Agenda of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board

A black text on a white background

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū

Banks Peninsula Community Board

Open Minutes

Date: Monday 10 March 2025

Time: 10.01am

Venue: Lyttelton Community Boardroom,
25 Canterbury Street, Ōhinehou Lyttelton.

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Lyn Leslie

Nigel Harrison

Tyrone Fields

Jillian Frater

Asif Hussain

Cathy Lum-Webb

Principal Advisor

Penelope Goldstone

Manager Community Governance

Tel: 941 5689

penelope.goldstone@ccc.govt.nz

Meeting Advisor

Liz Beaven

Community Board Advisor

Tel: 941 6601

liz.beaven@ccc.govt.nz

Website: www.ccc.govt.nz

Part A Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B Reports for Information

Part C Decisions Under Delegation

Karakia Tīmatanga

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1. Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00010

That the apologies for lateness from Asif Hussain and Nigel Harrison be accepted and the apologies for absence from Luana Swindells and Howard Needham be accepted.

Lyn Leslie/Cathy Lum-Webb Carried

2. Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

Nigel Harrison joined the meeting at 10:03am during consideration of Item 2 -Declarations of Interest.

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

Part C

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00011

That the minutes of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board meeting held on Monday, 10 February 2025 be confirmed.

Lyn Leslie/Tyrone Fields Carried

Asif Hussian joined the meeting at 10:04am during consideration of Item 3 – Confirmation of Previous Minutes.

4. Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

4.1

NIWA Canterbury Science Fair Application

Leonor de la Maza Macpherson, student, spoke to the Board regarding her recent success at the NIWA Canterbury Science Fair.

After questions, the Board thanked Ms de la Maza Macpherson for her presentation.

4.2

Proposed Matariki Awards Event

Maui Stuart, kaumatua, spoke to the Board regarding a proposed Matariki Awards Event.

After questions, the Board thanked Mr Stuart for his presentation

4.3 Lyttelton Harbour Business Association

Sabrina Sauders, Chairperson, spoke to the Board regarding the Lyttelton Harbour Business Association’s support for the proposed Matariki Awards (refer Item 4.2 of these minutes).

Ms Saunders outlined recent and proposed activities of the Association.

After questions, the Board thanked Ms Saunders for her presentation.

13. Resolution to Include Supplementary Report

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00012

That the report be received and considered at Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board meeting on Monday, 10 March 2025.

Open Items

14. Koukourarata Port Levy - Bach on Public Land (Road Reserve)

Tyrone Fields/Asif Hussain Carried

5. Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

5.1

Port Levy Bach on Public Land

Lindsay Woodward, owner, spoke to the Board regarding Item 13 - Port Levy Bach on Public Land report.

After questions, the Board thanked Mr Woodward for his presentation.

5.2

Port Levy Bach on Public Land

Ian Culpan, local resident spoke to the Board regarding Item 13 - Port Levy Bach on Public Land report.

After questions, the Board thanked Mr Culpan for his presentation.

14. Koukourarata Port Levy - Bach on Public Land (Road Reserve)
	Community Board Comment 1. The Board took into consideration the deputations made by Lindsay Woodward and Ian Culpan. (Item 5 of these minutes refers). 2. Tyrone Fields moved the original officer’s recommendations with an amendment to recommendation 2, which was seconded by Nigel Harrison: That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board recommends that the Council: 2. Delegates authority to the Property Consultancy Manager to negotiate and enter into the Deed of Licence on Council’s standard terms and conditions, including but not limited to: a. A term of 10 years less one day. b. A negotiated licence fee. c. The requirement for the licensee to hold public liability insurance of at least $2m. d. The public’s right of access must not be obstructed, the macrocarpa hedge must be removed, and the retaining wall must be removed and the foreshore returned to its natural form and this must be resolved within six months. e. Reassessment of the licence if the structure is reconstructed or altered. f. Council will not be responsible to repair or retain the structure in the event of coastal sea level rise or other natural hazard. 3. The meeting debated the amendment and when put to the vote the amended motion was declared tied. The Chairperson exercised her casting vote against the amendment therefore the amendment was lost. 4. The original officer’s recommendations, both Part A and C, were moved by Asif Hussain and seconded by Lyn Leslie and when put to the vote, a division was called, and the motion was declared carried.
	Community Board Recommendation Amended Motion moved by Tyrone Fields and seconded by Nigel Harrison That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board recommends that the Council: 1. Approves the granting of a licence over unformed legal road adjoining 23 and 3B Puari Road, Port Levy to legitimise the legacy encroachment of the dwelling (the bach) as shown in Attachment A attached to the meeting agenda report. 2. Delegates authority to the Property Consultancy Manager to negotiate and enter into the Deed of Licence on Council’s standard terms and conditions, including but not limited to: a. A term of 10 years less one day. b. A negotiated licence fee. c. The requirement for the licensee to hold public liability insurance of at least $2m. d. The public’s right of access must not be obstructed, and the macrocarpa hedge must be removed, and the retaining wall must be removed and the foreshore returned to its natural form and this must be resolved within six months. e. Reassessment of the licence if the structure is reconstructed or altered. f. Council will not be responsible to repair or retain the structure in the event of coastal sea level rise or other natural hazard. That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board: 3. Receives the information contained within this report for the Koukourarata /Port Levy Bach, located on the foreshore, adjacent to properties on Puari Road. 4. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Tyrone Fields/Nigel Harrison Lost
	Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00013 Officer recommendations accepted without change That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board: 3. Receives the information contained within this report for the Koukourarata /Port Levy Bach, located on the foreshore, adjacent to properties on Puari Road. 4. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The division was declared carried* by 4 votes to 2 votes the voting being as follows:* *For:* Lyn Leslie, Nigel Harrison, Jillian Frater and Asif Hussain *Against:* Tyrone Fields and Cathy Lum-Webb Asif Hussain/Lyn Leslie Carried

Community Board Decided BKCB/2025/00014 Officer recommendations accepted without change

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board recommends that the Council recommends that the Council:

1. Approves the granting of a licence over unformed legal road adjoining 23 and 3B Puari Road, Port Levy to legitimise the legacy encroachment of the dwelling (the bach) as shown in Attachment A attached to the meeting agenda report.

2. Delegates authority to the Property Consultancy Manager to negotiate and enter into the Deed of Licence on Council’s standard terms and conditions, including but not limited to:

a. A term of 25 years less one day.

b. A negotiated licence fee.

c. The requirement for the licensee to hold public liability insurance of at least $2m.

d. The public’s right of access must not be obstructed, and the macrocarpa hedge must be trimmed to the Council’s satisfaction or removed and the retaining wall must be removed and the foreshore returned to its natural form.

e. Reassessment of the licence if the structure is reconstructed or altered.

f. Council will not be responsible to repair or retain the structure in the event of coastal sea level rise or other natural hazard.

The division was declared carried by 4 votes to 2 votes the voting being as follows:

For: Lyn Leslie, Nigel Harrison, Jillian Frater and Asif Hussain

Against: Tyrone Fields and Cathy Lum-Webb

Asif Hussain/Lyn Leslie Carried

Tyrone Fields left the meeting at 10:51 am during consideration of item 14 - Koukourarata Port Levy - Bach on Public Land (Road Reserve).

Tyrone Fields returned to the meeting at 10:55 am during consideration of item 14 - Koukourarata Port Levy - Bach on Public Land (Road Reserve).

The meeting adjourned at 11:25am and reconvened at 11:35am.

The meeting adjourned at 12:15 pm and reconvened at 12:45 pm.

6. Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

7. Reserve Committee Meeting Minutes

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00015 Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part B

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receives the unconfirmed minutes of the following Reserve Committees:

a. Duvauchelle Reserve Committee 20 January 2025

b. Duvauchelle Reserve Committee 17 February 2025

c. Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee 24 January 2025

d. Lyttelton Reserves Committee 10 February 2025

e. Cass Bay Reserve Committee 5 February 2025

f. Robinsons Bay Reserve Committee 16 February 2025

g. Okains Bay Reserve Committee 19 February 2025

h. Stanley Park Reserve Committee 19 February 2025

Lyn Leslie/Nigel Harrison Carried

8. Akaroa Museum Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00016 Officer recommendation accepted without change

Part B

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receives the Akaroa Museum Advisory Committee 19 February 2025 unconfirmed minutes.

Jillian Frater/Cathy Lum-Webb Carried

9. Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Update
	Community Board Comment 1. Eve Mickell, Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Trust Manager, co-presented with staff on the Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Trust Update report, advising the Board of recent events and future projects. 2. The Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Trust asked the Board to consider a liaison Board member for the Trust.
	Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board: 1. Receives the information in the Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Update Report.
	Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00017 Part C That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board: 1. Receives the information in the Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Update Report. 2. Appoints Cathy Lum-Webb and Jillian Frater as liaison Board member to Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Trust. Nigel Harrison/Tyrone Fields Carried

Nigel Harrison left the meeting at 1:15 pm during consideration of Item 10 - Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Trust Update report.

Nigel Harrison returned to the meeting at 1:19 pm during consideration of Item 10 Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre Trust.

10. Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Plan Monitoring

Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00018 Officer recommendation accepted without change

Part C

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receives the information in Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Plan Monitoring Report.

Lyn Leslie/Nigel Harrison Carried

11. Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - March 2025
	Board Comment 1. The Board considered confirming a delegation to two Board members to authorise the submitting of the Board submission to the Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2025-26,
	Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board: 1. Receives the information in Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - March 2025.
	Community Board Resolved BKCB/2025/00019 Part B That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board: 1. Receives the information in Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - March 2025. 2. Delegates to the Board Chairperson and Asif Hussain to authorise the submitting of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board’s submission to the Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2025-26. Nigel Harrison/Cathy Lum-Webb Carried

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

Part B

Board members exchanged the following information:

· Some Board members recently attended the reopening of Drummonds Jetty in Akaroa.

· A meeting has been held with the Friends of the Britomart Memorial reserve in Akaroa. The Friends will be entering into an agreement with the Council’s Parks Unit to ensure they are involved in matters relating to the reserve.

· It was noted that there had been an algae bloom in Akaroa Harbour.

· The Board were advised that the Coastal Hazards Adaption Plan for Whakaraupō and Koukourarata was adopted by the Council on 5 March 2025.

· Lyttelton recently hosted the Port Noise Festival which was well supported.

· One Board member attended Live at the Point music and art festival and the FLARE festival.

· Council has released several consultations and hearings have been booked in. The Board will be making an oral submission on the Dog Control Bylaw Review.

· The Board were advised that some community members have enquired about having fitness equipment installed at the Lyttelton Recreation Ground.

· The Port Liaison Committee has recently met.

· Te Ūaka The Lyttelton Museum recently reviewed their strategy.

· The Cass Bay Residents’ Association is holding their Annual General Meeting on 26 March 2025.

· The Whakaraupō Lyttelton Harbour Community Resilience groups successfully tested a new walkie talkie system.

· The Board Chairperson presented the Board’s submission on Council’s Draft Ōtautahi Christchurch Future Transport.

Karakia Whakamutunga

Meeting concluded at 2 pm

CONFIRMED THIS 7^th DAY OF APRIL 2025

Lyn Leslie

Chairperson

9. Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan and Reserve Schedule 2023 - 26
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/1754002
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Burkes, Banks Peninsula Governance Advisor
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 This report is to bring the Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan (Attachment A) to Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board for its acceptance and support; and to bring the Okains Bay Reserve Schedules (Attachments B and C) to Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board for its endorsement.

1.2 As stated in clause 13 of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Reserve Committees Terms of Reference, a Triennial Plan identifies the Reserve Committees priorities and can be used to report on progress, and to support submissions to the Long-Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan (AP) processes for funding.

1.3 As stated in clause 1.2 of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Reserve Committees Terms of Reference, a Reserve Schedule will outline such things as: the reserves they are to co-manage, the facilities and assets on the reserve, the local community relating to the reserve, user groups and organisations, and the local rūnanga that has kaitiakitanga of the reserve. Okains Bay Reserve Committee co-manage two reserves: Ōkeina and Sefton Park.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receive the information in the Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan and Reserve Schedule 2023 - 26 Report.

2. Accept and support the Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan through the Long-Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan (AP) processes.

3. Endorse the Okains Bay Reserve Schedules for Ōkeina and Sefton Park Reserves.

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

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 This report presents the opportunity to support the Reserve Committee’s priorities and support the Okains Bay Reserve Triennial Plan through the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan processes.

3.2 The preferred option is to accept and support the Okains Bay Reserve Triennial Plan and endorse the Okains Bay Reserve Schedules.

3.3 This is the preferred option because the Reserve Committee members have collaborated with staff to create this plan based off their priorities and have accepted the Reserve Schedules as a true representation of the reserves they are to co-manage. Through the collaboration of this work, staff have approved deliverability for the proposed work subject to available budgets.

3.4 Reserve Committee members have collaborated with representatives from both Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu and Te Rūnanga o Koukourarata, who have agreed to the inclusion of their logos on the Triennial Plan.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 In alignment with Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Reserve Committee Terms of Reference, every Reserve Committee is encouraged to create their Triennial Plan, and confirm their Reserve Schedules, in collaboration with staff.

4.2 Okains Bay Reserve Committee has collaborated with staff and Rūnanga representatives to create the attached Okains Bay Reserve Triennial Plan which is now being placed in front of the Board for the Boards acceptance and support through the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan processes.

4.3 Okains Bay Reserve Committee has accepted the attached Reserve Schedules outlining the reserves they are to co-manage, the facilities and assets on the reserve, the local community relating to the reserve, user groups and organisations, and the local rūnanga that has kaitiakitanga of the reserve.

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

4.4.1 Accept and support the Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan through the Long-Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan (AP) processes.

4.4.2 Do not accept and support the Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan through the Long-Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan (AP) processes.

4.4.3 Endorse the Okains Bay Reserve Schedules for Ōkeina and Sefton Park Reserves.

4.4.4 Do not endorse the Okains Bay Reserve Schedules for Ōkeina and Sefton Park Reserves.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.5 Preferred Option: Accept and support the Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan through the Long-Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan (AP) processes.

4.5.1 Option Description: Okains Bay Reserve Committee has worked with staff and the Rūnanga to outline its operational plans for the term, priorities, and goals in a clear and collaborative work programme. The Triennial Plan can be used to report on progress and to support submissions to the Long-Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan (AP) processes for funding.

4.5.2 In alignment with Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Terms of Reference (6 November 2023), the Triennial Plan will be submitted to the Board for their acceptance and support through the LTP and AP processes.

4.5.3 Option Advantages

· This option allows the Reserve Committee to have support for funding through the LTP and AP processes.

· This option allows Okains Bay Reserve Committee to begin their programme of work.

· No financial implications: The staff who create the Triennial Plan in collaboration with the Reserve Committee, can do the proposed work subject to available operational budgets. As such, by staff co-creating the Triennial Plan they are offering deliverability subject to their approved budgets.

4.5.4 Option Disadvantages

· There are no disadvantages to this option.

4.6 Preferred Option: Endorse the Okains Bay Reserve Schedules.

4.6.1 Option Description: Okains Bay Reserve Committee has accepted the Reserve Schedules as a true representation of the reserves they are to co-manage, the facilities and assets on the reserve, the local community relating to the reserve, user groups and organisations, and the local rūnanga that has kaitiakitanga of the reserve.

4.6.2 In alignment with Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Terms of Reference (6 November 2023), the Reserve Schedules will be endorsed by the Board on a triennial basis.

4.6.3 Option Advantages

· This option outlines the scope of responsibility for Okains Bay Reserve Committee and enacts the Terms of Reference for reserve committees.

4.6.4 Option Disadvantages

· There are no disadvantages to this option.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

5.1 Staff that create the Triennial Plan in collaboration with the Reserve Committee, do so knowing the proposed work is deliverable subject to the available operational budgets.

5.2 There are no financial implications associated with endorsement of the Reserve Schedules.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 There are no applicable risk management implications.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

6.2.1 Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Reserve Committee Terms of Reference, clause 13.3 states:

The Committee is responsible for preparing a Triennial plan with guidance and support from Council staff. The plan will identify the Committee’s priorities and can be used to report on progress and to support submissions to the LTP and AP processes for funding.

6.2.2 Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Reserve Committee Terms of Reference, clause 1.2 states:

Each Committee will have a Reserve Schedule, which will be endorsed by the Board on a Triennial basis.

6.3 Other Legal Implications:

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

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The required decisions:

6.4.1 Strongly align with the Community Outcomes and Strategic Priorities detailed in Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework, in particular:

· We can actively participate: Residents and groups in the wider community are socially and actively engaged and can initiate, influence and make decisions that affect their lives. Volunteers from the community form the Reserve Committee and collaborate with Council staff to co-manage the reserve.

· We have a sense of belonging and identity: We support and help build connections between communities and their places and spaces to foster a sense of local identity, shared experience, and stewardship. Banks Peninsula reserves are highly valued spaces where our rural and often isolated residents can gather for events that promote a sense of connection and community.

· We protect open space, landscape and biodiversity through the provision of parks and reserves, covenants, sites of ecological significance, consents, land, waterways and coastal restoration programmes.

6.4.2 Are assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by considering the criteria set out in the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy.

6.4.3 Are consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

6.5 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2024 - 2034):

6.6 Parks, Heritage and Coastal Environment

6.6.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.2.12 Active collaboration on plant and biodiversity project, including conservation of rare and threatened species - Actively collaborate with a partner on a conservation project

· Level of Service: 6.3.7.4 Volunteer participation at community opportunities across parks network - Volunteer hours – maintain or grow compared to previous year

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

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

6.7.1 Akaroa subdivision, Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula ward.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.8 The decision relates in part to Ōkeina (Okains Bay Reserve and Okains Bay Hall Reserve) which is subject to Sections 127-129 and Schedule 8 of the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998, therefore this decision does specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture, and traditions.

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

6.10 The acceptance and support of this Triennial Plan and endorsement of the Reserve Schedules does involve or impact mana whenua.

6.11 While the land at Ōkeina is vested in Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu under the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998, Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu agreed to Ōkeina being managed and controlled by Banks Peninsula District Council, including its successors, now Christchurch City Council.

6.12 Te Rūnanga o Koukourārata are tangata whenua, hold rangatiratanga and are the kaitiaki within their rohe.

6.13 Representatives from both Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu and Te Rūnanga o Koukourarata sit on the Okains Bay Reserve Committee and support the triennial plan for Ōkeina, acknowledging that a process is currently in place to complete a new Management Plan for Ōkeina.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

6.16 No significant impacts are anticipated because it relates to a continuation of existing reserve management.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 The Okains Bay Reserve Committee can continue their programme of work for this term on Okains Bay Reserve.

7.2 The Okains Bay Reserve Committee will have support for funding through the LTP and AP processes.

7.3 The Okains Bay Reserve Committee has a clear understanding of the scope of their responsibilities in co-management of the Reserve with Council staff and the Community Board.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Okains Bay Reserve Committee Triennial Plan 2023-2026	25/566512	51
b ⇩	Okains Bay Reserve Schedule for Ōkeina 7 April 2025	25/377872	55
c ⇩	Okains Bay Reserve Schedule for Sefton Park 7 April 2025	25/515386	66

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author	Linda Burkes - Banks Peninsula Governance Advisor
Approved By	Penelope Goldstone - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula

10. 67 and 67A Rue Lavaud (BP Meats site) - Phase 1 Community Feedback & Confirming Phase 2 Engagement Plan
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/216920
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Angus Smith, Manager Property Consultancy
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Anne Columbus, General Manager Corporate Services/Chief People Officer

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is twofold:

1.1.1 Firstly, to present the Board with the community feedback from Phase 1 of the community engagement and assessment of the resulting findings.

1.1.2 Secondly, to use that information to seek the Board’s decision on and approval to proceed with community engagement on the recommended short-listed potential future land uses for 67 and 67A Rue Lavaud (aka the BP Meats site). This also provides the Community Board with an opportunity to address any areas they consider require addressing, additional focus or further analysis before proceeding with the next stage.

1.2 The report follows a staff project update memo in December 2024.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the 67 and 67A Rue Lavaud (BP Meats site) - Phase 1 Community Feedback & Confirming Phase 2 Engagement Plan Report.

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

3. Agrees that the best potential future land uses of the site would be commercial and/or residential activity as set out in Indicative Concept Plans 1 – 3 (Attachment A) in this report.

4. Instructs staff to undertake Phase 2 of community engagement, which will seek to further refine those into the preferred future land use/s through continued stakeholder input and public engagement, and report back to the Community Board with the findings and implementation recommendations for final sign off and adoption of.

5. Delegates authority to the Manager Property Consultancy do all things necessary and make any decisions at his sole discretion that are consistent with the intent of this report to implement the resolutions above.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 Staff have initiated a process signed off by the Community Board on 11 March 2024 to ensure a balanced approach to the future use of the BP Meats site – one which integrates community perspectives with a strategic, long-term vision that considers economic, social, and environmental sustainability.

3.2 Phase 1 of community engagement commenced with targeted early engagement with key stakeholders to share the project process, gather local intel and obtain early feedback on potential future land use options for the site. That was followed by broader consultation with the community, the results of which are the subject of this report.

3.3 Staff have formally reviewed and assessed the feedback received, identified key themes identified and drawn conclusions, ensuring that all stakeholder perspectives have been adequately considered and that the findings align with the broader strategic objectives for Akaroa. The assessment also identified gaps or areas that were further explored before progressing to the next stage.

3.4 While current stakeholders have voiced strong preferences — from preserving existing businesses and heritage structures to creating more community and arts spaces — there is also a need for an informed, future-focused lens to assess how the site can best serve Akaroa over the coming decades. This means weighing immediate concerns like retail competition and site maintenance against broader priorities like housing affordability, climate resilience and sustainable development. Thoughtful planning must ensure that future use aligns with community values while addressing evolving demographic trends, economic shifts and environmental challenges. By combining local insights with expert analysis and long-term urban planning principles, the site can be transformed into a space that meets present-day needs and fosters a resilient and thriving Akaroa for future generations.

3.5 The consultation process ran from 31 October to 24 November 2024, engaging 151 key stakeholders, community groups and the public through multiple channels, including digital platforms, local media and in-person outreach. The Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk webpage received 902 views, and staff attended the Akaroa Farmers Market to facilitate discussions.

3.6 Staff received feedback from nearly 100 people. This rich information helped the staff inform the recommendations in this report on the shortlisted future uses of the land.

3.7 After collecting the community’s views, staff reviewed and assessed it against the Site Development Principles, updated from those in the Akaroa Places and Spaces Plan 2011 referencing the Council's current Community Outcomes and Strategic priorities. The ten Site Development Principles are discussed later in this report.

3.8 With the information available, staff shortlisted two worthwhile land use activities: commercial and residential. From this staff have developed indicative concept plans (see Attachment A) to help the audience visualise their possible site layouts, configurations and proportions on the site.

3.9 This report seeks the Board’s decision and approval to proceed with consultation on these short-listed future land uses for 67 and 67A Rue Lavaud (BP Meats site). These draft uses, refined based on Phase 1 engagement findings and staff analysis, represent potential future land uses that align with community priorities while considering long-term sustainability, economic viability, and cultural significance.

3.9.1 If the Board is satisfied with the staff's conclusions, staff recommend endorsing Phase 2 consultation to further refine the shortlisted into preferred future land use/s through continued stakeholder input and public engagement.

3.9.2 If the Board is not fully satisfied, staff requests clear direction on any additional focus areas, concerns to be addressed, or further analysis required before proceeding with the next phase.

3.10 Phase 2 of community engagement will aim to refine these short-listed options, ensuring the community is on the same page regarding the site layout, configuration and proportion of land allocated to different uses. This will obtain the community’s views on, for example, what they like about each indicative concept plan, what they do not like about each and how they would prefer we accommodate commercial and/or residential activity on the site (including through horizontal and/or vertical mixed-use).

3.11 The next steps following this Phase 2 community engagement will be to report back to the Community Board with the consultation findings and, based on those, the implementation recommendations for final sign off and adoption of:

· The preferred future land use/s; and

· The implementation process, e.g. any sale (unencumbered or not), Expressions of Interest (EOI), Requests for Proposal (RFP), partnerships, unilateral dealing, etc.

3.12 The results of the implementation process will determine the financial feasibility and, among other factors, determine the successful delivery of the preferred future land use/s.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 67 and 67A Rue Lavaud (“the site”) is currently leased to several tenants (as illustrated below), the rental income from whom sufficiently covers the site’s operational costs.

A screenshot of a phone

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

4.2 The site was purchased by the Banks Peninsula District Council from Banks Peninsula Meats Ltd in 2000, with the intention of eventually developing it in a way which supports economic growth and community development in Akaroa. Ownership of the site was transferred to the Christchurch City Council following their amalgamation in 2006.

4.3 Although some work occurred in the past to identify potential future land use/s for the site, these were never thoroughly consulted on nor refined due to disruption by the Canterbury earthquakes. Council responses to queries and three proposals for the site (for housing by Purple Peaks Developments Ltd from 2004 - 2012, a market square and display of a replica boat from Shackleton’s expedition by the Christchurch Foundation in 2021 and affordable housing from Ōnuku Runanga in 2023) have been reactive and ad-hoc in the absence of proactive planning for the site. None of those proposals progressed for various reasons. The poor amenity of the site and growing community concern regarding its underutilisation also resulted in direction from the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Community Board (“the Board”) in April 2019 to develop viable commercial regeneration options for the site for it to consider and develop a future process from (resolution BKCB/2019/00036).

4.4 The following related information session/workshops have taken place for the members of the meeting:

Date	Subject
12/6/23	Community Board briefing on the various unsolicited proposals for the site.
26/2/24	Community Board briefing ahead of presenting the project process for determining the future land use/s for approval on 11 March 2024.
24/6/24	Community Board information session/workshop to update the Board on project progress and seek feedback on the engagement approach.

4.5 The following related memo/information was circulated to the meeting members:

Date	Subject
19/12/24	Memo to the Community Board regarding the date of the staff presentation on feedback from the first phase of community engagement and the shortlisted future land use/s to be consulted on in the second phase.
3/3/25	Memo to the Community Board regarding the history, lease arrangement and impact on future land use decisions for the site of the building known as the ‘Kiosk’.

4.6 The Board endorsed the project process and community engagement approach at meetings on 11 March and 24 June 2024. When endorsing the project process, the Board agreed that a wider spatial plan, which would require increased complexity, resources, community capacity and time, was not needed. The project process includes at least two phases of community engagement, to:

1. share details of the project, its process and obtain initial community feedback to help identify the range of, and support for, potential future land uses (now completed and the subject of this report); and

2. obtain submissions on those potential future land uses shortlisted, as mentioned above, following their assessment based on the knowledge and views of the community and evidence-based data and technical information.

4.7 Staff will undertake the phase 2 community engagement upon adoption of the resolutions in this report, the findings of which will be reported to the Board in due course seeking sign-off and adoption of:

· The preferred future land use/s; and

· The implementation process.

4.8 On 7 October 2024, the Board also endorsed canvassing community support for the relocation of Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage from its current site at 40 Rue Jolie to the BP Meats site during phase 1 of community engagement on the site.

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

4.9 When assessed in 2011 against the original Site Development Principles during development of the Akaroa Places and Spaces Plan 2011, commercial and residential activity were considered the most compatible potential future land uses, along with some form of publicly accessible space.

4.10 When assessed against the updated Site Development Principles, in conjunction with current expert advice (including an updated land use options economic assessment undertaken by Property Economics), technical information and anecdotal corroboration in respect to financial/economic feasibility, need and site constraints, the following potential future land uses were determined as being most compatible potential future land uses:

4.10.1 Commercial activity (retail, offices and commercial services), as:

· Akaroa’s market catchment does not just serve Akaroa but encompasses areas like Robinsons Bay and Duvauchelle within a 20-minute driving radius. Its multifaceted commercial centre is sustained predominantly by tourism but also caters to the local community’s fundamental requirements. Its low vacancy rate indicates a healthy and vibrant centre with strong levels of demand.

· The breadth of retail is relatively narrow, dominated by small, independent businesses, with a higher proportion of food, beverage and boutique retailers targeting visitors. Accommodation and food services is the largest employment sector, constituting approximately 26% of the local employment base. The reliance on tourism makes Akaroa vulnerable to macroeconomic influences and market fluctuations.

· As NZ’s tourism sector continues to rebound post-pandemic, it’s anticipated the role and function of Akaroa’s commercial centre will need to improve to meet the growing demands of both visitors and the local community, being its lifeblood during the summer and off-peak winter months respectively.

· Statistics NZ 2023 population estimates indicate that Akaroa’s resident population grew 24% between 2005 and 2023 and will grow 12% by 2038, the more permanent needs of which should be satisfied locally to improve market efficiency. Cruise ships surges of around 4,000 people also create additional demand for convenience retail and commercial services (and provide holiday season employment).

· Akaroa has approximately 8,150sqm GFA of retail and commercial services floorspace. Based on current and forecast local and visitor expenditure, the estimated net additional retail and commercial services GFA is around 3,700sqm by 2038, although some of this increased demand is likely to be accommodated by increased productivities of the existing retail GFA. Property Economics nevertheless considers that accommodating additional retail/commercial services activity on the site’s frontage is appropriate and sustainable within the Akaroa market, both currently and over the long term.

· Allocating the frontage of the site for ground floor retail activities and offices and commercial services above would align with the site’s setting, leverage its high visibility, maximise economic returns and contribute to the vitality of Akaroa’s main street, consistent with Akaroa’s urban design guidelines. The site presents an opportunity for relocation and expansion of the existing Four Square store without compromising its existing on-site parking, to accommodate the retail needs of Akaroa’s growing resident and tourist numbers, and redevelopment of its existing site (although this is not the intention of the current owner).

· Commercial activity could include provision for the existing butchery, either in the existing main, or a new, building.

· The commercial zoning of the site also anticipates activities which could deliver some of those identified in community feedback (e.g. recreation activity, gymnasium, public artwork, civil defence) and/or contribute to rainy day activities and winter attractions for Akaroa’s residents and visitors (e.g. entertainment activity).

4.10.2 Residential (more specifically long-term affordable housing or short-term seasonal worker accommodation), as statistical[1] and anecdotal evidence[2] indicates that families, the elderly, people in need of social housing and seasonal workers are most impacted by a demonstrated housing shortage:

· AirBnB/holiday homes increased over the previous 10 years to approximately 25% of the housing stock in 2023. Holiday homes do not provide for economic or community development, nor improve housing availability and affordability.

· At 39% in 2018, Akaroa’s dwelling occupancy rate was significantly lower than Christchurch’s 91%, suggesting a higher incidence of seasonal accommodation or second-home ownership. Including unoccupied dwellings, Akaroa requires approximately 210 new dwellings by 2038 based on medium population growth projections. Based on demographic changes in the foreseeable future, the proportion of standalone dwellings is expected to decrease gradually to 82% while higher density terraced housing grows correspondingly to 16% (other typologies account for the remaining 2%).

· Between June 2021 to December 2023, Akaroa experienced the most rapid growth in house prices among all 85 suburbs in Christchurch City, with an annual increase of +4.58%. New supply appears impacted by limited land opportunities.

· The priority is for affordable, long-term housing, the lack of which negatively affects the wider community (e.g. schools and businesses)[3].

· There is limited suitable accommodation in Akaroa for the 44% of its population aged 60 years+ (i.e. centrally located, single storey and with easy access to amenities). Pompallier Retirement Village advises that there has been no sale nor rental available in recent years.

· Local community housing providers (CHPs) advise that eight existing social housing units are consistently occupied with low turnover. Due to the lack of available data for this area, the demand assessment for social housing is difficult. However, more social housing would likely be needed (because the accommodation supplement in Akaroa is less than in Christchurch and doesn’t align well with income). It could be managed by the Ōtautahi Community Housing Trust, an established community housing provider currently managing the existing social housing in Akaroa. Social housing should be part of mixed-tenure housing if it were to be considered for the site.

· Statistical evidence does not appear to exist, but anecdotal evidence from Akaroa Heartlands[4] and Akaroa District Promotions[5] supports the lack of seasonal worker accommodation being a perennial seasonal issue, albeit part of the larger issue of lack of affordable housing per se. Supporting seasonal worker accommodation would be beneficial given their important contribution to Akaroa’s economic success. However, Property Economics notes that, for various reasons, there is not a direct relationship between seasonal workers and seasonal worker accommodation demand. In 2018, 89% of Akaroa’s workforce resided there, with the balance 11% commuting from wider Banks Peninsula. Those seasonal workers not accommodated by their employer (e.g. The Grand and Madeira Hotels) may be among those forced to commute from neighbouring settlements like Duvauchelle or freedom camp (which has strict rules). The absence of significant employee influx from further afield Greater Christchurch locations and the periodic nature of seasonal worker accommodation requirements makes its provision on the site questionable from a land use and development efficiency and feasibility perspectives (it being a lower return land use). However, anecdotal evidence indicates some seasonal worker accommodation would be most welcome on the site. If pursued, it should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate seasonal workers when required and tourists during other periods.

· 68% of the respondents to an engagement survey during development of the Te Pātaka o Rākaihatū Banks Peninsula Destination Management Plan supported more affordable housing and accommodation for workers, as does Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Plan 2023 – 25.

· In a 2024 ’snapshot of life’ survey by Community Governance staff of at least 50 self-selected Akaroa residents, business owners, workers and year 7 – 13 students, concern about the lack of stable, permanent housing and seasonal worker accommodation, affordable accommodation and empty or substandard housing were raised in their responses. The health centre and social service provider, in particular, identified the lack of stable, affordable housing for families, and the flow on effects, as an issue. Three respondents identified the site as a potential location for housing.

Both long-term affordable housing and short-term seasonal worker accommodation would require covenants on the site to ensure their delivery, as neither are directly delivered by the Council.

4.11 The accommodation of commercial and/or community activity within the existing building is included on some of the indicative concept plans, as Property Consultancy staff estimate the cost of upgrading it ($326,300 - $780,000) is less than the construction of an equivalent new building ($520,000 - $910,000) and it could continue to accommodate activity while staged construction occurs elsewhere on the site. Its continued use therefore has financial implications. Note these estimated costs do not include those necessary to restore heritage-listing of the building in the Christchurch District Plan or by Heritage New Zealand. Heritage Team staff advise that the building has not been heritage-listed since its removal from the Christchurch District Plan in 2017. This is because it lacks enough verifiable significance of heritage values, with changes to the building over time obscuring its ability to demonstrate ‘technological and craftsmanship’ value without intrusive investigation into its fabric by a conservation architect. The building could meet the requirements for scheduling if its heritage fabric were reinstated by, for example, removal of its stucco and additions. This would, in the first instance, require a review of its heritage significance by a heritage researcher and a heritage architect to assess and report on the building’s condition, scope of works and necessary works to remediate it. The building nevertheless has ‘historical and social’, ‘cultural’ and ‘contextual’ value to the community through its ownership by the Narbey family and its continued use as a butcher’s shop for most of the 20^th century. It doesn’t need to be District Plan protected for the Council, as its owner, to protect these values.

4.12 Flooding risk and location of a possible stormwater device on the site account for the building setback from the rear site boundary adjacent to Wai-iti Balguerie Stream, which runs near the eastern boundary of the site. Land drainage staff note the stream is prone to trouble in several places and can flood properties in Rue Balguerie. Water running down Rue Balguerie has also flooded the museum site. Historical records show known flooding (largely due to rainstorm events) and breaking of the stream’s banks in February 1936, May 1945, July 1963, August 1973, August 1965, July 1977, August 1981 and January 2002. Photos exist of flooding on the site during the August 1981 event. Development may provide an opportunity to restore a flood plain area, which could be planted up with natives and trees, as well as streamside enhancement. Future development will need to take account of a 7m waterbody setback from the bank of the stream, to be kept free of built form and hard surfacing. Flooding mitigation for any future buildings should be through elevation of these above ground level based on an engineering assessment of flooding. Any additional runoff from an increase of impervious surfacing should be mitigated with rainwater tanks or similar, to help alleviate this concern and to treat runoff from the site. The eastern boundary of the site has been identified as the potential location for an in-ground biofiltration device for stormwater similar to a rain garden, requiring approximately 40sqm, to be funded through the Banks Peninsula Stormwater Management Plan. The device would treat the water from gutters on both sides of Rue Balguerie, reducing pollutants such as heavy metals and sediment from the road entering Wai-iti Balguerie Stream. It could potentially be designed to also treat the site’s stormwater. If located in the northern corner of the eastern boundary of the site, it would place it within the 7m waterway setback. This area has been incorporated into the indicative concept plans and would be a continued community use of the site. No other Council need for the site has been identified.

4.13 The following potential future land uses were considered but ruled out:

4.13.1 Community facilities, as Community Governance staff consider Akaroa currently has sufficient provision of community facilities and meeting hubs/spaces throughout the township to meet the needs of both local residents and visitors. These include by the Gaiety Hall (hall and supper room), Akaroa Sports Pavilion, Akaroa Bowling Club, Akaroa Croquet Club, Trinity Church, Coronation Library, Ōnuku Marae (its wharekai Amiria Puhirere) and Akaroa Service Centre (boardroom and first floor office space). While these are largely single use spaces where storage can be a challenge, the main issues are accessibility in respect to bookings and hireage fees. The provision of a multi-use community facility on the site would not resolve these issues. The three community tennis courts at the Akaroa Recreation Ground are considered sufficient. There is no public gym and indoor playground (other than the play centre for children aged 0 – 6 years), both of which would meet a need for rainy day activities. However, these could be accommodated in any commercial development of the site. A communal pizza oven would be more appropriately located elsewhere. Property Economics also considers upgrades to, or expansions of, these existing facilities is likely better and more economically efficient than consuming prime main street commercial land for a new community facility that would duplicate existing community resources.

4.13.2 Expansion of Akaroa Museum onto the site, as it has adequate safe collection storage to meet its present and future needs, the land surrounding the intervening former courthouse needs to continue to reflect its original setting (i.e. be devoid of additional buildings, with visual and physical separation from the site) and the museum already provides for connection with Takapūneke in collaboration with Ōnuku Rūnanga and Ngāi Tahu through its temporary and permanent exhibitions. There is no present or anticipated future need for it using any part of the site, except for a single container to store display cases (which could be relocated).[6] Property Economics notes using the site for museum expansion might result in an economic opportunity cost given the requirement for additional retail and commercial services GFA in the future.

4.13.3 Use of the site as a civil defence centre, as it’s within the Tsunami Evacuation Zone and a civil defence response requires the flexibility to operate from anywhere depending on the circumstances[7]. Civil Defence Emergency Management staff advise this could be in any of the existing community meeting hubs/spaces.

4.13.4 Recreation facility, as none are required according to the Council’s Public Open Space Strategy 2010 – 2040 and Our Sports Field Network Plan for Ōtautahi Christchurch 2024.

4.13.5 Open space. In terms of requests for nature play and a community garden/forest, the Council’s Public Open Space Strategy 2010 - 2040 notes that Akaroa has an abundance of high-quality open space areas. Property Economics concludes there is no need to use the site for open space, other than, potentially, a currently absent hard-surfaced civic square (for uses other than relocating or duplicating the existing Akaroa Farmers’ Market, as it benefits from the high visibility and flexibility of its existing location the St Patrick’s Church grounds at 29 Rue Lavaud [8]). Some from of publicly accessible space could nevertheless be incorporated into, and complement and support other development on, the site.

4.13.6 Visitor accommodation. As the site is located in close proximity to the coastline, water-based recreational activities, other popular attractions and restaurants, etc, it would enhance the local visitor accommodation options, employment opportunities, the economy (including evening) and development feasibility of the site through vertical development. Given the upward trend in the occupancy rate of Christchurch’s commercial visitor accommodation[9] between February 2023 (77.5%) and February 2024 (84.2%), potential exists for the development of new visitor accommodation on the site to meet growing demand for guest nights. However, it scored relatively low overall against the Site Development Principles compared to the other potential future land uses identified, including due to very low community support (only 2 of 98 people in favour of it).

4.13.7 Use of the site for parking (other than that accessory to the preferred land use/s, located unobtrusively to the rear of the site), as Traffic Operations staff advise that parking demand is unchanged from the 2011 conclusions in the Akaroa Places and Spaces Plan, being that parking demand is only high during the peak tourist season (December to March), with shorter periods of very high (super-peak) demand occurring on only a few days during this period. There isn’t sufficient parking demand to warrant the investment needed to clear, level and seal the balance of the site (assuming retention of the existing main building) and access when it would only yield a relatively small number of parks (62, including 4 disabled). Unsealed parking capacity would be much lower as individual spaces are more problematic to define. Either way, the existing access from Rue Balguerie would need signposting. Property Economics agrees that use of the site predominantly for parking would negatively impact the main street pedestrian environment, creating pedestrian/vehicle conflict and undermining its frontage and amenity. It also considers that parking would not be an efficient use of the site and would not assist in enhancing the commercial activity of the centre. However, the provision of on-site parking accessory to the preferred land use/s, using the existing site access off Rue Balguerie, will assist alleviate peak tourist season parking demand and traffic congestion.

4.13.8 Relocation of Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage onto the site, for the following reasons:

· Community feedback indicated that there is more opposition to, than support for, its relocation, including for reasons of character loss and cost. This is consistent with the lack of support for its funding indicated through submissions on the draft LTP 2024-2034.

· The latter is estimated by Parks asset staff at $50,000 to relocate and $450,000 - $650,000 to restore the cottage, of which only $113, 335 is currently budgeted for in the LTP (leaving a shortfall of $386,665 - $586,665).

· Relocation scored relatively low overall against the Site Development Principles compared to the other potential future land use/s identified.

· Relocation would constrain the site layout and built form and result in an economic opportunity cost given the requirement for additional retail and commercial services GFA in the future[10].

· Although the cottage (being part of the town’s architectural heritage) would contribute to the main street’s character if relocated on to the site, new development on the site is able to reinforce Akaroa’s heritage and character through, for example, the application of covenants to the site and adherence to the design guidelines applicable within Akaroa’s Commercial Banks Peninsula Zone.

· Relocation also creates a precedent in respect to other Council heritage assets in Akaroa at risk of rising sea levels and the broader impacts of climate change, e.g. the former Customs House.

4.13.9 Activities that are more of a design feature (such as landscaping ideas, outdoor art, embedding of Māori narratives and connecting neighbouring sites), which are more appropriately considered and provided for once preferred future land use is determined.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.14 The attached concept plans are high-level, not detailed, as they are not intended to be presented as proposed development options. They are intended to be indicative only, visually illustrating possible site-layouts, configurations and proportions of the short-listed (i.e. the most community-supported and worthwhile) potential future land use/s to give the Board and community a more refined idea of how they could be accommodated on the site. There will be other proportions and ways they could be arranged and located - e.g. mixed-use that is both horizontal (i.e. across the site) and/or vertical (e.g. commercial activity on the ground floor and residential activity above – and questions asked during the Phase 2 community engagement can tease these out. The indicative concept plans reflect advice from Property Economics that development of the site should have people as its focus and how they are attracted to/utilise/move through the site, rather than a purely built form focus, as well as adopt a longer-term focus (including developing flexible, multi-use spaces). Rather than being named ‘Options’ 1 - 3, staff propose the concept plans be identified as ‘Indicative’ and named based on their land use/s, as phase 2 of community engagement is likely to draw submissions that favour specific aspects from multiple concept plans. The final plan of preferred future land use/s might therefore look different to all three indicative concept plans. Depending on its nature, its construction could be staged.

4.15 Indicative concept plan 1: Mixed-use (commercial and residential activity).

4.15.1 Activity Description: Mixed-use, with commercial activity at the front of the site and residential activity (either long-term affordable or short-term seasonal worker), including communal open space central to, and residential access and parking, at the rear of the site. Provision for associated landscaping and a possible in-ground biofiltration device for stormwater similar to a rain garden adjacent to the eastern site boundary.

4.15.2 Activity Advantages:

· At 2554m², the site (excluding the 414m²access) is large enough to accommodate a mixture of activities.

· The multifaceted nature of the community’s (and visitor’s) needs, as well as economic considerations, warrant a mix of compatible (rather than singular) activities on the site.

· Mixed-use is preferred from an economic and urban design perspective and is better able to achieve the desired outcomes as expressed by the Site Development Principles.

· Would activate the main street frontage with commercial use and, potentially, provide for additional on-street car parking.

· Mixed-use is achievable utilising the existing access from a transport perspective.

· The residential activity will complement and support the commercial activity, providing for 24-hour use of the site.

· Potential for a shared central open space area.

· Residential activity could provide for a variety of options that are not widely available in Akaroa, including long-term affordable and short-term seasonal worker housing. The former would also assist aging residents to stay in Akaroa instead of relocating to Christchurch and the latter would support economic growth.

· Being less attractive to commercial activity and less accessible to the public, the rear of the site would best accommodate activities that foster community wellbeing, at a higher density to maximise efficient use of the scarce commercial land in Akaroa and development feasibility across the site.

· An opportunity to diversify the local housing stock by providing medium-density housing and a mix of ownership types.

· An opportunity to work to deliver long term affordable housing in collaboration with Ōnuku Rūnanga and/or CHPs.

· The site is within easy access of community amenities.

· Residential activity may have acceptable impacts on the site’s access if managed appropriately.

· Residential activity would provide good transition to the existing residential activity in the surrounding area.

4.15.3 Activity Disadvantages:

· May not provide for on-site parking accessory to the commercial activity.

· Residential activity reduces the availability of commercially zoned land in the town centre and may adversely affect adjoining commercial activities.

· Potential low return from social housing and short-term seasonal worker accommodation.

· Securing the funding and resources to deliver social housing.

· Loss of public ownership of at least the front part of the site.

· Any associated sale (wholly or partially) of the site would result in the Council no longer having control over how any commercial or residential activity is developed privately, unless appropriately covenanted (e.g. to avoid development that does not meet local housing needs in respect to typology, affordability and community).

4.16 Indicative concept plan 2: Commercial activity (large scale).

4.16.1 Activity Description: Commercial activity or activities located in a large-scale building, with on-site parking to the north and servicing to the rear accessed by a one-way through route from Rue Lavaud to Rue Balguerie. Provision for associated landscaping and a possible in-ground biofiltration device for stormwater similar to a rain garden adjacent to the eastern site boundary.

4.16.2 Activity Advantages:

· Would help meet future commercial demand and grow the local economy, employment base and existing offerings by delivering a range of large-scale and/or small-scale retail, offices and commercial services anticipated by, and making efficient use of, the site’s Commercial Banks Peninsula zoning (excluding its access from Rue Balguerie, which is zoned Residential Banks Peninsula).

· Site size and location is good for large retail.

· Large-scale retail could provide for essential, or hard to locate elsewhere, activities (e.g. a larger supermarket).

· If well-designed (i.e. providing for smaller commercial activities at the street frontage), it could activate the street, fit with the architectural character of Akaroa and, potentially, provide for additional on-street car parking.

· Could provide for the existing butchery - a business located on the site since around 1842, which provides an essential service for, attraction to and is well supported by, the local community.

· Any associated sale (wholly or partially) of the site would provide revenue which could be used to fund other projects in Akaroa.

4.16.3 Activity Disadvantages:

· Commercial viability given the low resident population and seasonal variation in visitor demand.

· A larger footprint building and car park may not fit with Akaroa’s character and would be harder to integrate into the residential and heritage surrounds.

· If small-scale activities are not integrated at the front of the site, only a modest level of street engagement would occur.

· Access and parking issues relating to higher volumes of traffic.

· Large signage may be required.

· Would not provide for new housing.

· Loss of public ownership of the site.

· Any associated sale (wholly or partially) of the site would result in the Council no longer having control over how the site is developed, unless appropriately covenanted.

4.17 Indicative concept plan 3: Commercial activity (small-scale/finer grained).

4.17.1 Activity Description: Commercial activity or activities located in a small-scale/finer grained building or buildings, with on-site parking to the north and servicing to the rear accessed from Rue Lavaud and Rue Balguerie respectively. Provision for associated landscaping and a possible in-ground biofiltration device for stormwater similar to a rain garden adjacent to the eastern site boundary.

4.17.2 Activity Advantages:

· Would help meet future commercial demand and grow the local economy, employment base and existing offerings by delivering a range of small-scale retail, offices and commercial services anticipated by, and making efficient use of, the site’s Commercial Banks Peninsula zoning (excluding its access from Rue Balguerie, which is zoned Residential Banks Peninsula).

· Small-scale retail could provide for essential activities.

· If well-designed, it could activate the street, fit with the architectural character of Akaroa and, potentially, provide for additional on-street car parking.

· Incorporation of existing main building would result in minimal disruption to the existing tenants, including the Akaroa Butchery & Deli.

· Could provide for the existing butchery - a business located on the site since around 1842, which provides an essential service for, attraction to and is well supported by, the local community.

· Smaller-scale commercial activity may have acceptable impacts on the site’s access if managed appropriately.

· A small-scale/finer grained building or buildings would be easier to integrate into the residential and heritage surrounds.

· Any associated sale (wholly or partially) of the site would provide revenue which could be used to fund other projects in Akaroa.

4.17.3 Activity Disadvantages:

· Commercial viability given the low resident population and seasonal variation in visitor demand.

· If small-scale activities are not integrated at the front of the site, only a modest level of street engagement would occur.

· Commercial activities to the rear would reduce commercial activity on the main street.

· May not fit with the Akaroa character.

· Access and parking issues relating to higher volumes of traffic.

· Large signage may be required.

· Would not provide for new housing.

· Loss of public ownership of the site.

· Any associated sale (wholly or partially) of the site would result in the Council no longer having control over how the site is developed, unless appropriately covenanted.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.18 Staff analysis of the potential future land uses was informed by:

4.18.1 Advice about, and validation of, the approach to assessing, scoring and ranking explained below from Monitoring and Research staff.

4.18.2 Assessing and scoring the extent to which each potential future land use aligned with each of the Site Development Principles below was determined as follows: 1 = yes, to a limited degree; 2 = yes; 3 = yes, definitely; and 0 = highly unsuitable, invasive or not wanted by the community (generally less than 10 feedback respondents in support).

4.18.3 The original 6 Site Development Principles on page 26 of Section D (specific to the BP Meats site) of the Akaroa Places and Spaces Plan 2011 were reviewed, updated and added to last year with reference to the Council's current Community Outcomes and Strategic Priorities, to help inform Phase 1 of community engagement. The updated Site Development Principles were likewise weighted as noted below based on the extent to which they align with current Community Outcomes and Strategic Priorities.

· Reflects community feedback for its future use (20%/0.2);

· Minimises greenhouse gas emissions and protects our indigenous biodiversity, water bodies and tree canopy (15%/0.15);

· Enables the community to be prepared for, respond and recover from, the many hazards which are increasing in frequency and intensity (15%/0.15);

· Provides for activities that are difficult to locate elsewhere in the township (15%/01.5);

· Balances today’s needs with the future needs of the community (10%/0.1);

· Recognises the financial trade-offs that need to be considered by the Council in delivering quality core services to the whole community (10%/0.1);

· Provides for, but balances, economic (particularly tourism-related) growth and development and community development, identity and connection (5%/0.05);

· Provides for sustainable growth in respect to impacts on critical infrastructure (5%/0.05);

· Reflects the surrounding character of the northern commercial area (2.5%/0.025); and

· Is compatible with adjoining land use activities now and in the future (2.5%/0.025).

The initial scores were then multiplied by the respective weighting ratio for each site development principle. For example, a potential future land use that definitely aligns with a site development principle with a 20%/0.2 weighting scored 3 x 0.2 = 0.6. The total of the scores for each potential future land use in respect to all 10 Site Development Principles provide a final score which enabled all of the potential future land uses to be ranked (see Attachment B). Keeping the existing butcher ranked the highest, with other retail, commercial (excluding guest accommodation) and community activity (generally, plus some specific, e.g. space for community groups) clearly favoured. Residential activity (particularly long-term housing, seasonal worker accommodation and affordable housing) followed. Guest accommodation ranked relatively low and the relocation of Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage only scored slightly above the lowest scoring parking.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option	Option 2	Option 3
Cost to Implement	N/A	N/A	N/A
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	N/A	N/A	N/A
Funding Source	N/A	N/A	N/A
Funding Availability	N/A	N/A	N/A
Impact on Rates	N/A	N/A	N/A

5.1 The above analysis is not applicable at this stage of the process. The Council has no budget or provisions in its Long Term or Annual Plans to develop the site. Consideration of implementation options for the preferred future land use/s identified and the associated cost and funding will be in the report to the Community Board subsequent to the Phase 2 community engagement.

5.2 Phase 2 of community engagement, subsequent analysis and reporting requires staff time and expert inputs. This is being funded from existing operational budgets, including consultant fees for the technical analysis from that of the Property Consultancy Team.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 There is a risk the community perceives that there is a predetermined land use for the site, when this is not the case. The project process, community engagement and associated communication have been designed to reassure the community of that.

6.2 If the determination confirms that two activities (commercial and residential) are preferred on the site, there are risks associated with an individual or a particular community group not being happy with their identified land use not being shortlisted and/or a lack of community-buy-in. This has been managed through the Council openly engaging with all stakeholders and considering and assessing all identified potential future land uses against the 10 Site Development Principles and technical information in a manner validated by Monitoring and Research staff.

6.3 Current uses of the site and existing buildings may present a constraint to delivery of the optimal preferred future land use/s. This risk has been mitigated in any lease terms and conditions where possible and will also need specific considerations and decisions associated with any implementation strategy.

6.4 There is a risk that any preferred future land use/s for the site will not be financially viable nor supported by the market. This risk will be assessed and determined during the implementation process, e.g. when assessing any sale proposals, tenders, EOIs, RFPs, etc.

6.5 Site-specific matters (e.g. possible contamination, geotechnical, ecological, archaeological, existing trees, waterway setback, consenting and future development matters) will be considered during the implementation process.

7. Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

7.1.1 The Board gave approval for staff to undertake public consultation and report to the Community Board regarding the consultation findings and the next steps on 11 March 2024 (resolution BKCB/2024/00013).

7.2 Other Legal Implications:

7.2.1 Local Government Act 2002: Under s78 of the Local Government Act 2002, the consultation process and outcome reported herein enable the Community Board to consider the views and preferences of the top logical activities based on community preference.

7.2.2 This report otherwise meets the Council’s decision-making requirements under ss 78-82A of the Local Government Act 2002, considering the reasonably practicable options and Māori contribution to the decision-making process.

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

7.3 The required decisions:

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

· The shortlisted potential future land uses have the capacity to help achieve to some extent at least one (individually) or (if mixed-use) all four of the Community Outcomes: A collaborative confident city; A green, liveable city; A cultural powerhouse city; and A thriving prosperous city.

· The shortlisted potential future land uses and the way they are being identified with the local community similarly have the capacity to help deliver on the following Strategic Priorities: Be an inclusive and equitable city; Build trust and confidence; Reduce emissions; Manage ratepayer’s money wisely; and Balance the needs of today and the future.

7.3.2 Are assessed as medium significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy 2019. The level of significance was determined by the level of interest of the local community in the future land use/s on the site, the site’s location within an area of significance to Ōnuku Runanga and the possible economic, social, environmental and cultural opportunities and benefits development of the site presents for the Council and local community.

7.3.3 Are consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, given the potential future land use/s (likely of a commercial and/or community and/or residential nature) have the potential to assist deliver outcomes sought in several of Council’s strategic documents, including:

· Akaroa Places and Spaces Plan 2011, Section D of which is specific to the development of the site, taking community views into account and undertaking a comprehensive analysis of the potential future land uses. Section D was updated in 2024 to reflect subsequent changes in the Christchurch City Plan, Akaroa’s demographics and market, community needs and potential future land uses, to assist obtain current community views on the site.

· Christchurch Visitor Strategy 2019, to the extent that any development supports local tourism.

· Toi Ōtautahi: A Strategy for Arts and Creativity in Ōtautahi Christchurch 2019 – 2024, to the extent any development provides for community activities including creative space (for development and presentation) and art installation on site.

· Biodiversity Strategy 2008 – 2035, to the extent that enhancement of Wai-iti Balguerie Stream bordering the eastern boundary of the site may be possible through site layout, access improvements and riparian planting.

· Our Heritage, Our Taonga Heritage Strategy 2019 – 2029, to the extent that any development provides for the recognition of, access to and promotion of the diversity of cultural heritage and taonga within the area. Although the main building on the site is not heritage-listed in the Christchurch District Plan nor by Heritage New Zealand it nevertheless has ‘historical and social’, ‘cultural’ and ‘contextual’ value to the community.

· Community Facilities Network Plan 2020, which acknowledges that the development of halls, community centres, volunteer libraries, toy libraries and play centres owned by the Council are more likely to arise from changing community need (which needs to be well-defined and demonstrated) rather than an inherent facility deficit or geographic gap.

· Te Haumako Te Whitingia Strengthening Communities Together Strategy 2022, to the extent that any development, and the way it is being identified with the local community, promotes equity by valuing diversity, fostering inclusion, participation and preparedness, and building connection between communities and their places and spaces to foster a sense of local identity, shared experience and stewardship.

· The Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Plan 2023 – 25, which includes as one of its nine priorities Support community-based solutions for currently unused significant Council-owned sites and identifies the BP Meats site as such a site.

· Tree Policy 2023, to the extent that the site (and the trees thereon) is currently, and may remain in whole or part, Council-owned.

7.4 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2024 - 2034):

7.5 Strategic Planning and Policy

7.5.1 Activity: City Growth and Property

· Level of Service: 13.4.10.1 Deliver projects that will lead to positive community outcomes:· Increasing the supply of community housing; or· Increase employment opportunities; or· Improves Mana Whenua relationships; or· Allows for community “ownership” of service delivery; or· Reduces the impacts of natural or human induced (including climate change) hazards - At least one new project commenced annually

As noted above, development of the site has the potential to deliver a number of these positive community outcomes, particularly if the preferred future land use/s provides for mixed-use development.

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

7.7 Early engagement with Ōnuku Rūnanga started in July 2024. Ōnuku emphasised the urgent need for affordable housing in Akaroa, highlighting the Council-owned BP Meats site as the last piece of Council-owned flat land available. The potential future uses for the site were discussed, with a commitment to ongoing partnership, including co-developing a cultural narrative and ensuring meaningful community consultation, without predetermination of any specific outcomes.

7.8 Following this, staff met with leaseholders and neighbours of the site, and Council staff from Akaroa Museum to explain the process and gather early feedback which is summarised below:

· Akaroa Butchery & Deli requested Council support businesses by not increasing retail competition, especially considering a challenging winter season and noting that the building has not been well maintained by the Council. Their focus is on building up this business while improving its aesthetic and efficiency. They want to maintain the existing building, delivery access, privacy and security, some outdoor space and the trees in front of the main building. They support adding accommodation to the site, especially for workers.

· L'Op Shop want to continue operating on-site but are open to relocating if necessary. They are concerned about sea level rise and its potential impact on other businesses needing to relocate and would like flooding models reviewed. They value keeping social services on-site and would like a more suitable, well-maintained space if they remain. They have had maintenance issues, particularly with the roof, and want clarity on responsibility.

· Akaroa Arts Council operate on the site and want to open it to the arts with a village green, amphitheatre, and use Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage as an art gallery. They proposed a glass box exhibit for the first fire engine with the bell tower. They also suggested parking/accommodation at the back of the site and that the butchery building could be replaced with a purpose-built space, a pavilion, fruit trees and a farmers' market. They propose this is all designed in a mock Victorian style. They also noted a chronic shortage of local accommodation.

· Akaroa Toy Library operate on the site and requested shared community spaces with better landscaping, including BBQs, kids' spaces, and sandpits. They would like to offer educational activities for kids but note that winter is quiet. The Akaroa Arts Council shares the space for exhibitions, and the nearby knitting shop is considering relocating here.

· The Common café neighbours the site and is focused on attracting more people to the area. They believe hot pools are needed, especially in winter. They mentioned an art hub and multi-purpose space being ideal. They would like to see wooden structures for community use, including for musicians and the market, to draw people in from the street. Ideas included water education play, a good site flow and accessible community spaces. They are open to pedestrian access from their site and to the stream, while maintaining access for the butchery.

· The owner of the small turquoise building envisages the site as a creative community space focused on regenerative design. She sees potential for a community space like a night market and mentioned the site could host cultural events, such as Matariki and pop-up markets, with the stream being a key feature for future use. She recognises Akaroa’s accommodation issue but is unsure if this site is suitable for housing.

· Four Square Akaroa were at this stage unsure about their opinion on food retail for the site.

7.9 Consultation started on 31 October 2024 and ran until 24 November 2024.

7.10 Consultation details including links to the project information shared on the Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk webpage were advertised via:

7.10.1 An email which was sent to 151 key stakeholders, including Akaroa District Promotions, Akaroa and The Bays Forum, Akaroa Area School, Akaroa Civic Trust and Akaroa Heartlands. Community organisations were sent a news item to share online.

7.10.2 The Council Facebook page, the Council LinkedIn page and 2 local community group pages (Banks Peninsula Community and Akaroa – What is happening?), which reached 28,944 people.

7.10.3 Two advertisements in the Akaroa Mail, on 1 November and 15 November 2024.

7.10.4 A4 posters in local shop windows across Akaroa.

7.10.5 A sign installed at the front of the BP meats site.

7.10.6 Digital signs in the Akaroa Library.

7.10.7 Consultation documents delivered to leaseholders on 2 November 2024, which were also available to the community in local service centres, the Akaroa Butchery & Deli, and The Common café. In addition, a feedback box was set up in the Akaroa Library to collect submission forms.

7.10.8 Akaroa School's parent newsletter.

7.11 The Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk page had 902 views throughout the consultation period.

7.12 Staff attended Akaroa Farmers’ Market on 2 November and 16 November 2024 to provide consultation documents and answer any questions.

7.13 Discussion with approx. 30 people covered retaining the site's character, balancing commercial and residential development (with a focus on affordable housing), consultation on heritage buildings (particularly Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage), challenges with community spaces, concerns about gentrification and climate change and ideas for hot pools, an indoor swimming pool, pop-up art spaces and community gardens.

Summary of Feedback Ngā Tāpaetanga

7.14 Discussion with approx. 30 people covered retaining the site's character, balancing commercial and residential development (with a focus on affordable housing), consultation on heritage buildings (particularly Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage), challenges with community spaces, concerns about gentrification and climate change and ideas for hot pools, an indoor swimming pool, pop-up art spaces and community gardens.

7.15 The consultation asked for people’s preference for overarching options for land use (provided in the updated Akaroa Places and Spaces Plan 2011), for any other land use ideas, and for any other comments or information about the future use of the site.

7.16 Feedback was made by three recognised organisations, six businesses and 91 individuals (100 total respondents). Feedback from three respondents was not accepted for various reasons and has not been included in the analysis of the feedback. Feedback is available on the Kōrero mai webpage.

7.17 The majority of respondents (79) mentioned multiple use types in their feedback, suggesting the community is in favour of mixed-use for the site.

7.18 The majority of respondents (67) wanted Council to keep the butcher on site either:

· In the existing building (41); or

· In a new building on site (3).

The remaining 23 did not specify how to retain it.

7.19 Many respondents mentioned community use (60), specifically:

· Space for community groups, especially to retain existing tenants (23).

· Historic information displayed/museum space (20).

· Public space, a town square or market space (19).

· Specific community facilities, (17), including tennis courts, a gym, an adventure playground, hot pools, a communal pizza oven, a community meeting space/hub, and a mixed-use space.

· Creative art space (11).

· Mitigating climate change, a civil defence hub, environmental community group space (11).

· Māori history and art (7).

· An information centre (5).

7.20 Many respondents mentioned residential use (39), specifically:

· Seasonal worker accommodation (22).

· Affordable housing (19).

· Short term/prefab housing (11).

· Long-term housing (8).

· Social housing (6).

· Six respondents mentioned they were not happy with any residential use on the site (6).

7.21 Many respondents mentioned retail and commercial services (39):

· Some respondents mentioned specific retail/commercial ideas (11), including Boutiques, specialised retail, creative and flexible spaces, pop-up shops, service-based retail, artisan craft and handmade, night market space, craft fairs, integration with historical and cultural themes and adaptable for different uses.

· Three respondents mentioned they were not happy with additional retail on the site (3).

7.22 Some respondents mentioned needing some car parking on the site (29), specifically:

· Visitor/contractor car parking (6).

· Parking at the rear of the property (4).

· Public parking (3).

· Others were not specific as to what type of car parking.

· No respondent mentioned car parking being utilised for the entire site.

7.23 Some respondents (19) mentioned food retailing/a grocer in addition to the butcher on the site. Nine (9) respondents mentioned not wanting any other additional food retail/grocer on the site.

7.24 Several respondents mentioned landscaping ideas (15) which included:

· A community garden/food forest (7).

· Incorporating and retaining trees (7).

· Native planting (5).

· An area for performance/music (4).

· Footpath access through the site (3).

· Seating (3).

7.25 Three respondents mentioned that the Wai-iti Balguerie Stream is prone to flooding.

7.26 In addition, the community were asked whether they supported the relocation of the historical Jeannie’s/Yew Cottage to the site.

· 40 were in support

· 47 were not in support.

· 10 did not provide an answer.

· Those in support who provided reasons (15) mentioned it needing to be refurbished, tourism opportunities, community use, heritage preservation and private ownership with conditions. Those not in support who provided reasons (9) mentioned it would be too expensive to move or would lose its character if moved.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

o The site is of cultural significance to Ngāi Tahu. It falls within a Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan Silent File area as being a Wāhi Tapu/Wāhi Taonga location mapped by tribal experts to indicate a higher probability of an encounter with sensitive tangible or intangible Ngāi Tahu values. The erection of any new buildings on the site is a Discretionary Activity requiring consultation with Ōnuku Runanga and notification of them via the Resource Consent process under Rule 9.5.4.1.3 of the Christchurch District Plan. Staff have been having ongoing engagement with Ōnuku Rūnanga.

o The decisions at this stage of the process do not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land, a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore the decisions do not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture, and traditions.

o However, the decisions however do involve a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and continued engagement will be undertaken with the Ōnuku Rūnanga to ensure our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga are understood and considered.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.15 The decisions in this report are unlikely to contribute negatively to adaptation to the impacts of climate change or to emissions reductions as they are of a procedural nature only. The climate change impact implications of the preferred future land use/s identified through Phase 2 of community engagement will be provided to the Board subsequent to Phase 2 of community engagement.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

· Should the Community Board adopt the officer recommendations in this report, the following steps will be:

i. Initiate Phase 2 community engagement to identify the community’s preferred land use/s.

ii. Following Phase 2 community engagement, report back to the Community Board with the findings and implementation recommendations for final sign-off and adoption of:

1. The preferred future land use/s.

2. The implementation process, e.g. any sale, Expression of Interest (EOI), Request for Proposals (RFP), etc.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Appendix A - BP Meats site - Indicative concept plans of shortlisted potential future land uses	25/536358	91
b ⇩	Appendix B - BP Meats site - Graph of potential future land uses ranked	25/536955	94
c ⇩	Late feedback received - Akaroa Civic Trust	25/654659	95

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Raymond Qu - Property Consultant

Samantha Smith - Engagement Advisor

Janine Sowerby - Senior Planner

Approved By

Bruce Rendall - Head of Facilities & Property

11. Akaroa Recreation Ground - Akaroa Playcentre New Lease
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/245789
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Lisa Barwood, Leasing Consultant
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, 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 the approval of the Te Pataka o Rakaihautu Banks Peninsula Community Board to grant a new lease for Te Whānau Tupu Ngātahi O Aotearoa - Playcentre Aotearoa Akaroa branch at the Akaroa Sports Pavilion located at the Akaroa Recreation Grounds.

1.2 The Community Board on 10 June 2024 approved the reclassification of part of the Akaroa Recreation Ground to Local Purpose (Community Building) Reserve foreshadowing a lease for Te Whānau Tupu Ngātahi O Aotearoa - Playcentre Aotearoa Akaroa; this process has been completed.

1.3 The report is staff generated to address the issue of the Te Whānau Tupu Ngātahi O Aotearoa - Playcentre Aotearoa Akaroa known as ‘Akaroa Playcentre’ having a sublease that is rolling over with a community organisation that is no longer registered or operating.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receive the information in the Akaroa Recreation Ground - Akaroa Playcentre New Lease Report.

2. Grant a lease to Te Whānau Tupu Ngātahi O Aotearoa - Playcentre Aotearoa Akaroa branch pursuant to section 61(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, for a lease period of thirty-three years less a day, including renewals for an area approximately 532 square meters of land and approximately 75 square meters of the Akaroa Sports Pavilion being part of Akaroa Recreation Ground described as Lot 1 Deposited Plan 79110.

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

4. Delegates authority to the Manager Property Consultancy to do all things necessary and make any decisions at his sole discretion that are consistent with the intent of this report to implement the resolutions above including but not limited to finalising the lease negotiations including the setting of the annual rental.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 Akaroa Playcentre has been a vital part of the community since its establishment in 1946. In 1993, the Playcentre relocated to the Akaroa Sports Pavilion, contributing $67,250 towards its construction and an additional $20,000 to develop the playground.

3.2 Initially, Akaroa Playcentre operated under a sublease agreement with The Akaroa Sports Complex Incorporated. However, following the dissolution of the Sports Complex in 1999, ownership and management of the facility was transferred to the Banks Peninsula Council. The Christchurch City Council has continued to roll over the Playcentre’s lease, maintaining its occupancy.

3.3 To ensure long-term stability and security for Akaroa Playcentre, staff are seeking to formalize the existing lease arrangement. Establishing a formal lease agreement will provide clarity and certainty, allowing the Playcentre to continue serving the community effectively.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 Akaroa Playcentre has been an integral part of the Akaroa community since 1946. In 1993, the Playcentre contributed funding towards the construction of the Akaroa Sports Pavilion and subsequently entered into a sublease agreement with The Akaroa Sports Complex Incorporated. This arrangement allowed the Playcentre to operate within the park under the Reserves Act 1977, with the land designated as a recreation reserve under a head lease granted by the Banks Peninsula District Council in 1995.

4.2 Following the dissolution of The Akaroa Sports Complex Incorporated, ownership of the building was transferred to the Banks Peninsula District Council. Since the expiration of the Playcentre’s sublease in 2014, the lease has been renewed on a rolling basis.

4.3 The Akaroa Domain, where the Playcentre is located, also accommodates other recreational facilities, including the Akaroa Croquet Club and a mini-golf course. Additionally, lease negotiations are currently underway with Banks Peninsula Sports and Recreation Incorporated for part of another building on the domain.

4.4 Akaroa Playcentre has exclusive access to approximately 120 square meters within the building, which is used for equipment storage and operations. The Playcentre currently operates two days per week, during which they utilize the entire building. On non-session days, the building is available for public hire, excluding the Playcentre’s secured storage area and designated outdoor space.

4.5 The Playcentre also maintains a dedicated outdoor area of approximately 532 square meters, which they have fully funded and maintained. This includes fencing, gardening, equipment, and storage sheds. The proposed lease agreement will formalize the Playcentre’s exclusive use of Areas A and B, as outlined in the plan below.

4.6 A new lease could not be granted until a reclassification of part of the reserve was completed. This process was finalized in 2024, allowing the Council to proceed with granting a new lease for Akaroa Playcentre. The reclassified area is highlighted in yellow on the map below, ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and securing long-term tenure for the Playcentre.

4.7 The annual rent will be set in accordance with the Council’s policy for setting rentals to community and sports groups. The annual rent will be set at $211 plus GST per annum, with three yearly rent reviews to be set in accordance with the Council’s policy for setting rents to community and not-for-profit groups.

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

4.8.1 To deal unilaterally and grant a lease to Playcentre for the area they occupy.

4.8.2 To advertise and run an expression of interest for all local groups to see who else would like to lease the area.

4.9 The following options were considered but ruled out:

4.9.1 Relocating the Playcentre (a charitable trust) to an alternative site. This is impractical and a costly option with limited suitable facilities available in the area.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.10 Preferred Option: to deal unilaterally and grant a lease to playcentre for the area they occupy.

4.10.1 Option Description: This option involves granting a formal lease agreement to Playcentre for the specific area they currently occupy. The lease would provide long-term security of tenure, allowing Playcentre to continue delivering early childhood education and community services. The terms of the lease would be negotiated to align with council policies and community expectations

4.10.2 Option Advantages

· Ensures Playcentre has stability and security to continue operations.

· Supports early childhood education and community engagement.

· Recognizes the long-standing presence and contribution of Playcentre to the community and building of the facility.

4.10.3 Option Disadvantages

· Limits opportunities for alternative community groups to access the space when playcentre is in session.

· Could be perceived as lacking transparency if no wider consultation is undertaken.

4.11 To advertise and run an expression of interest for all local groups to see who else would like to lease the area.

4.11.1 Option Description: This option involves publicly advertising the availability of the site and running an Expression of Interest (EOI) process. Local community groups, including Playcentre and other interested organizations, would be invited to submit proposals for leasing the area. The selection process would be based on criteria such as community benefit, financial viability, and alignment with council priorities.

4.11.2 Option Advantages

· Ensures a fair and transparent process by allowing multiple community groups to express interest.

· Provides an opportunity to identify the best use of the space based on community needs.

· Encourages broader community engagement and participation.

4.11.3 Option Disadvantages

· Could create uncertainty for Playcentre and disrupt their operations if they are not selected.

· Involves additional administrative time and costs to run the EOI process.

· May lead to disputes or dissatisfaction among applicants who are not successful.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.12 Community Benefit

· Playcentre provides a well-established, trusted service benefiting young children and families in the community.

· Playcentre’s cooperative model encourages parental engagement, strengthening social bonds and community participation.

· Compared to some private providers, Playcentre offers an affordable early childhood education option, increasing accessibility for families from diverse economic backgrounds.

4.13 Playcentres Financial Contribution to the Facility

· Playcentre has financially contributed to the construction or development of the facility, so granting them a lease acknowledges and respects their investment.

· Playcentre’s financial contribution means the facility was partly built through community investment, reinforcing local ownership and involvement.

· Encourages future community partnerships in public infrastructure development.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option	Option 2 - EOI
Cost to Implement	Staff time absorbed in operating budgets	Advertising in the local papers and EOI documents to be created – approximately $500
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	No change	No change
Funding Source	Not applicable	Parks Unit budget
Funding Availability	Not applicable	Parks planning operational budget
Impact on Rates	No impact	n/a

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 The risk in granting a lease to Akaroa Playcentre is that they may discontinue their activities due to membership or funding from their parent organisation. The lease would need to be terminated and the space would be advertised for lease to other community groups. Additionally, the building remains available for bookings by other groups, ensuring continued use of the facility. If no other community group expresses interest in leasing the area, bookings could be expanded to encompass the entire site, maximizing its utilization.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

6.2.1 Community Boards have the delegated authority (Part D – Sub Part 1) to grant leases of local purpose reserves in accordance with this section.

6.3 Other Legal Implications:

6.3.1 The legal consideration is the terms and conditions of the lease between the Council and the Tenant.

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. A collaborative confident city – residents have an opportunity to participate in community life.

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 number of people affected and the use of the local purpose community reserve is in keeping with that purpose.

6.4.3 Is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

6.5 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2024 - 2034):

6.6 Parks, Heritage and Coastal Environment

6.6.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.8.5 Resident satisfaction with the overall availability of recreation facilities within the City’s parks and foreshore network - >= 70%

6.7 Communities & Citizens

6.7.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

· Level of Service: 2.0.1.1 Provide a sustainable network of community facilities to empower resilient, active, and connected communities owning their own future - 78 - 82 Facilities

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

6.8 A public notice identifying the land to be reclassified did not receive any submissions for or against; the reclassification allows the building to be better utilised as it will allow other groups to use the facility that may not have been able to under the Reserves Act 1977.

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

6.9.1 Te Pataka o Rakaihautu Banks Peninsula Community Board.

6.10 The Community Board approved the change in classification and were made aware that a report would be forthcoming seeking their approval to grant a lease for the Akaroa Playcentre.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

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

6.13 MKT were approached when reclassifying the reserve and at that point they had no issues with the reclassifying to allow Playcentre to enter a lease. MKT advised they didn’t require further engagement on the matter.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

6.16 There will be no change to the general use of the facilities and the reserve.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 Preparation and execution of the lease documentation.

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

Author

Lisa Barwood - Leasing Consultant

Approved By

Kathy Jarden - Team Leader Leasing Consultancy

Angus Smith - Manager Property Consultancy

Kelly Hansen - Manager Parks Planning & Asset Management

Rupert Bool - Acting Head of Parks

13. Leading Light Lane - Transition of Pine Block to Native Forest
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/524024
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Toby Chapman, Manager Urban Forest
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 This report relates to the proposed removal of a block of pine trees located at the top of Leading Light Lane in Governors Bay.

1.2 This report has originated due to concerns regarding the condition of a portion of the pine trees on the edge of the stand and their long-term viability.

1.3 Given the current size of the trees and their location, staff feel that a transition to native forest would be more appropriate for the area.

1.4 While removal of the stand is not required immediately for health and safety reasons, it is acknowledged that the trees are not the best choice for the long term and removal will become more costly and complicated as the trees increase in size.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Leading Light Lane - Transition of Pine Block to Native Forest Report.

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

3. Approve the removal of the block of pine trees and replacement with appropriate native species.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 The block of pines located above Leading Light Lane, Governors Bay is made up of a stand of Radiata Pine which are semi-mature in age. The trees have the potential to grow much larger. The stand is approximately 1650m2 and is estimated to have approximately 100 trees.

3.2 Directly below the stand is a drainage channel and a stone retaining wall. There is also a new house build below the pines which is currently outside of fall distance.

3.3 The site has been identified as an opportunity to improve the area for the long term. Staff are seeking approval from the Community Board to remove the pine block and plant the site with native trees and shrubs.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1

4.2

4.3 Image 1: Showing the location of the pine block circled in orange. New house build in section circled in green.

4.4 The block of pines located above Leading Light Lane, Governors Bay is made up of a stand of radiata pine which are semi-mature in age. The trees have the potential to grow much larger. The stand is approximately 1650m2 and is estimated to have approximately 100 trees.

4.5 The block of pines should be treated as a single group as they have become interdependent on each other. This means that the removal of some of the trees will have an impact on the others.

4.6 Directly below the stand is a drainage channel and a stone retaining wall. There is also a new house build below the pines which is currently outside of fall distance.

4.7 A portion of the trees on the northern end of the block are showing signs of decline. Staff have not attempted to ascertain what is causing this decline of these trees and are instead looking at the stand and its long-term viability regardless of the declining trees.

4.8 Due to the topography of the site (being located on a steep slope) the removal of these trees will be challenging. This will become more challenging overtime as the trees increase in size. It is therefore staff’s recommendation that the trees be considered for removal while they are still relatively small.

4.9 Staff feel that the site would lend itself better to a native forest type planting. One of the key reasons for this is that a native forest could be retained permanently unlike the pine block which will likely require removal in the next 15-20 years. Removal in 15-20 years will be significantly more expensive, as the trees will be larger.

4.10 The replacement of the pine block with native species will also improve the biodiversity of the area. A landscape plan will be developed and include the species that are appropriate for the area.

A landscape with a house and trees

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Image 2: Photo of the block of trees. Note the discolouration of foliage.

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

4.11.1 Remove the pine trees and plant the area with native species.

4.11.2 Only remove the pine trees that are in declining health

4.11.3 Retain the pine trees.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.12 Preferred Option: Option 1 Remove the pine block and replace with native species-

4.12.1 Option Advantages

· Removes the risk of the pine trees declining and ongoing maintenance.

· Improves the biodiversity of the area.

4.12.2 Option Disadvantages

· Bank side is exposed until native vegetation can establish.

4.13 Option 2: Only remove the pine trees that are in declining health.

4.13.1 Option Advantages

· Retain the health portion of the block.

4.13.2 Option Disadvantages

· Exposes the retained trees to wind loading, increasing likelihood of failure.

· Future safety concerns with adjacent property.

· Retained trees to continue growing, making extraction more difficult and costly in the future.

4.14 Option 3: Retain the trees – do nothing.

4.14.1 Option Advantages

· No upfront cost now.

4.14.2 Option Disadvantages

· Trees continue to grow making extraction more difficult and costly in the future.

· Future safety concerns with adjacent property.

· Loss of time for establishment of more appropriate native species

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option	Option 2 – Partial removal	Option 3 – Do Nothing
Cost to Implement	$80,000 (removal and replanting)	$20,000 (removal only)	$0
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	Maintenance of planting during establishment covered under planting contract
Funding Source	Urban Forest Capital Fund + Red Zone Eco Restoration (Ex OARC)	Urban Forest Capital Fund + Red Zone Eco Restoration (Ex OARC)
Funding Availability	Existing	Existing
Impact on Rates	Nil	Nil	Future CAPEX allocation required when removal becomes unavoidable

5.1 The cost will be shared by CAPEX budgets and the replacement planting will be undertaken by the Urban Forest Team.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 Staff have received quotes for the tree removal which provides a level of certainty around the current price. Any delays in gaining approval could result in a price increase.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

6.2.1 Part D (Section 42) of Council’s delegations register delegates Community Boards the powers to “determine to plant, maintain and remove trees on reserves within the policy set by the Council.”

6.2.2 Global Consent RMA/2021/2059 can be used to remove the trees.

6.3 Other Legal Implications:

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. with a particular focus on a green, liveable city through the planting of a native forest and improvements in biodiversity.

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 level of impact these removals will have and the number of properties that will be affected.

6.4.3 Is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

6.5 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2024 - 2034):

6.6 Parks, Heritage and Coastal Environment

6.6.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.3.2.1 Comply with Canterbury Regional Pest Management Plan - Annual compliance 100% (nil notices of direction served by ECan)

6.7 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies. Section 4.7 of Council tree policy where approval for the removal of trees to facilitate projects on council land will take into account the value of the project to the community, including public health and/or the local environment and considerations taken for retaining existing trees compared with the loss of the benefits provided by the trees.

6.8 If the preferred option is approved, Tree Policy 1.9 will be met as the area will be planted with native species to replace the canopy which is lost within 20 years

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

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

6.9.1 Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū – Banks Peninsula

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

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

6.11 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.

6.12 The report relates to the removal of exotic species with no cultural significance, these would be replaced by native species.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.13 The decisions in this report are likely to:

6.13.1 Be neutral relative to adaptation to the impacts of climate change.

6.13.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions in the long term. While removal of these trees will return their stored carbon to the atmosphere in the short term, replacement with permanent native species will sequester more carbon over time (in addition to the biodiversity benefits that such planting offers).

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 If the removals are approved a contractor will be engaged to undertake the works.

7.2 Replanting will be planned to be completed in the 2025 planting season.

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

Toby Chapman - Manager Urban Forest

James McDuff - Arborist

Approved By

Rupert Bool - Acting Head of Parks

15. Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - April 2025
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/2207271
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Penelope Goldstone, Community Governance Manager
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, 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 report is staff-generated monthly.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Area Report - April 2025.

3. Community Support, Governance and Partnership Activity

3.1 Community Governance Projects

Activity	Detail	Timeline	Strategic Alignment
Allandale Hall	The repairs to the floor, installation of mechanical sub-floor ventilation and installation of skylight flashings have been completed. Hall maintenance plans are now being reactivated. Apex Water have been consulted on re-instating a potable water supply compliant with the Water Services Act 2021 and we now await their proposal and costs.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Destination Management Plan (DMP) Implementation	Staff worked with ChristchurchNZ to identify ways in which progress could be shared widely including: • Developing a Banks Peninsula DMP Dashboard. • Producing regular DMP update newsletters. • Holding regular Public Reporting Workshops or forums where community members can hear about progress, voice any opinions, share ideas and contribute to the implementation of the plan.	Ongoing	Tourism opportunities are balanced with social, cultural, economic and environmental values
Whakaraupō Emergency Hubs Collective	All Emergency Hubs joined a “test” of the walkie talkies, funded by the Community Board, to learn which communities could communicate well with each other. Lyttelton Hub will map these links and connections out so that everyone around the harbour understands the clearest and best hub to communicate any needs/situation updates with.	Ongoing	Proactive planning for climate change
Whakaraupō Community Network Youth Hui	A Youth Hui was held in Diamond Harbour, hosted by Diamond Harbour Youth & Community Trust and Diamond Harbour School. The purpose of the hui was to identify key issues faced by local youth (recognising that this was from a broader community perspective, rather than from young people themselves), and explore potential opportunities for youth development. The hui included presentations from guest speakers and then a workshop format for participants to identify issues and service gaps and explore opportunities to address these locally.	Completed	Good social and physical community connections
Le Bons Bay Flooding	Staff held a community meeting in Le Bons to gather information and look to progress flooding working party and to progress a Le Bons Bay resilience hub. Both of these are currently being worked on with more meetings to follow.	Ongoing	Proactive planning for climate change
Responding to community identified issues	Staff have been providing support to community members from around Akaroa Harbour who were looking for next steps to make progress on issues they have identified in their communities. These requests mostly relate to parking safety.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Lyttelton Farmers Market	Staff are supporting Project Lyttelton who manage the Lyttelton Farmers Market to identify ways to reduce the current high costs of traffic management. A funding application will be considered by Council to provide interim support to the Market while a more financially sustainable approach to traffic management is developed.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Lyttelton Children’s Community Garden	Lyttelton Community Garden has a developed a Children’s Garden, which has been designed by children for children to experience the outdoors, to play and grow a sense of connection and of belonging to both their community and the wider environment of Whakaraupō. The garden enables children to engage with their environment in a way that is age and stage appropriate, to increase their positive health and knowledge outcomes around food and food choices, and develop decision making ability to influence their own environment, which builds a sense of guardianship. In March 2025, the Children’s Garden was awarded funding from the Place Partnership Fund to enable a coordinator to support the development of the garden and increase participation of local tamariki.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Coastguard Search and Rescue Centre at Naval Point	Coastguard Canterbury opened its new Search and Rescue Centre base for Whakaraupō at Naval Point on 15 March 2025. A carving by Caine Tauwhare and funded by the Council is a taonga that surrounds the front door of the main entrance to the building.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Community Research / Feasibility for Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre	A feasibility study is being initiated for Mānawa Kāwhiu Lyttelton Recreation Centre. The feasibility study will look at how the Recreation Centre can be activated to best meet the needs of the community.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Funding Advice to Community Groups	Staff have provided funding advice at the request of community groups who are in the process of expanding what they are offering to the community.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Birdlings Flat Storage Sheds	The sheds are now completed, and the community is in the process of moving items stored in the hall into one and community emergency hub equipment into the other.	Completed	Proactive planning for climate change Good social and physical community connections
Kaituna Hall – Return to Community Management	A survey of residents has resulted in 100% of respondents saying they are happy to attend events in the hall, a list of suggested activities and nine residents volunteering to be part of a committee to manage the hall.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Awa Iti Reserve toilets	A new standalone water tank has been ordered to avoid the toilets running out of water during large events at the reserve.	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Little River Village Planning (phase 3)	Staff are working with the Little River Wairewa Community Trust, local business owners and other community organisations to plan improvements to the area adjacent to the dog exercise area and at the end of the Little River Rail Trail	Ongoing	Good social and physical community connections
Little River Coronation Library Storage	A container has been placed on Awa Iti Reserve to provide storage for furniture and other equipment while the Little River Wairewa Community Trust awaits repairs to Coronation Library. The Trust has been acquiring the necessary furniture etc. in preparation for the opening of the building and had nowhere to store it.	Completed	Good social and physical community connections

3.2 Community Funding Summary

3.2.1 As at 18 March 2025 the Discretionary Response Fund unallocated balance for 2024/25 is $16,707. The Discretionary Response Fund summary as at 18 March 2025 is attached. (Attachment A).

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]

· Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board 2023-25 Community Board Plan was adopted by the Board at their meeting in 8 May 2023 and can be found online here.

· The Board received a report on the progress made towards achieving the objectives of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board Plan 2022-2025 during the period of September 2024 to March 2025 at its 10 March 2025 meeting. Progress on the Community Board Plan can be found online here.

· Letter/s of Support - Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board provided a letter of support for the Friends of the Akaroa Museum external funding application. This application seeks a grant for the design and printing of a photographic history.

3.3.2 Council Engagement and Consultation.

· Have your say – at the time of writing the report there were no consultations open within Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula.

· A full list of open consultations can be found on the Council's Lets Talk website at https://letstalk.ccc.govt.nz/.

· Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2025-26 - the Board submitted on the Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2025-26. The Board was heard on 3 April 2025. (Attachment B).

· Board Submissions – Board members presented at the following hearings:

· Dog Control Bylaw and Policy Hearing – 12 March 2025

· Ōtautahi Christchurch Future Transport Strategy – 5 March 2025

3.3.3 Start Work Notices - Various Start Work Notices have been sent to the Board throughout the month. All Board area and city-wide start work notices can be found at: https://ccc.govt.nz/transport/works.

3.3.4 Planned road works and closures - Planned road works and closures are indicated on the map at the Traffic Updates . Additionally, a Smartview of nearby road works and closures is available at the following link: https://smartview.ccc.govt.nz/travel/roads.

3.4 Governance Advice

3.4.1 Public Forum – The Board received the following Public and Open Forum presentations in March 2025:

· NIWA Canterbury Science Fair Application.

· Proposed Matariki Awards Event

· Lyttelton Harbour Business Association

· Proposed Youth and Multicultural Initiative

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Banks Peninsula Discretionary Response Fund Summary - March 2025	25/539655	147
b ⇩	Christchurch City Council Draft Annual Plan 2025-26 - Board Submission	25/608473	148

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Liz Beaven - Community Board Advisor

Steffi Brightwell - Community Development Advisor

Linda Burkes - Banks Peninsula Governance Advisor

Jane Harrison - Community Development Advisor

Dane Moir - Community Development Advisor

Heather Spreckley - Support Officer

Jo Wells - Community Development Advisor

Andrea Wild - Community Development Advisor

Approved By

Penelope Goldstone - Manager Community Governance, Banks Peninsula

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

[2] Source: Kerry Little (Akaroa Heartland Foundation), Jim Coubrough (Banks Peninsula RSA and Akaroa Forum).

[3] Source: Kerry Little (Akaroa Heartland Foundation).

[4] Source: Kerry Little (Akaroa Heartland Foundation).

[5] Source: Keith Harris (Akaroa District Promotions).

[7] Source: Rachel Hunt (Community Resilience Coordinator, Civil Defence Emergency Management).

[8] Source: Jan Whyte (Coordinator of Akaroa Farmers’ Market).

[9] Excludes AirBnB and holiday home listings due to their different operating model and target market.

Minutes Received	Date
Awaiti Reserve Committee Unconfirmed Minutes	26 February 2025
Lyttelton Reserves Committee Unconfirmed Minutes	3 March 2025
Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee Unconfirmed Minutes	3 March 2025
Garden of Tane Reserve Committee Unconfirmed Minutes	4 March 2025

	Recommended Option	Costs
Cost to Implement	Option One
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	Botanical Survey Drill and filling of pine trees Insect survey and identification Bird survey Animal and plant pest control	$12,000 $8000 $3000 (to be done in house by CCC rangers) (to be done in house by CCC rangers)
Funding Source	Capex/Opex and CCC ranger staff	Parks Operational
Funding Availability	Existing capex – Ecological Recovery Fund & Habitat and Restoration fund.	Parks

Total Budget 2024/25	Granted To Date	Available for allocation	Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted
$47,588	$29,588	$16,707	$13,767

7. Reserve Committee Meeting Minutes
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/442642
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Burkes, Banks Peninsula Governance Advisor
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community

8. Head to Head Walkway Working Party Notes
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/500368
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Burkes, Banks Peninsula Governance Advisor
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

Name	Subject
Head to Head Walkway Working Party Meeting Notes	10 March 2025

12. Te Oka Reserve - Pine plantation conversion to native forest
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/74231
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Alison Evans
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community

14. 2024/25 Discretionary Response Fund Applications - Akaroa Resource Collective Trust, Te Whare Tapere O Te Mata Hapuku Society Incorporated
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/534897
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Steffi Brightwell, Community Development Advisor Jane Harrison, Community Development Advisor
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community