/832776	158
c ⇩	Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Hybris Report - April 2024	24/907034	160
d ⇩	RMA20213271 Combined s95 104 Report	24/973241	161

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Noela Letufuga - Support Officer

Faye Collins - Community Board Advisor

Marie Byrne - Community Development Advisor

Bailey Peterson - Community Development Advisor

Sam Savage - Community Recreation Advisor

Hannah Martin - Community Support & Events Coordinator

Jess Garrett - Manager Community Governance, Halswell Hornby Riccarton

Approved By

Jess Garrett - Manager Community Governance, Halswell Hornby Riccarton

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Funding Request Number	Organisation	Project Name	Amount Requested	Amount Recommended
00067793	Emmanuel Christian School	South Island Secondary Schools Junior Netball Tournament	$1,755	$650
00067821	Citizens Advice Bureau Christchurch Area Incorporated	CAB West- Hornby Secure Access	$380	$380

Total Budget 2023/24	Granted To Date	Available for allocation	Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted
$136,030	$131,895	$4135	$2,105

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
13.	Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board - Community Service and Youth Service Awards 2024
	Attachment b - Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Service Awards 2024 - Nomination Matrix	s7(2)(a)	Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons	To protect the privacy of the nominees and the confidence of the nomination process. Names of unsuccessful nominees will be kept confidential.	Names of successful nominees will be released following receipients receiving their awards.

10. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Discretionary Response Fund Applications - Youth Development Fund Transfer, Emmanuel Christian School and Citizens Advice Bureau Christchurch Area Incorporated
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/705844
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Bailey Peterson – Community Development Advisor Sam Savage – Community Recreation Advisor
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

11. Progress on Community Board Plan Priorities
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/844301
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Jessica Garrett Pou Whakahaere Mana Whakahaere – Manager Community Governance
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

13. Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board - Community Service and Youth Service Awards 2024
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/826897
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Noela Letufuga, Support Officer
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community