Agenda of Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

A black text on a white background

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Waipapa

Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

Open Minutes

Date: Thursday 11 December 2025

Time: 4 pm

Venue: Board Room, Papanui Service Centre,
Corner Langdons Road and Restell Street, Papanui

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Sunita Gautam

Simon Britten

Pauline Cotter

Mike Davidson

Ashleigh Feary

Victoria Henstock

Jake McLellan

John Miller

Emma Twaddell

Principal Advisor

Stacey Holbrough

Acting Manager Community Governance

Tel: 941 8102

stacey.holbrough@ccc.govt.nz

Meeting Advisor

Mark Saunders

Community Board Advisor

Tel: 941 6436

mark.saunders@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. Where no voting record is shown, the item was carried unanimously by those present.

1. Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

There were no apologies received.

2. Declaration by Member Te Ki Taurangi

Part B

Mike Davidson made his oral declaration, then signed his written declaration in the presence of the Head of Community Support & Partnerships (acting on behalf of the Chief Executive), in accordance with Clause 14, Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

3. Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

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

Part C

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00071

That the minutes of the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board meeting held on Thursday, 6 November 2025 be confirmed.

Victoria Henstock/Simon Britten Carried

5. Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

5.1

Merivale Retirement Village

Anne Hall and Brian Tucker from Merivale Retirement Village spoke to their concerns about the footpaths, gutters and road in Somme Street, and the need for reconstruction to address the issues with the poor surface condition, gradients, and deep dish gutters.

The Board thanked Ms Hall and Mr Tucker for their presentation, and requested that staff investigate where Somme Street is sitting in the prioritisation programme for improvements, and clarify previous representations of when works are scheduled for.

5.2

Chris Dooley

Chris Dooley spoke regarding his concerns about speeding traffic on Trafalgar Street.

The Board thanked Mr Dooley for his presentation, and requested that staff investigate whether there are recent speed counts for Trafalgar Street relevant to understanding his concerns.

6. Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

7. Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

7.1

Stephen Anderson and Cushla Mullen from Fresh Choice Edgeware presented the attached ‘Petition for the Saint Albans Business District against unsocial and threatening behaviour’.

The Board thanked Mr Anderson and Ms Mullen for presenting the petition, and speaking to local concerns about aggressive begging in the area.

Hearing it could assist the situation, the Board requested that staff investigate adding plantings to the street garden outside the supermarket aimed at preventing people sitting there.

The Board also requested that staff share their advice on the approach to the issues raised with the petitioner, and investigate arranging a meeting with Police to discuss the concerns.

Attachments

a Petition for the St Albans Business District against Unsocial and Threatening Behaviour - presented 11 December 2025

8. Briefings

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00072 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part B

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Notes the information supplied during the Briefings.

Pauline Cotter/John Miller Carried

Attachments

a Northwest Water & Roading Upgrades - Staff Presentation

b Engagement Team Presentation

Jake McLellan left the meeting at 4.42 pm and returned at 4.45 pm during consideration of Item 8.

12. Ryan Street Parking Improvements

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00073 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Ryan Street Parking Improvements Report.

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

3. In accordance with Clause 6(2) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, revokes any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the removal of parking or stopping restrictions described in resolutions 4 and 5 below.

4. Approves that the removal of one existing variable P1 parking restriction active 8.30 – 9.30am and 2.30 – 3.30pm, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the east side of Ryan Street commencing at a point 371 metres north-east of its intersection with Ferry Road and extending in an nor-easterly direction for a distance of 5 metres as detailed in Attachment A (TG151650, Issue 1, dated 03/09/2025) to the report.

5. Approves that the removal of one existing variable P1 parking restriction active 8.30 – 9.30am and 2.30 – 3.30pm, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic & Parking Bylaw 2017, on the west side of Ryan Street commencing at a point 375 metres north-east of its intersection with Ferry Road and extending in an nor-easterly direction for a distance of 5 metres as detailed in Attachment A (TG151650, Issue 1, dated 03/09/2025) to the report.

6. Approves that these resolutions take effect when parking signage and/or road markings that evidence the restrictions described in this staff report are removed.

Jake McLellan/John Miller Carried

9. Updated Shirley Community Facility Design

Community Board Consideration

The Board accepted the Officer Recommendations, except in respect of it selecting the option of having a raked ceiling for the facility, rather than a flat ceiling.

The Board also added resolution 7 below to enable the two meeting rooms in the updated facility design to be accessed independently of the function space via external doors that it requested the identified windows be replaced with. The Board’s consideration confirmed that the authority given to staff to amend the updated design included determining whether the added doors be single or double.

Victoria Henstock foreshadowed moving the Officer Recommendations without change, but the addition of a raked ceiling, and external doors for the meeting rooms, was carried before the foreshadowed motion could be put to a vote.

Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Updated Shirley Community Facility Design 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. Approves the updated developed detail design, including a flat ceiling and associated project costings, incorporating the Board’s September 2025 directions, as shown in Attachment A to this report.

4. Instructs staff to proceed to tender and procurement following approval of the updated design and project costings.

5. Acknowledges the mahi of the Shirley Working Group and thanks them for their contribution to the project.

6. Notes that the total project remains deliverable within the Long-Term Plan budget of $3,705,000.

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00074

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Updated Shirley Community Facility Design 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. Subject to resolution 7, approves the updated developed detail design, including a raked ceiling and associated project costings, incorporating the Board’s September 2025 directions, as shown in Attachment A to the report.

4. Instructs staff to proceed to tender and procurement following approval of the updated design and project costings.

5. Acknowledges the mahi of the Shirley Working Group and thanks them for their contribution to the project.

6. Notes that the total project remains deliverable within the Long-Term Plan budget of $3,705,000.

7. Requests and authorises staff to amend the updated design by replacing:

a. the external window in Meeting Room 04; and

b. the south-western external window in Large Meeting Room 03;

with external glass doors of the same style as the other external doors in the facility, to enable those rooms to be accessed independently of the function space.

Pauline Cotter/Jake McLellan Carried

9. Updated Shirley Community Facility Design

For	6	Pauline Cotter, Jake McLellan, Dr Sunita Gautam, John Miller, Mike Davidson, Simon Britten
Against	1	Emma Twaddell
Abstain	2	Ashleigh Feary, Victoria Henstock
TOTAL	9

10. Lancaster Park Development - Final Stage Redevelopment Plan

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00075 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Lancaster Park Development - Final Stage Redevelopment Plan Report.

2. Approve the Final Stage Redevelopment Plan for the development of the new play space, bike loop track, multi-sports court, cricket wicket, path elements, park seating and BBQ area, fitness equipment and additional landscaping as per Attachment A and B to the report.

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

Sunita Gautam/John Miller Carried

John Miller left the meeting at 5.38 pm during consideration of Item 11.

11. Community Parks Rolling Renewal Programme

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00076

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Community Parks Rolling Renewal Programme 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. Approves the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Boards Community Parks Rolling Renewal Programme FY26-FY29 (as set out in Attachment C to the report).

Mike Davidson/Pauline Cotter Carried

13. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Bangaliana Multicultural Christchurch - Sarawasti Festival 2026 East Indian Cultural and Community Day

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00077 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Bangaliana Multicultural Christchurch - Sarawasti Festival 2026 East Indian Cultural and Community Day Report.

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

3. Approves a grant of $1,800 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to Bangaliana Multicultural Christchurch towards venue and stage hire, performer and Event costs for the Sarawasti Festival 2026 East Indian Cultural and Community Day.

Pauline Cotter/Mike Davidson Carried

14. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Avon Ōtākaro Network Inc - Matariki in the Zone 2026

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00078 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Avon Ōtākaro Network Inc - Matariki in the Zone 2026 Report.

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

3. Approves a grant of $4,300 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to Avon Ōtākaro Network Inc. towards Matariki in the Zone 2026.

Pauline Cotter/Mike Davidson Carried

15. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - The Village Presbyterian Church - Community Centre enhancement.

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00079 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - The Village Presbyterian Church - Community Centre enhancement. Report.

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

3. Approves a grant of $1,450 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to The Village Presbyterian Church – Community Centre enhancement towards the cost of deck railing only.

Pauline Cotter/Mike Davidson Carried

16. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Delta Community Support Trust - Empowering Communities Through Staff & Volunteer Training and Development

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00080 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Delta Community Support Trust - Empowering Communities Through Staff & Volunteer Training and Development Report.

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

3. Approves a grant of $3,800 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to Delta Community Support Trust towards Empowering Communities Through Staff & Volunteer Training and Development.

Pauline Cotter/Mike Davidson Carried

17. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Canterbury Horticultural Society - CHS Avebury Climate Resilient Garden

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00081 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Canterbury Horticultural Society - CHS Avebury Climate Resilient Garden Report.

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

3. Approves a grant of $5,000 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to Canterbury Horticultural Society towards Operational costs.

Pauline Cotter/Mike Davidson Carried

18. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Board Projects Funding - Community Pride Garden Awards and Youth Recreation Project

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00082 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Board Projects Funding - Community Pride Garden Awards and Youth Recreation Project Report.

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

3. Allocates $2,000 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board towards the Community Garden Pride Awards.

4. Allocates $7,500 from its 2025/26 Discretionary Response Fund to the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board towards the Youth Recreation Project.

Pauline Cotter/Mike Davidson Carried

19. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board - Governance Arrangements for 2025-2028

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00083

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

Consideration of a Casting Vote

3. Resolves that the Chairperson of the Board is not to have a casting vote.

Pauline Cotter/Jake McLellan Carried

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00084

Part C

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board - Governance Arrangements for 2025-2028 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.

Ordinary Meetings Schedule

4. Adopts the following schedule of ordinary meetings for the Board’s 2025-2028 term:

Mondays from 4pm (and Thursdays from 4pm where public holidays conflict) as below in the Board Room at Papanui Service Centre, 5 Restell Street, Christchurch:

2026	2027	2028
2 February	Thurs, 11 February	14 February
9 March	8 March	13 March
13 April	12 April	10 April
11 May	10 May	8 May
8 June	14 June	12 June
13 July	12 July	10 July
10 August	9 August	14 August
14 September	13 September	11 September
12 October	11 October
9 November	8 November
7 December	13 December

5. Approves that the Board Chairperson and Community Governance Manager are jointly authorised to amend the Ordinary Meeting Schedule as necessary to meet circumstances as required, after consulting with the Board members, including adding, removing or changing meeting dates, times and locations.

6. Notes the holding of Board information sessions/workshops will be at the discretion of the Board Chairperson and Community Governance Manager and generally take place at the conclusion of a Board meeting, or:

Mondays from 4pm (and Thursdays from 4pm where public holidays conflict) as below:

2026	2027	2028
23 February	22 February	28 February
23 March	22 March	27 March
20 April	19 April	Thurs, 20 April
25 May	24 May	22 May
22 June	28 June	26 June
27 July	26 July	24 July
24 August	23 August	28 August
28 September	27 September
19 October	18 October
23 November	22 November

Appointments and Delegations

7. Appoints Victoria Henstock as Board representative to the North West Christchurch Community Sporting Trust to serve as a trustee for the new triennium.

8. Appoints Emma Twaddell as Board representative to the Keep Christchurch Beautiful Committee and the Christchurch Beautifying Association.

9. Approves the Board Chairperson to represent the Board, or to appoint another representative (or additional representatives) of the Board, on any other group, committee, entity, or ad hoc process or event, of any kind that the Board is invited to participate in after consulting with the members.

10. Appoints a Recess Committee for the 2025-28 term as follows:

a. Terms of Reference are to allow Board business to continue to be conducted where it is reasonably necessary to do that over the recess period at the end of each year, crossing into the start of the next.

b. The Recess Committee is accordingly authorised to exercise the delegated powers of the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board for the period, throughout the 2025-28 term, following its last ordinary meeting of the calendar year up until the Board resumes its normal business the following year.

c. All Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board members are members of its Recess Committee, though its quorum is two members.

d. The Recess Committee has the same Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson as the Board. However, if they are both unavailable at the time needed, the Community Governance Manager may appoint a Chairperson for the Recess Committee.

e. Any delegation exercised by the Recess Committee will be reported to the Board for record purposes.

f. Any meeting convened of the Recess Committee will be publicly notified, and the details forwarded to all Board members.

11. Re-establishes a Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Submissions Working Group for the 2025-28 term as follows:

a. Terms of Reference are to develop submissions on behalf of the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board for relevant consultations as desired and practicable.

b. All Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board members who are not also Councillors are appointed as members of the Submissions Working Group.

c. The quorum of the Submissions Working Group is two members, noting that it will operate on an informal basis for flexibility of timing in light of submission timeframes, with the option to meet via audio-visual link.

d. The Board Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson will fill these roles for the Submissions Working Group and are authorised to approve submissions on behalf of the Board, which will be subsequent to their development through the Submissions Working Group, where practicable.

e. The Board Chairperson (or a member they delegate to for this purpose) is authorised to:

i. appear and be heard at any hearing of submissions;

ii. approve when and how submission opportunities will be workshopped in consultation with the Community Governance Manager; and

iii. amend or withdraw a submission (after consulting with the members).

f. Any submissions to be reported to the Board for record keeping purposes.

12. The Submissions Working Group need not process filings into quasi-judicial and similar proceedings, allowing that where the Board has decided to participate in such proceedings, filings (including submissions) to these may be approved by the Board Chairperson or the member(s) appointed to appear in the proceedings (who may also approve their withdrawal or amendment, and any settlement arrangements).

Simon Britten/Pauline Cotter Carried

20. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report - December 2025

Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00085 Officer Recommendations accepted without change

Part B

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report - December 2025.

Simon Britten/Mike Davidson Carried

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

Part B

Board members updated each other on recent events, and issues of relevance to the Board arising at Council, including in relation to:

· Papanui Bush mural

· Lancaster Park community centre opening

· Rangatahi Civic Awards

· Edgeware Pool progress

· Community Liaison Hui

Mike Davidson left the meeting at 6.10 pm during consideration of Item 21.

Karakia Whakamutunga

Meeting concluded at 6.15 pm.

CONFIRMED THIS 2^nd DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026

Sunita Gautam

Chairperson

7. MOE Disposal of Phillipstown School Site
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/2227246
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Angus Smith, Manager Property Consultancy
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 update the Waipapa Papanui–Innes–Central Community Board on the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) disposal process for part of the former Phillipstown School site at 39 Nursery Road. It also seeks the Board’s views and recommendations to inform Council’s decision on whether to exercise its right of acquisition under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981.

1.2 The report assesses whether acquisition of all or part of the site can be justified as a public work, and if so, identifies a preferred acquisition option

1.3 The report originates from the formal Section 50 notice received from the MOE on 1 October 2025, offering Council first right to acquire part of the site for another public work.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the MOE Disposal of Phillipstown School Site Report.

2. Notes that, for the purposes of the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, the decision in this report has been assessed as low significance.

3. Notes:

a. The Ministry of Education’s intention to dispose of approximately 0.92 hectares of the former Phillipstown School site under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981.

b. The findings of the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment, which identifies the need for an ongoing, locally accessible community facility in Phillipstown.

c. The Council’s intent to secure an interim ground lease for the Council-owned house on MOE land adjacent to the Transitional Unit School - Tētēkura as a temporary base to enable existing community activities continuance.

Recommends that the Finance and Performance Committee:

4. Requests staff engage with the Phillipstown Community Centre Charitable Trust (PCCCT) to establish a management agreement for the community facility, including use and activation of the Lancaster Park facility. If agreement cannot be reached for either or both facilities, an operator/manager may be sought through a request for proposal.

5. Resolves, subject to satisfactory commercial terms, to exercise Council’s rights under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981 to acquire part of the former Phillipstown School site.

6. Endorses Partial Land Purchase Option 1 (approximately 1,140 m² frontage to Nursery Road, clause 4.68) as the preferred acquisition configuration, with Options 2 and 3 retained as backup options in that order.

7. Resolves that implementation is conditional on the land purchase, and relocation of the existing Council-owned house to there, being achieved within the current budget provision.

8. Delegates authority to the Property Consultancy Manager and the Head of Community Support and Partnerships to give effect to the above resolutions and to make decisions within the scope of, and consistent with, the outcomes and intent of this report and Council’s delegations.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 The Ministry of Education has advised its intention to dispose of approximately 0.92 hectares of the former Phillipstown School site under Section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981. This triggers Council’s first right of acquisition for another public work.

3.2 Council has assessed whether the acquisition of all or part of the site is justified, having regard to statutory obligations, strategic alignment, financial sustainability, and demonstrated community need. This assessment has been informed by the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment (December 2025) (Attachment B), which confirms Phillipstown as a high-needs, diverse community with a strong reliance on accessible, locally based community infrastructure.

3.3 The needs assessment establishes a clear mandate for a permanent community presence in Phillipstown. However, it also concludes that the scale and configuration of the former school site, the end-of-life condition of most existing buildings, and the legacy of metropolitan-level service provision mean the site is not suitable for long-term Council ownership or operation in its current form. Acquisition of the entire disposal area cannot be justified as a proportionate or efficient public work.

3.4 Council officers have therefore identified a partial site acquisition, supported by a two-phased delivery approach, as the most defensible option. This approach enables continuity of service in the short term while securing a smaller, right-sized footprint capable of supporting a fit-for-purpose community facility with long-term tenure and sustainability.

3.5 Several partial acquisition configurations have been considered, with differing implications for cost, flexibility, and operational efficiency. All options assume land-only acquisition, as most of the existing buildings are end-of-life, poorly maintained, and unsuitable for retention.

3.6 The decision before Council is whether to exercise its Section 50 rights in respect of part of the site. On balance, a targeted partial acquisition best achieves strong community outcomes while maintaining financial prudence, strategic alignment, and long-term operational viability, and is consistent with Council’s community facility strategy and retention criteria.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 The primary decision for Council is whether to exercise its right under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981 to acquire all or part of the former Phillipstown School site from the Ministry of Education.

4.2 In considering whether to exercise this option, Council must have regard to the following interrelated matters:

Strategic rationale for acquisition (retention criteria)

4.3 Whether acquisition of all or part of the site can be justified as a legitimate public work, having regard to strategic alignment, long-term operational suitability, financial sustainability, and opportunity cost. This includes assessing whether the site meets Council’s retention criteria and represents an efficient and appropriate use of public funds. Refer Attachment A for an analysis.

Community provision considerations

4.4 The extent to which ongoing community use of the site contributes to a valid public work purpose, informed by the outcomes of the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment December 2025 Attachment B. This includes consideration of the scale, form, and location of any future community facility, and whether community needs can be more effectively met through partial acquisition, alternative Council assets, or other delivery models.

Implications for existing community groups and activities

4.5 The implications of Council’s decision for the community groups currently operating from the site, including potential transition arrangements, alternative accommodation options, and continuity of service. While the presence of these groups does not in itself determine whether the site should be acquired, their activities are a relevant consideration insofar as they inform community need and potential public work justification.

Site and MOE Disposal Process

4.6 The former Phillipstown School site (39 Nursery Road) comprises three main parts:

· Te Hohepa Te Kōhanga Reo (2,719 m²) – retained by MOE.

· Transitional Unit School - Tētēkura (8,329 m²) – retained by MOE.

· Community Hub area (approx. 0.92 ha) – subject to disposal notice.

4.7 When the Ministry of Education (MOE) no longer requires school land, it must follow a formal Crown disposal process before the property can be sold. This process is governed by the Public Works Act 1981 and other Crown land protocols.

4.8 The main steps are:

4.8.1 Section 50 Offer – Public Works Act 1981. The land must first be offered to other public bodies (such as councils or government agencies) for another public work. If a public body wishes to acquire the land, it must be for a legitimate public purpose and purchased at market value. Council must therefore assess whether there is sufficient justification to acquire the land for public or community use.

4.8.2 Section 40 Offer-Back – Public Works Act 1981. If no public body wishes to acquire the land, the Crown must consider whether it should be offered back to the former owner or their successors.

4.8.3 Treaty Settlement Right of First Refusal (RFR). If offer-back obligations are met or do not apply, the land is then offered to mana whenua (iwi/hapū) under any applicable Treaty settlement legislation.

4.8.4 Open Market Sale. Only once all these statutory and Treaty requirements are completed may the Crown sell the land on the open market.

4.9 This process is typically managed by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) on behalf of the Crown and can take several years to complete depending on the land’s history, complexity, and the responses from interested parties.

4.10 In this case, the MOE has initiated the process for part of the former Phillipstown School site. They have issued a formal notice advising that it intends to dispose of part of the former Phillipstown School site at 39 Nursery Road, Phillipstown. Under Section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981, the Council has an opportunity to acquire the site for another public work.

4.11 The notice was dated 1 October 2025, giving Council 20 working days (until 28 October 2025) to respond. At the staffs request this deadline has been extended to 28 February 2026.

4.12 The land subject to disposal notice is approximately 0.9227 ha, highlighted in blue on the plan below.

4.13 The Te Hohepa Te Kōhanga Reo – 2,719 m² - Māori language immersion early childhood education centre (Kōhanga Reo) is to be retained by MOE (not subject to disposal).

4.14 The transitional Unit Tētēkura – 8,329 m² which is a collaborative initiative between Pītau-Allenvale School and Ferndale School, supporting students with additional learning needs transitioning from school to adult life is also to be retained by MOE.

4.15 The council “house” building (circled in red on the plan) is owned by Council, with the land leased from MOE. The lease expires on 30 September 2026. The building is operated by the Phillipstown Community Centre Charitable Trust (PCCCT) on Council’s behalf, although there is currently no formal management agreement in place. This is currently occupied by the Refugee Council. The MOE at this stage is unable to provide any strategy about the future of this lease beyond the expiry and that responsibility looks to be transferring to the school. The building would be more suitable to play a role in future community arrangements on a council-controlled site i.e. relocated to provide future control and certainty.

Current Use - Community

4.16 The disposal area is currently managed by the PCCCT, in conjunction with the Council-owned hub building. It provides a well-established as a community facility providing social, cultural, and wellbeing outcomes. It provides a highly active community hub supporting a wide range of organisations and activities.

4.16.1 Home for community groups, which are tenants of the PCCCT:

· The Green Lab

· Te Puawaitanga ki Ōtautahi Trust

· Kiwi Family Trust

· Purapura Whetu

· Linwood Islamic Trust

· Safe Connection

· Ōtautahi Creative Spaces

· Canterbury Refugee Resettlement & Resource Centre

· Community Garden

4.16.2 Community hub activities and events:
These include language, cultural, wellbeing, and recreation programmes such as:
Zumba, Ukulele, Bonsai workshops, West African drumming, Vegan Night Mākete, Arabic calligraphy, Pregnancy Support Circle, Auahatanga – Art & Wellbeing, Ngā Kākano o Te Reo, Connect n’ Learn, Crop Swap, Board Game Club, and many others.

4.16.3 Community garden:
An established and active garden supports local engagement, food resilience, and social connection.

4.16.4 Overall, the site is a valued and well-used community asset serving a diverse and often vulnerable population. However, the current provision of community services has grown to fill the space available and as a result has become a home for metropolitan groups.

Current Status of Community Groups and Activities

4.17 Upon receiving formal notice that the Ministry of Education (MOE) had commenced the disposal process for part of the Phillipstown School site, the Phillipstown Community Centre Charitable Trust resolved to close the Phillipstown Community Hub, effective 31 March 2026.

4.18 The PCCCT’s decision was intended to provide certainty for the groups occupying the site and to allow reasonable time for planning an orderly and managed transition in anticipation of the site’s eventual disposal.

4.19 The Trust has advised that it will remain a constituted entity and has expressed its willingness to continue working with Council on the provision of future community services for Phillipstown. The Trust’s correspondence confirming this position is attached to this report Attachment C.

4.20 The Trust’s eight tenant organisations are currently considering their future operating arrangements. While some are actively seeking alternative premises, it may not be necessary for all groups to vacate the site by 31 March 2026. The Ministry of Education’s disposal process is expected to take some time to complete, and there may be scope for interim occupancy arrangements to be agreed directly between the tenant organisations and the Ministry of Education to enable a more orderly transition.

4.21 Any such interim arrangements would be a matter solely for the Ministry of Education and the relevant occupiers. They would not involve Council as a party, nor imply any Council commitment to ongoing occupancy, tenure, or future use of the site. This observation is provided for context only and does not form part of Council’s decision-making or obligations in relation to the site.

4.22 There may nevertheless be mutual benefit in the Ministry of Education retaining an active or caretaker presence on the site while disposal and any associated demolition processes are progressed.

Key Points from the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment (Dec 2025)

Purpose and relevance to the decision

4.23 The needs assessment was undertaken to inform Council’s decision on whether there is a demonstrable ongoing need for a permanent community facility in Phillipstown, and if so, what scale, form, and location would be appropriate following the Ministry of Education’s disposal of the former school site

4.24 The assessment directly informs whether acquisition of land (in full or part) can be justified as a public work, and what level of investment would be proportionate and sustainable.

Community profile and level of need

4.25 Phillipstown is a high-needs, rapidly changing suburb with characteristics that increase reliance on local, accessible community infrastructure:

4.26 Population approx. 4,620, growing and younger than the city average, with 38% under 25.

4.27 High deprivation indicators:

4.27.1 62% report financial strain.

4.27.2 63% renters, home ownership well below the city average.

4.27.3 Higher unemployment and a high proportion of sole-parent and single-person households.

4.28 One of Christchurch’s most ethnically diverse suburbs (Māori, Pacific, Asian and migrant communities strongly represented).

4.29 These factors collectively increase demand for local, low-cost, walkable services, particularly for youth, families, migrants, and people without private transport

Role and value of the existing Hub

4.30 The current Phillipstown Community Hub is widely regarded as:

4.30.1 A central anchor for community identity and cohesion.

4.30.2 A critical access point for social, cultural, wellbeing, food security, and informal support services.

4.30.3 A place-based connector rather than just a facility.

4.31 Key evidence:

4.31.1 71% of respondents to a recent survey use community spaces at least monthly.

4.31.2 96% of respondents say a permanent community centre in Phillipstown is important.

4.31.3 Closure of the Hub is expected to result in service fragmentation, reduced participation, and increased isolation, particularly for vulnerable residents.

Gaps, constraints, and risks identified

4.32 While need is clearly established, the assessment also identifies important constraints that are highly relevant to Council’s acquisition decision:

4.32.1 Phillipstown has limited alternative community infrastructure within its boundaries.

4.32.2 Existing nearby facilities are often:

· Too large, costly, or metropolitan in focus.

· Difficult to access for residents with mobility or transport barriers.

4.32.3 A large, purpose-built facility would introduce:

· High capital and operating costs.

· Risk of duplication with existing city-wide services.

· A mismatch between facility scale and local community needs.

4.33 The assessment explicitly notes that the current Hub has grown to become a metropolitan service node that is no longer right sized for Phillipstown.

Core requirements for any future facility

4.34 The needs assessment identifies several non-negotiable criteria for Council consideration:

4.34.1 Long-term tenure and stability to justify investment and rebuild community trust.

4.34.2 Central, walkable location within Phillipstown to maintain equity of access.

4.34.3 Smaller, flexible, multi-use spaces rather than a large single facility.

4.34.4 Ability to support:

· Youth and family activities.

· Cultural and language-based programmes.

· Food resilience initiatives (garden, pantry, shared cooking).

4.34.5 Alignment with housing intensification (PC14 / NPS-UD) and sustainability goals.

4.35 Importantly, the assessment concludes that community need does not justify acquisition of the entire former school site, but does support securing a smaller, locally focused footprint.

Needs Assessment Summary

4.36 The assessment provides a clear mandate for a permanent community presence in Phillipstown, but equally clear advice that:

4.36.1 The solution should be smaller, localised, and fit-for-purpose.

4.36.2 Acquisition decisions should focus on strategic justification and sustainability, not simply the retention of the existing site in its entirety.

4.36.3 A partial acquisition aligned to a two-phased approach is the most defensible response to the identified needs.

4.37 While there are existing community groups operating from parts of the site, this matter is not directly about their ongoing tenure but rather whether the site itself is suitable and justified for Council acquisition for public works or community purposes.

4.38 The presence of community occupiers is a related consideration to the extent that continued community use could constitute a relevant public work purpose. However, the primary decision must focus on the site’s strategic, financial, and operational suitability for long-term Council ownership or management.

Overall Conclusion

4.39 Council’s decision under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981 requires a careful balancing of demonstrated community need against strategic justification, financial sustainability, and long-term operational suitability. The former Phillipstown School site presents a genuine opportunity to support community outcomes, but that opportunity must be framed within Council’s retention criteria and obligations to ensure efficient and appropriate use of public resources.

4.40 The Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment (December 2025) provides clear and robust evidence that Phillipstown is a high-needs community with strong reliance on accessible, local, low-cost community infrastructure. The existing Community Hub has played a significant role in supporting social cohesion, wellbeing, and cultural connection, particularly for vulnerable and diverse populations. There is a strong mandate for a permanent community presence in Phillipstown.

4.41 However, the assessment equally identifies that the current scale and configuration of the former school site, and the way it has evolved into a metropolitan service node, is not well aligned with Phillipstown’s long-term local needs or with Council’s strategic and financial parameters. Acquisition of the entire disposal area cannot be justified as a proportionate or efficient public work when assessed against opportunity cost, ongoing operating liabilities, and the availability of alternative delivery models.

4.42 The evidence supports a more targeted response: securing a smaller, right-sized footprint that enables long-term tenure, walkable access, and flexible multi-use community spaces. This approach better aligns with Council’s strategic objectives, minimises financial and operational risk, and responds directly to the needs assessment’s recommendation for a two-phased, locally focused solution rather than wholesale site retention.

4.43 The presence of existing community groups and activities on the site is an important contextual consideration, particularly in understanding community need and the value of place-based provision. However, their current occupation does not, in itself, determine the appropriateness of acquisition. Decisions must be based on whether land acquisition can be justified as a legitimate public work for the future, rather than as a mechanism to preserve current arrangements.

4.44 In summary, the assessment of statutory obligations, community need, and strategic fit indicates that while continued community provision in Phillipstown is warranted, acquisition of all the land subject to the Ministry of Education’s disposal notice is not. A partial acquisition, or alternative approach that secures a smaller, fit-for-purpose community facility with long-term certainty, represents the most defensible, sustainable, and outcome-focused option available to Council.

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

Date	Subject
13/10/2025	End of day update

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

Date	Subject
18/12/2025	Workshop Council
11/12/2025	Briefing Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

4.47.1 Option 1: Do Nothing - Decline the Section 50 offer and focus on alternative community provision elsewhere in the Phillipstown/Linwood area.

4.47.2 Option 2: Acquire the whole site - exercise purchase option under Section 50 for continued public/community use.

4.47.3 Option 3: Acquire part of the site – (Two Phased Approach in the needs analysis) – exercise purchase option under Section 50 for continued public/community use. Complement community service delivery and outcomes by leveraging other council assets.

4.48 The following options were considered but ruled out:

4.48.1 These options relate to doing nothing in respect of the ex-school site purchase (i.e. no purchase) and consider alternative community service delivery options.

4.48.2 Option 4: Develop Community Centre Elsewhere This option involves constructing a new purpose-built community centre in a different location within the wider catchment area. The facility would provide dedicated spaces for community programs, events, and services, similar to what Phillipstown previously offered, but in a new setting.

· While developing a new community centre elsewhere could deliver a modern, fit-for-purpose facility with long-term efficiencies and opportunities for co-location, the option carries substantial barriers. It would require high upfront capital investment, secure land, and navigating lengthy planning and construction processes, all of which introduce delay and significant financial risk.

· Importantly, relocating the facility outside Phillipstown risks reducing accessibility for the community most affected, potentially undermining equity objectives and creating reputational challenges. Given these constraints—and the lack of alignment with existing facility planning—this option was considered but discounted early in the analysis.

4.48.3 Option 5: Mobile Community Development This option involves placing a community development worker in Phillipstown to provide on-the-ground support and coordination for local initiatives without establishing a permanent physical hub. The worker would operate in a mobile capacity, using existing community spaces (e.g., schools, churches, libraries) for meetings and activities.

· A community development–led model offers flexibility, lower costs, and the ability to strengthen local networks by working directly with residents, grassroots groups, and existing venues. It could adapt quickly to changing needs and make efficient use of current spaces without requiring major capital investment.

· However, the lack of a permanent, visible community hub limits its impact and risks the initiative feeling temporary or fragmented. A single worker is unlikely to meet the scale and complexity of need in Phillipstown, and reliance on external venues constrains delivery. Community expectations for a dedicated, place-based facility also mean this option may be viewed as a downgrade, making long-term engagement and sustainability difficult. For these reasons, the option was considered but discounted early in the assessment.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.49 Option 1: Do Nothing - Decline the Section 50 offer and focus on alternative community provision elsewhere in the Phillipstown/Linwood area. Not Recommended

4.49.1 Option Description: This option involves permanently closing the existing community hub and ceasing council-led community development activities in Phillipstown. While this approach delivers immediate cost savings by eliminating operating expenses, it comes with significant social and reputational risks. Leaves the provision of council delivered community services from the “house” on land leased from the MOE/ Tētēkura.

4.49.2 Option Advantages

· Immediate financial savings: Eliminates operational and maintenance costs.

· Administrative simplicity: Reduces complexity in managing facilities and programs.

· Budget flexibility: Funds can be re-allocated to other council projects.

4.49.3 Option Disadvantages

· Loss of community identity: The hub has been a focal point for local engagement; its closure may erode social cohesion.

· Reduced access to services and activities: Residents lose a central space for programs, events, and support.

· Increased isolation and vulnerability: Particularly impacts groups already experiencing disadvantages.

· Reputational risk for council: Perception of disinvestment in a high-needs area could damage trust and relationships.

· Potential long-term costs: Social issues arising from reduced engagement may lead to higher demand for other council or social services.

· This has a high risk associated with the “house” on leased land. The lease expires next year and a renewal or ongoing lease is vulnerable.

4.50 Option 2: Acquire the whole site - exercise purchase option under Section 50 for continued public/community use. Not Recommended

4.50.1 Option Description: This option involves purchasing the entire Phillipstown School site, including the existing dwellings currently owned by the Ministry of Education. Securing the full site would provide the Council with strategic land for future needs, including potential infrastructure requirements such as 3 Waters, and allow flexibility for long-term community development planning.

4.50.2 Option Advantages

· Strategic asset acquisition: Positions council to meet future growth and infrastructure demands.

· Flexibility for future development: Enables long-term planning for community facilities or other council priorities.

· Avoid fragmentation: Ensures control over the entire site rather than partial ownership.

· Potential cost efficiencies in the long term: Consolidated land may reduce future acquisition costs.

· Potential to provide for 3Waters future demands in the area beyond 25years in the future.

4.50.3 Option Disadvantages

· High financial impact: Entire market value is not budgeted in the Long-Term Plan; purchase would likely require rate increases or cost-sharing arrangements.

· Political risk: Public perception of significant expenditure in a constrained fiscal environment.

· Opportunity cost: Funds allocated to land purchase may limit investment in other community priorities.

· Majority of existing buildings are at end of life: Buildings do not meet accessibility or quality standards, requiring demolition or major refurbishment.

· Uncertain timing and negotiations: Market conditions and Ministry of Education timelines may delay acquisition.

· Maintenance burden: Interim holding costs for land and buildings until redevelopment occurs.

· This option is not proportionate to the demonstrated community need and does not meet Council’s retention criteria.

4.51 Option 3: Acquire part of the site – (Two Phased Approach in the needs analysis) – exercise a partial land purchase option under Section 50 for continued public/community use. Complement community service delivery and outcomes by leveraging other council assets. Preferred Recommended Option

4.51.1 Option Description: This option provides continuity for the community while enabling staged investment, balancing immediate needs with long-term strategic planning. It involves two phases:

4.51.2 Phase 1: Immediate Continuity

· Leverage existing Council assets by seeking an interim ground lease for the Council-owned house on MOE land adjacent to Ferndale School as a temporary base for community activities, allowing Council time to establish Phase 2.

· If an interim lease cannot be secured, officers will focus on expediting Phase 2 options or identifying alternative short-term accommodation within the community facilities network

· Minimal cost for adaptation and maintenance.

· Provides a visible and accessible presence for residents, ensuring locally focused programs and engagement continue without interruption.

4.51.3 Phase 2: Long-Term Solution

· Secure permanent community space through partial purchase and subdivision of the Phillipstown school site to create a future-focused smaller locally focused amenity. The Ministry of Education have indicated their willingness to subdivide the land.

· Move Council owned house onto the recently purchased land.

· Facilitate community use and activation of the Lancaster park facility. This will serve to optimise the use of that facility and complement the scaled service to be provided on the purchased Phillipstown School site.

4.51.4 Option Advantages

· Allows Council to act fast and decisively to secure a site in a suburb that needs it and where there is little by the way of alternatives

· Continuity of service: Maintains community engagement and trust during transition.

· Right sized to meet local community need into the future.

· Reflects historic service provision.

· Financial feasibility: Smaller area of land purchased is potentially more affordable to Council. Spreads costs over time, reducing immediate budget impact.

· Strategic flexibility: Positions council to secure land for future needs without committing to full-site purchase upfront.

· Community confidence: Demonstrates commitment to Phillipstown while managing fiscal responsibility.

· Moderate risk profile: Risks are manageable with clear funding commitments and stakeholder support.

· Provides scope to consider retention of the small dental building under partial land purchase option 1.

4.51.5 Option Disadvantages

· Interim facility limitations: The house may not fully meet accessibility or space requirements and with a short-term ground lease perpetuating the feeling of a “temporary” solution.

· Complexity of staged approach: Requires careful coordination between phases to avoid delays or cost overruns.

· Funding, costs and delivery uncertainty.

· Community expectations: Risk of dissatisfaction if long-term facility development is delayed.

· Existing provision of funding within the Long- Term Plan may not be sufficient to provide for everyone’s aspirations.

· Negotiation of risks: Partial purchase and subdivision may involve complex agreements with the Ministry of Education.

Partial site purchase options

4.52 Under the preferred Option 3, several partial site purchase configurations have been considered to determine the most appropriate footprint to support a right-sized, locally focused community facility with long-term tenure and financial sustainability.

4.53 Option 1 Approx 1140m² frontage to Nursery Road.

4.53.1 Advantages

· Established and familiar access point, as this frontage reflects the site’s existing and historic entrance, supporting continuity and legibility for the community.

· Strong walkable location on Nursery Road, well aligned with the needs assessment emphasis on local, accessible provision.

· Potential to formalise shared access arrangements, including the ability to establish an easement to share the existing entry with the remaining Transitional Unit, improving efficiency and reducing duplication of infrastructure.

· Smaller land footprint, reducing acquisition cost and long-term holding risk.

· Clear separation from retained Ministry of Education land, simplifying subdivision and ownership boundaries.

· Flexibility for future redevelopment, enabling a purpose-built, right-sized facility aligned with local needs.

· Opposite the reserve, allowing for event overflow and integration. Provides for good amenity value and outlook.

· Allows consideration to retain the small dental building which is in reasonable condition compared to the rest of the buildings on site.

4.53.2 Disadvantages

· Limited site area, constraining the scale and range of activities that could be accommodated.

· Reduced capacity for outdoor or ancillary spaces, requiring careful design to accommodate any external uses.

· Limited ability for future expansion, relative to the larger partial acquisition options.

· Potential servicing and parking constraints, depending on final design outcomes.

4.54 Option 2 Approx 1080m² two parcels on the corner of Hillview Road and Phillips Street the entire corner of Hillview Road and Phillips Street

4.54.1 Advantages

· Prominent corner location, offering visibility and opportunities for passive surveillance.

· Dual street frontage, which may support flexible access and design responses.

· Relatively small land area, supporting affordability and alignment with a modest facility scale.

4.54.2 Disadvantages

· Adjacent context is predominantly industrial and commercial in nature, with the corner facing non-residential uses, which may limit alignment with the intended community-focused character of the facility.

· Weaker sense of place as a neighbourhood community hub, compared with options located closer to established community or social services.

· Fragmented land configuration, increasing design, servicing, and management complexity.

· Increased subdivision and legal complexity, with potential cost and programme implications.

· Less intuitive site identity, which may reduce legibility and community ownership.

4.55 Option 3 Approx 2310m² the entire corner of Hillview Road and Phillips Street

4.55.1 Advantages

· Largest and most flexible partial acquisition option, enabling efficient site planning and adaptability over time.

· Ability to position a facility closer to the existing early learning centre, improving proximity, functional alignment, and coherence with other community-oriented services.

· Improved contextual fit, as the scale of the site allows the community facility to be orientated away from adjoining industrial and commercial activities, helping to mitigate interface effects.

· Strong corner presence, supporting visibility, safety, and placemaking outcomes.

· Capacity for complementary outdoor or shared spaces, consistent with the needs assessment emphasis on flexible, multi-use provision.

· Greater resilience for future service changes, without committing to full-site acquisition.

4.55.2 Disadvantages

· Higher acquisition cost, increasing pressure on available capital budgets.

· Greater ongoing maintenance and holding costs, relative to smaller options.

· Risk of over-provision, if not carefully constrained, given that the needs assessment does not support a large-scale facility.

· Requires disciplined scope control, to ensure the facility remains locally focused and financially sustainable.

· The site faces away from the Philipstown community it purports to support creating a sense of distance and a disjointed approach to facility provision.

4.56 Partial site options including existing buildings have been considered but are not recommended because:

· The existing buildings are end-of-life, functionally obsolete, and not fit for long-term community use.

· There is significant deferred maintenance, with known and unknown remedial works required.

· Buildings have not been comprehensively repaired or maintained since the Canterbury earthquakes, increasing risk and uncertainty.

· Some structures may be subject to heritage or planning constraints, limiting redevelopment flexibility and increasing compliance costs.

· Retention would divert investment away from delivering a fit-for-purpose facility, contrary to the needs assessment findings.

· Acquisition of buildings would undermine financial sustainability and value-for-money principles and is inconsistent with Council’s retention and acquisition criteria.

Conclusion

4.57 On balance, Option 1 (approximately 1,140 m² frontage to Nursery Road) is the preferred partial site acquisition option. This option best aligns with the findings of the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment and Council’s retention and acquisition criteria by enabling a right-sized, locally focused community facility with strong walkable access and long-term sustainability.

4.58 Option 1 benefits from being the existing and familiar entrance to the former school site, supporting continuity, legibility, and community recognition. Its location on Nursery Road provides a clear neighbourhood-facing address and avoids the interface challenges associated with adjoining industrial and commercial activities present at the Hillview Road / Phillips Street corner.

4.59 Importantly, Option 1 also offers the potential to formalise shared access arrangements, including an easement to share the existing entry with the remaining Transitional Unit. This could improve operational efficiency, minimise duplication of infrastructure, and support a more coherent overall site layout between retained Ministry of Education land and the Council-owned parcel.

4.60 While the smaller land area limits the scale of development, this constraint is considered appropriate and desirable, ensuring that any future facility remains fit-for-purpose, financially prudent, and consistent with the needs assessment conclusion that a large or metropolitan-scale facility is neither required nor justified for Phillipstown. Any limitations on space can be mitigated through careful design, flexible programming, and complementary use of nearby Council facilities.

4.61 Accordingly, Option 1 represents the most proportionate, defensible, and sustainable partial acquisition configuration, balancing community outcomes with fiscal responsibility and long-term operational viability.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.62 The following criteria will guide final analysis and recommendations:

4.62.1 Alignment with Council’s community facility strategy and network plan.

4.62.2 Community need and service gaps identified through the needs analysis.

4.62.3 Financial sustainability (capital and ongoing).

4.62.4 Strategic value of site location and accessibility.

4.62.5 Partnership opportunities and alternative delivery models.

4.62.6 Alignment with mana whenua, Treaty, and equity priorities.

4.63 The key decision point in this matter is whether the Council should exercise its right of acquisition under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981.

4.64 This decision should be based primarily on whether the Phillipstown site is suitable and justified for Council ownership having regard to:

4.64.1 Its physical and operational fitness for community or civic purposes.

4.64.2 Its ability to be managed and maintained on a financially and operationally sustainable basis.

4.64.3 Alignment with Council’s strategic framework and community facility network; and

4.64.4 Opportunity cost and alternative uses or investment priorities.

4.65 The existence of current community occupants is relevant insofar as their activities may represent a potential public work purpose. However, their presence should not drive the acquisition decision unless the site demonstrably meets the criteria for sustainable and efficient community service delivery.

4.66 Should the site not meet those criteria, Council may instead explore alternative accommodation solutions for those groups through the broader community facilities network or partnership arrangements.

4.67 Summary Comparison of Primary Options

Criteria	Option A – No acquisition	Option B – Full site acquisition	Option C – Partial site acquisition
Cost	Lowest short-term cost, but no asset secured and potential future costs to re-establish services elsewhere.	Highest cost due to land acquisition, deferred maintenance, building remediation, and long-term holding costs.	Moderate and controlled cost, focused on land only and within existing LTP assumptions.
Community outcomes	Poor; loss of long-term tenure for community services and reduced Council presence in a high-needs area.	Mixed; provides space but risks over-provision and retention of unsuitable, end-of-life buildings.	Strong; secures long-term community presence through a right-sized, locally focused facility.
Risk	Moderate; reputational risk and risk of service discontinuity, with no control over future land use outcomes.	High; significant financial, operational, and asset-condition risk, including ongoing liability for obsolete buildings.	Low–Moderate; risks are contained through partial acquisition, land-only approach, and staged delivery.
Alignment with needs assessment	Low; does not respond to identified need for a permanent, accessible community presence.	Low–Moderate; scale and configuration exceed what the needs assessment supports.	Very strong; directly reflects the needs assessment’s emphasis on scale, accessibility, flexibility, and sustainability.

4.68 Summary Comparison of Partial Site Purchase Options

Criteria	Option 1 – Nursery Road frontage (≈1,140 m²)	Option 2 – Hillview / Phillips corner (≈1,080 m², two parcels)	Option 3 – Hillview / Phillips full corner (≈2,310 m²)
Cost	Lowest acquisition and long-term holding cost due to smallest footprint and simpler subdivision.	Low–Moderate acquisition cost, but increased legal, design, and servicing costs due to fragmented parcels.	Highest acquisition and holding cost of the partial options due to significantly larger land area.
Community outcomes	Strong neighbourhood-facing outcome with familiar access, good walkability, and clear identity as a local community facility.	Moderate outcomes: location faces predominantly industrial/commercial uses, limiting sense of place and community alignment.	Good outcomes: larger site allows better buffering from industrial uses and closer alignment with nearby early learning/community services.
Risk	Low risk profile: simpler site, clearer boundaries, lower financial exposure, and strong alignment with existing access and use patterns.	Moderate risk; fragmented land, weaker contextual fit, and increased complexity in design, access, and servicing.	Moderate–High risk; higher cost exposure and risk of over-provision if facility scale is not tightly controlled.
Alignment with needs assessment	Very strong alignment; right-sized, local, walkable, flexible, and financially sustainable.	Moderate alignment: scale is appropriate, but location and context are less consistent with a neighbourhood-focused facility.	Good alignment if carefully constrained; offers flexibility but risks exceeding the locally focused scale recommended.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

5.1 Council has $3,629,914 CAPEX (including inflation allowances) allocated in the Long-Term Plan (2024–2034) to support a Phillipstown Community Centre under CPMS project number 69275 as follows:

· $241,353 in 2029/30

· $3,388,561 in 2030/31

5.2 Modest operating costs can be absorbed into the Community Facilities Operations budget.

5.3 The site comprises relatively high-value land, and the existing buildings are of mixed condition with most at end of life. Ongoing community or civic use is unviable and not sustainable in its current use.

5.4 Therefore, an alternative accommodation option for the current community groups in more appropriate and sustainable facilities needs to be identified if it has not been done already.

5.5 The recommended option is consistent with existing LTP funding envelopes but does not yet commit Council to any unbudgeted capital expenditure.

	Option 1 – Do nothing	Option 2 – Acquire the whole site	Option 3 – Acquire small portion of the site
Capex Cost to Implement	Low - Nil	High - Estimated approx. Purchase $6m - $8m Existing buildings are end of life and require replacement or significant refurbishment - not costed but significant.	Purchase – Estimated $1m - $2m Relocation of the house $350k - $650k
Capex Funding Source	CPMS 69275 Phillipstown Community Centre - $3.6m this would be a saving. Currently in 2029/30 and 2030/31	CPMS 69275 Phillipstown Community Centre – Total $3.6m in 2029/30 and 2030/31– significant additional funding would be required	CPMS 69275 Phillipstown Community Centre – with $3.3m being brought forward from 2029/31 to 2026/27 and 2027/28
Maintenance/ Ongoing Costs	Low – ongoing operating costs for the house est. $20 – $40K	High	Low – ongoing operating costs for the house est. $20 – $40K
Operating Funding Source	Community Facilities Operations Budget	Significant	Community Facilities Operations Budget
Impact on Rates	Nil	Would require significant additional capex and opex funding therefore have an impact on rates	Nil - achievable within current budgets

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 Key risks include:

6.1.1 Reputational risk and potential loss of community cohesion if transition not managed.

6.1.2 Uncertainty around MOE disposal timeframes and reaching agreement.

6.1.3 Complexities with subdivision and consenting processes.

6.1.4 Market risk and cost escalation if acquisition pursued.

6.1.5 Mitigation includes ongoing communication with MOE, timely needs assessment, and early engagement with affected groups.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

6.2.1 Authority exists under the Public Works Act 1981, Section 50, enabling Council to acquire Crown land for another public work.

6.3 Other Legal Implications:

6.3.1 There will be several legal context, issue, or implication relevant to this decision. Legal services will be engaged to work through the issues and documentation to give effect to the resolution.

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The required decision:

6.4.1 Aligns with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework. (Strong Communities, Resilient Communities).

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 an assessment which that although the decision is important to the Phillipstown community and attracts local interest, its impacts are geographically limited, financially constrained, and staged. It does not involve the disposal of strategic assets, major expenditure outside the Long-Term Plan, or irreversible changes to Council’s service delivery. Engagement undertaken through the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment is proportionate to the level of significance.

6.4.3 Consistent with the Community Facilities Network Plan and Long-Term Plan 2024–2034 community facility transition objectives.

6.4.4 This report is consistent with the Council's Long Term Plan (2024 - 2034).

6.5 In 2020, Council endorsed a set of criteria to guide decisions on whether properties should be retained or considered for disposal (CNCL/2020/00169). Those criteria focus on determining when public ownership continues to be necessary to deliver Council services, protect significant values, or meet strategic needs.

6.6 To ensure consistency and alignment of approach, a complementary acquisition assessment framework has been applied attachment A, reflecting the same principles but inverted to test when acquisition of land or buildings is required or justified. The framework is intended to support robust, transparent, and defensible decision-making.

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

6.7 The Phillipstown Hub is a vital community anchor supporting diverse social, cultural, and wellbeing programmes. The community’s views and preferences have been obtained and are reflected in the Needs Assessment.

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

6.8.1 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

6.9 The Community Boards view and recommendation to Council is sought through this report.

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 On this basis, the decision relates to the potential acquisition of land for community facility purposes only and does not affect ancestral land, sites of cultural significance, wāhi tapu, waterways, or taonga. The proposal does not alter access to, or use of, land or resources of significance to Mana Whenua, nor does it give rise to any identified impacts on cultural values or customary interests. While the decision does not trigger specific engagement with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga, it is noted that the interests of Mana Whenua are, in part, reflected through the broader community consultation undertaken and the outcomes of the Phillipstown Community Needs Assessment. Accordingly, no specific engagement with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga is required in relation to this decision.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

6.14 The decision relates to whether Council should acquire part of the former Phillipstown School site and does not, in itself, authorise or commit Council to any development, construction, or operational activity. As such, the decision is not expected to have any direct or immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions or climate resilience.

6.15 From an adaptation and mitigation perspective, the proposed partial acquisition has the potential to support positive long-term outcomes by enabling locally based, walkable community services in an established urban area. This may contribute to reduced reliance on private vehicle travel and support compact urban form, consistent with Council’s climate and sustainability objectives.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 If the recommendations in this report are accepted, the following next steps will be progressed:

7.2 Engagement with the Ministry of Education
Officers will formally advise the Ministry of Education of Council’s decision to pursue a partial acquisition of the former Phillipstown School site under section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981, with Option 1 (approximately 1,140 m² frontage to Nursery Road) identified as the preferred configuration.

7.3 Negotiation of commercial and technical terms
Subject to delegation, officers will negotiate the commercial terms of acquisition with the Ministry of Education, including purchase price at market value, subdivision requirements, access arrangements, and any necessary easements. This will include refining site boundaries to achieve a practical and efficient subdivision outcome.

7.4 Due diligence and feasibility confirmation
Officers will undertake appropriate due diligence, including valuation, survey, geotechnical review (as required), and confirmation of servicing feasibility, to ensure the acquisition represents value for money and aligns with Council’s retention and acquisition criteria.

7.5 Interim continuity arrangements (Phase 1)
In parallel, officers will continue discussions with the Ministry of Education regarding the potential for an interim ground lease for the Council-owned house adjacent to the Transitional Unit School (Tētēkura), to maintain continuity of locally focused community services while longer-term arrangements are progressed.

7.6 Planning for relocation and future facility (Phase 2)
Subject to acquisition proceeding, officers will further investigate the feasibility, timing, and costs associated with relocating the Council-owned house onto the acquired land and establishing a fit-for-purpose, locally focused community facility, consistent with the needs assessment and available budget provision.

7.7 Community and stakeholder engagement
Officers will maintain communication with affected community groups and stakeholders, including the Phillipstown Community Centre Charitable Trust, to support an orderly transition and manage expectations regarding interim and long-term arrangements.

7.8 Further reporting to Council
Any decisions relating to capital investment, relocation of buildings, facility development, or long-term operational and management arrangements will be the subject of separate reports to Council as required.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Assessment against retention criteria (Under Separate Cover)	25/2646440
b	Needs assessment (Under Separate Cover)	25/2646340
c	Letter from PCCCT (Under Separate Cover)	25/2646364

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

Matt Boult - Acting Community Facilities & Activation Manager / Team Leader Governance Process

Claire Phillips - Manager Community Planning & Projects

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

Andrew Rutledge - General Manager Citizens and Community

8. Abberley Cr/Edgeware Rd/Springfield Rd - Pedestrian Safety Improvements
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/2416926
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Lachlan Beban, Principal Advisor Transportation
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Brent Smith, General Manager City Infrastructure

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek the approval of the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board to proceed with proposed pedestrian safety improvements at the intersection of Abberley Crescent, Edgeware Road and Springfield Road.

1.2 The report has been written following community requests to provide improved pedestrian facilities to assist pedestrians to cross Springfield Road at this intersection.

1.3 The recommended option is to install a pedestrian refuge island on Springfield Road.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Abberley Cr/Edgeware Rd/Springfield Rd - Pedestrian Safety Improvements 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. Under Clause 6(2) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw revokes any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the parking or stopping restrictions described in resolutions 4 to 16 below.

4. Approves, pursuant to Section 331 and 334 of the Local Government Act 1974, the road layout, including all road surface treatments, traffic islands, pedestrian facilities and road markings on Edgeware Road and Springfield Road as detailed on plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26 in Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda.

5. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the eastern side of Springfield Road, commencing at its intersection with Edgeware Road and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 36 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

6. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Edgeware Road, commencing at its intersection with Springfield Road and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 23 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

7. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, a bus stop be installed on the northern side of Edgeware Road, commencing at a point 23 metres east of its intersection with Springfield Road and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

8. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the northern side of Edgeware Road, commencing at a point 37 metres east of its intersection with Springfield Road and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 2 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

9. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southern side of Edgeware Road, commencing at a point 38.5 metres east of its intersection with Springfield Road and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 12 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

10. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, a bus stop be installed on the southern side of Edgeware Road, commencing at a point 24.5 metres east of its intersection with Springfield Road and extending in a easterly direction for a distance of 14 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

11. Approves that pursuant to Section 339(1) of the local Government Act:1974, that a bus shelter be installed on the southern side of Edgeware Road, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26)

12. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the southern side of Edgeware Road, commencing at its intersection with Springfield Road and extending in an easterly direction for a distance of 24.5 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

13. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the eastern side of Springfield Road, commencing at its intersection with Edgeware Road and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 37 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

14. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the western side of Springfield Road, commencing at a point 29.5 metres south of its intersection with Abberley Cresent and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 54 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

15. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 that the parking of vehicles on western side of Springfield Road be restricted to a maximum period of 5 minutes commencing at a point 17.5 metres north of its intersection with Abberley Crescent and extending in a northerly direction for a distance of 5.5 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26). This restriction is to apply at all times.

16. Approves that in accordance with Clause 7 of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, that the stopping of vehicles be prohibited at any time on the western side of Springfield Road, commencing at its intersection with Pitt Place and extending in a southerly direction for a distance of 27.5 metres, as detailed on Attachment A to the report on the meeting agenda (Plan TG133787 dated 09/01/26).

17. Approves that these resolutions take effect when parking signage and/or road markings that evidence the restrictions described in 4 to 16 are in place or removed in the case of revocations.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 Requests have been received from the local community for facilities to support pedestrians crossing Springfield Road near its intersection with Abberley Crescent and Edgeware Road.

3.2 It is proposed to install a refuge island on Springfield Road to the immediate north of the intersection.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 Improving safety and accessibility on local roads in Christchurch is a priority for the Council.

4.1.1 There are a number of levels of service agreed as part of the Long-Term Plan 24-34 which are relevant to this decision, such as measuring: safety statistics for pedestrians and cyclists; and perceptions that Christchurch is a “walking friendly city”.

4.2 Providing safe infrastructure is key to helping people to get where they are going safely, irrespective of their mode of travel.

4.3 Requests have been received from the local community (via the Community Board) and through consultation on speed limit changes for facilities to support pedestrians crossing Springfield Road at its intersection with Edgeware Road.

4.4 This is a longstanding issue, with initial requests from the Community Board dating back several years and previous options were presented to the Board in 2018 (including modifications to the Abberley Crescent approach).

4.5 Currently there are no formal facilities for pedestrians to cross Springfield Road in this vicinity. There is demand for crossing in this location to access the Edgeware Village to the east, the dairy on the northwest corner of the intersection, Abberley Park to the west, public transport and schools.

4.6 Springfield Road is classified as an Urban Connector in the NZTA-Waka Kotahi One Network Framework and has an average daily traffic of around 7,300 vehicles per day (September 2025 survey). Edgeware Road is classified as an Urban Connector and has an average daily traffic of around 4,700 vehicles per day (September 2023 survey).

4.7 There have been four reported crashes at or within 30m of this intersection within the last five years, one serious, two minor and one non-injury:

4.7.1 The serious crash and one non-injury crash involved cars turning right out of Edgeware Road colliding with northbound vehicles on Springfield Road.

4.7.2 One minor injury crash involved a vehicle travelling through from Edgeware Road to Abberley Cresent colliding with a scooter rider who was crossing the Abberley Crescent leg of the intersection

4.7.3 One minor injury crash involved a vehicle travelling through from Edgeware Road to Abberley Cresent colliding with a southbound vehicle on Springfield Road.

4.8 Bus route 100 runs between Springfield Road north and Edgeware Road, with an existing outbound bus stop on Springfield Road to the immediate north of the intersection.

4.9 A concept option was presented to the Board in August. The main feedback being that staff explore options to retain kerbside parking on Springfield Road outside of the dairy on the northwest corner of the intersection.

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

Date	Subject
28 August 2025	Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Information Session/Workshop,Item 5

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

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

4.11.1 Pedestrian refuge island north of the intersection.

4.11.2 Do nothing.

4.12 The following options were considered but ruled out:

4.12.1 Pedestrian refuge island south of the intersection – This was problematic for the tracking of vehicles turning left from Edgeware Road and the high vehicle demand for turning right from Springfield Road into Edgeware Road. Pedestrian surveys also indicate a higher number of pedestrians crossing on the northern side of the intersection. To mitigate the above issues, the refuge island would need to be located quite a distance from the intersection, which would take it away from pedestrian desire lines.

4.12.2 Alternative bus stop locations – Several options for the new bus stop and for relocation of the existing bus stop have been considered however all have presented issues due to the adjacent topography, trees, bus stop spacing, and the nature of the surrounding land use.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.13 Preferred Option: Pedestrian refuge island north of the intersection.

4.13.1 Option Description:

· New pedestrian refuge island on Springfield Road to the immediate north of the intersection.

· Modifications to the existing refuge island on the Edgeware Road approach. These are necessary to allow for the tracking of buses making the left turn from Springfield Road into Edgeware Road.

· Right turn bay on Springfield Road for movements into Edgeware Road.

· Associated no stopping restrictions to provide adequate visibility at crossing points.

· The existing outbound bus stop is relocated from outside the dairy to the Edgeware Road approach to the intersection (with a new shelter), and a new citybound bus stop proposed on Edgeware Road. The bus stop relocation is required to maintain kerbside parking outside the dairy on the northwest corner of the intersection. Environment Canterbury requested the new citybound bus stop during consultation to improve access to public transport in the local area.

4.13.2 Option Advantages

· Provides waiting space in the middle of the road to allow people to cross in two stages of shorter distance.

· Pedestrians are able cross one direction of traffic at a time, making it easier to judge safe gaps in traffic.

· Provides an additional citybound bus stop to serve the local area.

4.13.3 Option Disadvantages

· Cost to Council.

· Loss of on-street parking.

4.14 Option 2 – Do Nothing.

4.14.1 Option Description: Do Nothing.

4.14.2 Option Advantages

· No cost to Council.

4.14.3 Option Disadvantages

· Does not address safety and accessibility concerns for pedestrians.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option	Option 2 – Do Nothing
Cost to Implement	$108,000 (pedestrian improvements) $25,000 (bus shelter)	$0
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	To be covered under the roading maintenance contract, the effect will be minimal to the overall asset.	No impact
Funding Source	Traffic Operations budgets for Minor Safety Intervention (CPMS 65924) and Public Transport Infrastructure Upgrades	N/A
Funding Availability	Funding available in the above-named budget	N/A
Impact on Rates	None	None

5.1 These are high level estimates only and not tendered prices.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 The proposal includes safety measures that will reduce risk for pedestrians crossing at this location.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

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

6.2.2 Clause 6(2) of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 provides Council with the authority to subsequently amend or revoke any resolution made under this bylaw at any time.

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

· Bus passenger shelters under Section 339 (1) of the Local Government Act 1974.

· To hear and determine objections to bus stop shelters.

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

6.3 Other Legal Implications:

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

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

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The required decisions:

6.4.1 Align with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework and Community Outcomes. Improving the safety of our roads aligns with the Strategic Priorities and Community Outcomes, in particular to be an inclusive and equitable city; build trust and confidence by listening to and working with our residents; and providing safe crossing points for people who walk and cycle will contribute to a green, liveable city, where our neighbourhoods and communities are accessible and well-connected.

6.4.2 This project is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the low number of people affected by the proposal.

6.4.3 The recommended option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, in particular:

· LTP Activity Plan - Level of Service target to reduce the number of deaths or serious injuries (DSI) from all crashes by 40% in 2030.

· The changes made align with road safety and liveable streets goals in the Christchurch Transport Strategic Plan 2012–2042, and similarly in the draft Transport Plan (safe streets).

· The changes made align with Kia tūroa te Ao - Ōtautahi Christchurch Climate Resilience Strategy as set out in the Climate Change Impact Considerations section below.

· Improving safety on local roads is a priority for the Council.

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

6.6 Transport

6.6.1 Activity: Transport

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

· Level of Service: 10.5.41 Increase access within 15 minutes to key destination types by walking (to at least four of the five basic services: food shopping, education, employment, health, and open spaces) - >=50% of residential addresses with a 15- minute walking access

· Level of Service: 10.5.1 Limit deaths and serious injury crashes per capita for cyclists and pedestrians - <=12 crashes per 100,000 residents

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

· Level of Service: 10.0.6.1 Reduce the number of death and serious injury crashes on the local road network (DIA 1) - 4 less than previous FY

· Level of Service: 10.0.6.2 Reduce the number of death and serious injury crashes on the local road network - Five year rolling average <95 crashes per year

· Level of Service: 10.0.2 Increase the share of non-car modes in daily trips - >=37% of trips undertaken by non-car modes

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

· Level of Service: 10.4.4. Improve customer satisfaction with public transport facilities (quality of bus stops and bus priority measures) - >=73%.

· Level of Service: 10.4.1 More people are choosing to travel by public transport - >=13 million trips per year.

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

6.7 Consultation started on 28 November and ran until 18 December 2025.

6.8 Project details including links to the Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk webpage were advertised via:

· An email sent to two key stakeholders, Empower Church and St Albans Residents Association providing details of the consultation to share with their communities

· Two local community group Facebook pages, which reached over 13,800 people.

· A leaflet drop to 37 properties on Edgeware Road and Springfield Road, directly impacted by the proposed safety improvements.

6.9 Staff doorknocked 17 residents / businesses to discuss the proposed pedestrian safety improvements and bus stop relocation. If residents were unavailable, information was left inviting them to get in touch.

6.10 The Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk page had 418 views throughout the consultation period.

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

6.11 Submissions were made by two recognised organisations, one business and 46 individuals. All submissions are available on our Kōrero mai webpage.

6.12 Springfield Dairy supported a pedestrian crossing near the dairy but preferred traffic signals or a zebra crossing to make the crossing point safer. They were happy with the time restricted parking on Springfield Road.

6.13 St Albans Residents Association supported the pedestrian refuge island and right turn bay. While they supported the no-parking restriction for increased visibility around the intersection they had concerns about the parking loss and how this might impact residents.

6.14 Spokes Canterbury supported the plan overall and provided a number of suggestions to make the intersection more pedestrian and cyclist friendly.

6.15 Overall, 52% (49) of submitters supported the plans, 33% (16) supported parts of the plan and 14% (7) did not support the plans.

6.16 Reasons for supporting the plans included:

· Springfield Road has become very busy and hard for pedestrians to cross, so the proposed pedestrian island will improve pedestrian safety (11).

· Many people, including school children cross Springfield Road daily (4).

6.17 Reasons for supporting parts of the plans included:

· Pedestrian safety on Springfield Road needs to be improved but the plans do not improve it enough. Due to the high volumes of traffic and high vehicle speeds submitters felt that a pedestrian island was inadequate and traffic signals or a zebra crossing should be considered (9).

· The intersection is very busy and a significant upgrade is needed such as signals or a roundabout to make it safe (4).

· The relocated bus stop on Edgeware Road will cause congestion at the intersection, particularly for left turning traffic which may cause dangerous driving (3).

6.18 Reasons for not supporting the proposal included:

· The removal of on-street parking (5).

· Residents not wanting a bus stop outside their property due to noise and personal safety concerns (4).

· The intersection is already very busy and adding a pedestrian island in the proposed location will make it more complicated for drivers (4).

6.19 Submitters made the following requests:

· Use alternative crossing types such as signals or a zebra crossing (7).

· Upgrade the intersection to be signals (8) or a roundabout (4).

· Install traffic calming devices as part of the works (7).

· Lower the speed limit (7).

6.20 In addition, submitters requested that more pedestrian crossing points be installed on Springfield Road (6) and more cycling infrastructure be provided on Springfield Road (6). Submitters also requested to, flatten the hump on Abberley Crescent (3) and mark two lanes on the Edgware Road approach to the intersection, one for right turners and one for left turners and through traffic (3).

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

6.21.1 Innes ward

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.22 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.

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.24 The decisions in this report are likely to:

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

6.24.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

6.25 The emission reductions associated with this project have not been estimated.

6.26 Improving the ability for people to walk, cycle, scoot and catch the bus are a key part of the Council’s emissions reduction efforts by providing a safe, low emission way for residents to move around the city.

6.27 Improving safety and making these roads feel safer would address some of the barriers to people making sustainable travel choices. Removing these barriers will lead to reductions in vehicle kilometres travelled and consequently emissions from transport.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 If the Community Board agrees to the recommendations in this report, staff will engage with contractors to proceed with construction.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Abberley Cr/Edgeware Rd/Springfield Rd Pedestrian Improvements TG133787	26/50299	55

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Lachlan Beban - Principal Advisor Transportation Signals

Gemma Dioni - Principal Advisor Transportation Safety

Mansour Johari - Passenger Transport Engineer

Daisy-Bea Scrase - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Kathy Graham - Team Leader Traffic Operations

Tony Richardson - Finance Business Partner

Stephen Wright - Manager Operations (Transport)

10. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report - February 2026
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/2466351
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Emma Pavey, Community Governance Manager Papanui-Innes-Central
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose of Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

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

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:

1. Receives the information in the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Area Report - February 2026.

3. Community Support, Governance and Partnership Activity

3.1 Community Governance Projects

Activity

Detail

Timeline

Strategic Alignment

Summer with your neighbours (SWYN)

SWYN is about bringing people closer together and celebrating the unique and diverse mix of each neighbourhood.

This year's events can be held from 25 October 2025 to 30 March 2026.

Grant recipients were notified and the 2025/26 season opened on 25 October 2025.

Te Haumako Te Whitingia

Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

Youth Recreation

Staff are working in collaboration with youth-focused organisations to discuss potential opportunities in the Papanui, Innes and Central ward areas.

Ongoing

Te Haumako Te Whitingia

Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

Youth Safety

A youth space has opened in Northlands Mall with the support of the Board’s Better Off Fund, in collaboration with Papanui Youth Development Trust and Te Ora Hou.

Participation numbers have been steady, with young people using the space after school hours, often before catching buses from the bus exchange.

Ongoing

Te Haumako Te Whitingia

Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

Revitalisation of Petrie Park

The Board approved the Petrie Park tree planting plan at its June 2025 meeting, and We Are Richmond’s concept plan is subject to funding being acquired and all consenting requirements being met.

Ongoing

Te Haumako Te Whitingia

Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

Safety Initiatives

Further discussions are underway about the future planning for the MacFarlane Park area. This includes working with key stakeholders to ascertain their future requirements.

Ongoing

Te Haumako Te Whitingia

Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Community Resilience Plans

- Richmond Civil Defence Plan

- Phillipstown Civil Defence Plan

- SHEAP - Shirley Emergency Action Plan

The Richmond Civil Defence Plan has been developed and issued to the community.

The Richmond Plan involved a number of groups, namely, We are Richmond, Delta Trust, Avebury House, Riverlution Eco Park and the Avon Sports Hub in its development.

The Phillipstown Civil Defence Plan has also been developed, and the Phillipstown Trust is working with CDEM to finalise the Plan.

Shirley Community Trust has been working closely with CDEM to review and update the Shirley Emergency Action Plan (SHEAP).

This collaborative effort helps ensure that the emergency plan reflects the most up-to-date information relevant to the Shirley community, including local hazards, key contacts, and available resources.

Through these updates, Shirley Community Trust is helping to build a more resilient and connected neighbourhood.

Staff are also working with Te Ora Hou, and St Albans Residents Association on the development of their Emergency Plans.

Ongoing

Te Haumako Te Whitingia

Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

3.2 Reports back on Summer with your Neighbours (SWYN) events

· Avebury House held its annual Teddy Bears Picnic on Friday, 21 November 2025. About 80 under-fives and mothers attended and had a great time, as did the teddy bears.

· Sarabande Avenue cul-de-sac held their annual SWYN gathering on Sunday, 8 December from midday to 3pm (although the kids kept playing into the afternoon) with a BBQ lunch, community connection, karakia and family activities. The event was graced with glorious weather, a lovely spread of food, and lots of new connections were forged.

· The Marralomeda Charitable Trust held their Christmas gathering on 1 December as a thank you to the volunteers who are so welcoming to their members.

They conveyed their thanks to the Board for the subsidy, noting it was very helpful and much appreciated.

3.3 Rangatahi Civic Award Presentations

The Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board previously gifted schools wishing to participate in the project a taonga and suggestions reflective of their feedback on recognising civic-related youth achievement at school award ceremonies.

The Board Chair presented the award at Pareawa Banks Avenue School on 21 November, congratulating their recipient, Alex, who was recognised for outstanding community spirit and the school's HEART values.

The Chair noted her thanks to Pareawa Banks Avenue School for inviting her to be part of this special occasion, and for their ongoing commitment to nurturing excellence and encouraging community engagement.

On 11 December, the Board Chair also presented the award at Te Kura Mareko Casebrook Intermediate School, congratulating the recipient, John Snazell, who was recognised for exceptional community spirit, leadership, and commitment to service.

The Chair noted her thanks to Te Kura Mareko Casebrook Intermediate for inviting her to be part of this meaningful occasion and for your ongoing commitment to nurturing student excellence and fostering community values.

3.4 Community Funding Summary

The balance of the Board’s funding pools at the time of writing is currently as follows, subject to subtraction of the grants proposed through the reports to this meeting as shown:

2025/26 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Discretionary Response Fund (DRF)
*DRF Grants approved last meeting:* · Delta Community Support Trust – Training and Development	*Granted:* $3,800
· Bangaliana Multicultural Christchurch – Saraswati Festival 2026	$1,800
· Avon Ōtākaro Network Inc. – Matariki in the Zone 2026	$4,300
· The Village Presbyterian Church Community Centre – Community Centre Enhancement	$1,450
· CHS Avebury Climate Resilience Garden	$5,000
· Board Project: Community Pride Garden Awards	$2,000
· Board Project: Youth Recreation Project	$7,500
AVAILABLE BALANCE (at time of writing):	$15,916.70
*Proposed DRF Grants (subject to approval at this meeting):*	*Recommended:*
· Papanui Leagues Club Inc. - towards replacement of the Club Chiller	$5,000
*Prospective remaining balance (if all recommendations accepted):*	*$10,916.70*

2025/26 Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Youth Development Fund (YDF)
*YDF grants approved under delegation as from 1 July 2025:*
· Tayla Eagle - 13-17 Aug 25 World Pipe Band Championships, Glasgow, UK	$500
· Georgia Eagle - 13-17 Aug 25 World Pipe Band Championships, Glasgow, UK	$500
· Ruby Cutbush – 14-20 Sep 25 FIBA U16 Asia Basketball Cup Tournament, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia	$500
· Lauren Dyet – 18-22 Sep 25 IKF Oceania Korfball Championships, Melbourne	$400
· Zoe Drennan – 23-25 Oct 25 HipHop Unite World Championships 2025, Prague, Czech Republic	$200
· Mia Black - 23-25 Oct 25 HipHop Unite World Championships 2025, Prague, Czech Republic	$200
· Charlotte Nelson – 27 Mar-6 Apr 26 Spirit of New Zealand Voyage (#939)	$350
· Libby Greaves – 1 Feb 26 NZ Rowing & Beach Spring Championships, Auckland	$350
· Malachi Mackie-Walker – 31 Aug – 5 Sep 25 AIMZ Games, Tauranga	$350
· Jun McDonald – 20-26 Oct 25 World Gymnastics Championships, Jakarta	$500
· Euphoria Dance Studio (3 students - $200 each) 23-25 Oct 25 HipHop Unite World Championships 2025, Prague, Czech Republic	$600
· Harper Knowles – 20-21 Nov 25 National Latin Dance Championships, Auckland	$300
AVAILABLE BALANCE (at time of writing):	$3,250

3.5 Report back from YDF Grant Recipients

A report as follows has been received from the crew manager for the dancers from Euphoria and Anna Lee Dance Studios, that the Board assisted with support to compete in the Hip Hop Unite World Championships, in Prague.

Dear Community Board members

I'm the manager of Full Force, the junior dance crew that represented NZ at the Hip Hop Unite World Champs in Prague. I just wanted to update you all on our trip and send a huge thank you to everyone involved in providing funding to help these talented young people follow their dreams!

The crew really had a fabulous time on this trip. They learnt to push themselves under pressure and overcome nerves and were exposed to numerous top-level crews from Europe and South Africa. It was really interesting to see the preference for the high energy, cheerful hip hop styles in Europe, in contrast to the more "gangsta" and aggressive styles and also the focus on very relaxed moves. The competition itself was extremely professionally run! Being part of Team NZ was an amazing experience. The children got to know the other NZ dancers and proudly performed a waiata and haka during the opening of the Finals session. The children also participated in two workshops with dancers from Brazil and Portugal.

We were really pleased with how everyone danced. We entered a cadet crew of 9-12-year-olds, a cadet duo aged 10 and 12, and an adult duo, which included my daughter Keisha, who coaches the children, along with another dance teacher from Swam Selwyn. Everyone made it to the semifinal round, and our cadet duo made it to the finals! Results were: The Cherries (adult duo) 8th, Full Force (cadet crew 9th), and Force Field 6th in each of their divisions.

As well as the dance experience, the children found time to do some sightseeing. We were all amazed at the history in Prague, with some buildings dating back to the Medieval Period! We visited a castle, markets, and a famous bridge, as well as fitting in some shopping. One family also visited a Jewish concentration camp. An added bonus was that some of the children had family or friends living in Poland, Switzerland, The Netherlands and Dubai and several of them came to watch the children compete and spend time with them. Our 9-year-old reserve met her Polish grandparents for only the second time, which was very special!

On our return to NZ, the crew started preparing for their Christmas in the Park performance. They performed last night in front of 10’s of thousands of people and had a fabulous experience! They have the dance school recital in two weeks and start preparing for the 2026 HHU nationals this week. World Champs are in NZ next year! The other crews from our dance school have been very supportive of Full Force and I can see that their success has really impacted these dancers, who are now training harder and aiming higher than ever before. They know now that anything is possible with the right mindset and hard work.

Once again, a huge thank you for your contributions to this amazing experience. I will attach some photos and videos for you to enjoy.

Ngā mihi

Cherise Jones

3.6 The Mayor’s Welfare Fund

The Mayor’s Welfare Fund provides financial support to families and individuals in the community who are in extreme financial distress. It is a last resort for when people have exhausted other appropriate sources, such as Work and Income New Zealand (WINZ). The criteria and instructions on how to apply can be found here: Mayors Welfare Fund - all you need to know.

3.7 Upcoming Community Events and Activities

Volunteer Events

Visit this link for a variety of volunteer events held around the city, and this link to volunteer at a Council-produced event.

There is also information at this link on becoming a Graffiti Programme volunteer, or register at this link to join the Parks Volunteers Team.

Some planting events are eligible for Children's University (CU) credits and are family-friendly. Schools can be supported by the ‘connect and grow’ planting programme: Manaaki Taiao – Nurture Nature.

Or find other opportunities to volunteer in your community at this link, whether it be sharing your passion for art at the Art Gallery, helping the Friends of the Library, joining the Friends of the Botanic Gardens, volunteering to help run the Peace Train, or any of the number of volunteer opportunities listed on the site for Volunteering Canterbury.

FRESH Events 2026

· Information on events from Youth & Cultural Development (YCD) is available at this link.

Children’s Day registration of interest

· Register your interest at this link to participate in Children's Day on Sunday 1 March 2026, 11am to 3pm at Cuthbert’s Green, Shuttle Drive, Bromley.

Children's Day is a free community event that is about celebrating children. The day is about having fun, learning and gaining information. More importantly, parents and caregivers don’t have to say no, as all activities are free.

Other upcoming community events and festivals in the city

· Visit this link for a variety of community events and festivals held around the city. You can also visit the What’s On site for one-off and regular events like:

· Summer Sundays – 1 February, 1pm to 4pm at the Archery Lawn, Christchurch Botanic Gardens - Summer Sundays, Christchurch's outdoor summer music series returns this summer with three free concerts to entertain the crowds. First up, DnD Showband – Fleetwood Mac tribute and Silver Train – The Rolling Stones tribute!

Picnic food, drinks and chairs are welcome – no glass, please. Check out other Summer Sundays live sessions happening on 8 and 22 February!

· Summer in the Styx 2026 – 1 February, 10am to 2pm at Te Waoku Kahikatea Reserve, 303 Radcliffe Road - Summer in the Styx is an event for the community to come and learn more about the amazing conservation mahi happening in Ōtautahi Christchurch and in particular the Pūharakekenui/Styx River Catchment.

There’ll be a range of stallholders, food, kayaking, guided walks, games, and so much more.

· The Quarter – 4 February, every Wednesday 6pm to 9pm at Christchurch Art Gallery - Soak up the waiata of Dj's AAKI, Rōrepo and tom plum as you relax in comfy spaces, enjoy kai and inu from food trucks, and experience in a whole new light.

· Linwood Village Market – 7 February, 10am to 1pm at Linwood Community Arts Centre car park, 388 Worcester Street - Plants, crafts, clothes, books, this and that, odds and ends, vintage and upcycled, garage sale-type stalls, and some tiny fundraisers for local community projects. Sometimes music, sometimes dance too, but always reasonably priced refreshments and a friendly welcome. Please note: currently there is no shelter, so: cancelled if wet.

· Mitre10 Sparks – 14 February, 6.25pm to 9.40pm at Entertainment Triangle, North Hagley Park - Get your friends and whānau together to celebrate the 43rd year at our city's dazzling fireworks extravaganza, featuring the Christchurch Symphony Orchestra.

Gather up your friends and whānau to enjoy a stunning, special Valentine’s Day themed evening of colourful, creative and crowd-pleasing entertainment for all those who love open-air music!

Christchurch City Council Libraries Events

· Christchurch City Libraries run a wide range of classes and programmes both in libraries and through its learning centres for everyone from babies to seniors, with information at this link.

· The Libraries’ technology programmes are designed to help people become more comfortable with technology and to make better use of available computer tools. Better Digital Futures Computer Programmes for ages 65+ is a free programme (though it does require bookings). There is also technology help drop-in sessions, and a GenConnect Drop-in to help with questions about your iPad, Smart Phone or Tablet, and how to use Skype, Facebook, or share your photos with family or friends.

· JP Clinics - Justices of the Peace are available at set times at a number of Christchurch City libraries. JPs can witness signatures, verify copies of documents, hear oaths, declarations and more. There is no charge for JP services.

· The Libraries’ Events Calendar can be found here, and there are dedicated pages for significant events and related topics like:

- Waitangi Day and the Treaty of Waitangi – Te Tiriti o Waitangi

- Valentine's Day – read about Saint Valentine, known as the patron saint of lovers, and dig into librarian recommendations, such as those related to celebrating Galentines Day on 13 February, which is a celebration of female friendship.

- Seaweek – From 28 February to 8 March Seaweek is New Zealand’s annual national week about the sea. It is hosted by the NZ Association for Environmental Education, opens a new window. Seaweek is run by NZAEE members and volunteers with support from a wide range of individuals, groups and organisations. Originally run by the Marine Education Society of Australasia (now part of NZAEE), it was first held in New Zealand in 1992.

3.8 Participation in and Contribution to Decision Making

3.8.1 Report back on other Activities contributing to the Community Board Plan

· Pool Party

On Friday, 28 November, the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Governance team supported the Papanui Youth Development Trust with their annual pool party at Jellie Park, in partnership with Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood. The weather was perfect, and the young people had an awesome time connecting with their peers and youth leaders.

The event featured waterslide fun, a manu competition with great prizes up for grabs, a live DJ, and a free sausage sizzle. It was a fantastic evening enjoyed by everyone who attended.

· First Anniversary of Little Poland Park

Board members joined the community on 30 November at the corner of Oakbridge Boulevard and Burkett Road to celebrate the first anniversary of Little Poland Park. A highlight was the unveiling of the Peace Pole by Rotary, symbolising unity, hope, and shared commitment to peace.

The event also marked 81 years since the arrival of the Polish Children of Pahiatua in New Zealand, and 107 years of Poland’s Independence.

· Community Liaison Hui

On Thursday, December 4th, the Waipapa Community Liaison Hui was held at the St Albans Community Centre. This gathering offered a valuable opportunity for the community to engage with the newly formed Community Board, fostering connections and collaboration among local organisations.

The Hui also served as a platform to reflect on the key achievements and challenges of 2025, providing insights to guide future initiatives. Participants were encouraged to actively contribute their thoughts and ideas, playing a direct role in shaping the board's priorities and influencing the development of the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Plan for 2026-2028. The Hui was an important step in ensuring that community voices are heard and integrated into the planning process for the years ahead.

· Charleston Neighbourhood Association Christmas Celebration

On 27 November, the Charleston Neighbourhood Association held its end-of-year Christmas celebration. The Chair reported that the celebration was filled with a delicious spread of kai, great conversations, plenty of laughter, and a beautiful spirit of living life to the fullest.

3.8.2 Council Engagement and Consultation

· Small Dog Exercise Area Trial in Fortune Playground

The Parks Unit is trialling a Small Dog Exercise Area at Fortune Playground from 1 September 2025 until 31 May 2026. During the trial, there will be signage on the fence indicating the trial period and providing information on how to submit feedback.

· Tree Planting Plans - Help the shape the tree planting plans for parks across Ōtautahi Christchurch.

· Play Space Projects - The Council is constantly replacing, upgrading, and creating new play spaces for people of all ages. Find out more here.

· Consultations in other parts of the district:

- Radcliffe Road improvements (closes 17 February)

- Percival Street renewal (closes 17 February)

- Barnett Park play space renewal and tree planting plan (closes 1 February)

- Brighton Mall speed limit changes (closes 1 February)

- Te Ara Kuaka Brighton Mall upgrades (closes 1 February)

- North Beach car park (closes 1 February)

1.2 Governance Advice

1.2.1 Customer Service Request (CSR) Report for the Papanui-Innes-Central Wards

Refer to Attachment A for the 1 to 31 December 2025 statistics, providing an overview of the number of CSRs that have been received, including the types of requests being received and a breakdown of how they are being reported.

Snap Send Solve is the smartphone app the Council offers to help make reporting issues easy, and it is still possible to report issues online, by calling Council on 03 941 8999 or visiting one of the Council’s Service centres.

1.2.2 Community Profiles

Each year, the Council's Community Support and Partnerships Unit produces community profiles of each of the 16 wards across the city.

These profiles are a snapshot of the ward regarding the community infrastructure and include the updated Census statistics and Deprivation Index information.

The profiles are now aligned with the Council’s Strengthening Communities Together Strategy and provide information regarding activities/groups/facilities in each ward that help meet the goals of each Pillar in the Strategy.

To view the profiles for the Papanui-Innes-Central Wards, please use the links below.

Papanui Innes Central

1.2.1 Climate action

A key resource for understanding the Council’s targets, what it's doing, how emissions are tracking, and finding relevant community events and activities, is the Council’s Climate Action webpage.

We’ve got greenhouse gas emission reduction targets to aim for. Find out here where our emissions come from and how we’re tracking them within the Council and across the Christchurch district.

We need everyone to play their part to reach our targets. These online tools can help you measure and reduce your household or business greenhouse gas emissions:

· Future Fit household emissions calculator

· Sustainable Business Network Climate Action Toolbox

Whether you are going to work or school, choose ways that are better for you and our environment. For more information, visit getting to work or getting to school.

We also recognise that our tamariki and rangatahi are the leaders of tomorrow. The Learning Through Action programme encourages students to get creative and find innovative ideas for meaningful climate action.

Prepare for the impacts of climate change - We’re already feeling the effects of a changing climate in the form of wetter winters, and hotter, drier and longer summers. Find out more here, and browse the Christchurch District Risk Screening Report (2022), which identifies how climate change will affect our natural and built environments. The document is based on the latest scientific information and input from key agencies in the region.

Take action to lower emissions - We can all take a variety of everyday actions to live lower-emission lives. Find more information here.

Get updates on climate action - Sign up for the Council’s newsletter and get the latest news and information delivered to your inbox.

3.9.2 Community Patrols

The Community Patrols of New Zealand website hosts a wealth of information relevant to what they do in helping to build safer communities, becoming a patroller, and setting up a patrol. Patrols in the Board area include the Christchurch North and City Park community patrols. Their statistical information can be found on the website.

3.9.3 Planned road works and closures

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

There is also a project page for the work in Bishopdale and Papanui at this site.

3.9.4 Public Notices

3.9.5 School travel

· The Council offers a wealth of resources at this link relevant to how together we can make it way safer and easier for more children to walk, bike and scooter to school.

· Good-to-go ways to get to school is an exciting programme designed to support schools in encouraging safe, active, fun, affordable, low-emission ways to travel to and from school.

3.9.6 Travel Planning

The Council also offers free city travel planning to help organisations, businesses and staff get to know their travel options, with personalised journey planning sessions, advice, practical resources, and services such as Metro incentives for taking the bus, and onsite bike workshops. Information is available at this link, which notes that over 50 workplaces have been supported since 2016, assisting thousands of staff across the city.

3.9.7 SmartView

The Council’s SmartView page gives users access to a range of real-time information about the city, including data on how to find local mountain bike tracks and also check that they are open, the number of spaces available in car park buildings, the nearest bus stop and the time of the next arrival, air quality, how to get to places, events, where to see street art, weather updates and the latest airport arrivals and departures. Advice Provided to the Community Board Ngā Kupu Tohutohu ka hoatu ki te Poari Hapori.

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

4.1 Start Work Notices (SWN)

SWN relating to the Board area is separately circulated to the Board. SWN are for works being carried out by the Council and can be found at this link. The traffic updates page is a more comprehensive map of planned road works and closures as other agencies also carry out work on the roads. Recent SWN relating to the Board area are:

· Fitzgerald Avenue - geotechnical investigations (night works) (circulated 12 January 2026)

· Hills Road - drain relining (circulated 29 December 2025)

· Flockton Street - wastewater and pavement renewal (circulated 23 December 2025)

· Morrison Avenue and Langdons Road - water main renewal (circulated 18 December 2025)

· Harewood Road - traffic signals and water upgrades (circulated 15 December 2025)

4.2 Graffiti Snapshot

The Graffiti Snapshot for November 2025 can be found as Attachment B to this report. The Council also provides information on graffiti, including tips to prevent it, and about becoming a Graffiti Programme volunteer, at this link.

4.3 Memoranda

Memoranda related to matters of relevance to the Board have been separately circulated for the Board’s information and are listed below.

· CCC: Draft Plan Change 20 (circulated 26 January 2026)

· CCC: Northcote Transport Area Study (circulated 26 January 2026)

· CCC: Linwood Village Mural (circulated 26 January 2026)

· CCC: Wairakei Road Intersections (circulated 23 January 2026)

· CCC: Momorangi Reserve - shade options (circulated 18 December 2025)

· CCC: Adapting to Climate Change: Building Adaptive Capacity (circulated 17 December 2025)

· CCC: Local Play Space Renewals FY26 and FY27 - project update (circulated 10 December 2025)

· CCC: Update on Richmond Neighbourhood Greenway (North Avon Rd - London Street) (circulated 9 December 2025)

· CCC: Press Lane Creative Lighting (circulated 8 December 2025)

· CCC: Special Olympics National Summer Games (circulated 5 December 2025)

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Customer Service Request Report - December 2025	2026/0095436	77
b ⇩	Graffiti Snapshot - November 2025	2026/0095513	78

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Mark Saunders - Community Board Advisor

Lyssa Aves - Support Officer

Trevor Cattermole - Community Development Advisor

Stacey Holbrough - Community Development Advisor

Jason Chee - Community Recreation Advisor

Hannah Martin - Community Support & Events Coordinator

Emma Pavey - Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes-Central

Approved By

Emma Pavey - Manager Community Governance, Papanui-Innes-Central

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Funding Request Number	Organisation	Project Name	Amount Requested	Amount Recommended
DRF-25/26 00028 PIC	Papanui Leagues Club Inc.	Replacement of Chiller	$8,119	$5,000

Total Budget Current Year	Granted To Date	Available for allocation	Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted
$70,003	$54,086.30	$15,916.70	10,916.70

REPORT TITLE/AGENDA SECTION	MEETING DATE	ACTION DUE DATE	UNIT	TEAM
Spokes Canterbury	10 July 2025	30 January 2026	Transport & Waste	Asset Planning
Ferry Road Active Transport Improvements	14 August 2025	26 February 2026	Transport & Waste	Project Management
Lancaster Park Development - Final Stage Redevelopment Plan	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	Parks	Community Parks
Petition	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	Community Support & Partnerships	Partnerships & Planning
Petition	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	Transport & Waste	Road Amenity & Asset Protectio
Public Forum - Chris Dooley	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	Transport & Waste	Traffic Operations
Updated Shirley Community Facility Design	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	Vertical Capital Delivery	Vertical Capital Delivery
Public Forum - Merivale Retirement Village	11 December 2025	30 April 2026	Transport & Waste	Asset Management

REPORT TITLE/AGENDA SECTION	MEETING DATE	DUE DATE	ACTION CLOSURE DATE	UNIT	TEAM
Shirley Community Reserve: Proposed Community Facility	13 June 2024	31 December 2025	12 December 2025	Parks	Parks & Recreation Planning
Momorangi Reserve play space renewal - concept plan	14 August 2025	30 January 2026	12 January 2026	Finance	Finance Business Partner
Shirley Community Facility	11 September 2025	11 December 2025	15 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance Process
Community Parks Rolling Renewal Programme	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	16 December 2025	Parks	Community Parks
Ryan Street Parking Improvements	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	20 January 2026	Transport & Waste	Travel Demand Management
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Avon Ōtākaro Network Inc - Matariki in the Zone 2026	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	18 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance (Pap-Inn-Cen)
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Bangaliana Multicultural Christchurch - Sarawasti Festival 2026 East Indian Cultural and Community Day	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	18 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance (Pap-Inn-Cen)
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Board Projects Funding - Community Pride Garden Awards and Youth Recreation Project	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	18 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance (Pap-Inn-Cen)
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Canterbury Horticultural Society - CHS Avebury Climate Resilient Garden	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	18 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance (Pap-Inn-Cen)
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Delta Community Support Trust - Empowering Communities Through Staff & Volunteer Training and Development	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	18 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance (Pap-Inn-Cen)
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - The Village Presbyterian Church - Community Centre enhancement.	11 December 2025	12 March 2026	18 December 2025	Community Support & Partnerships	Governance (Pap-Inn-Cen)

9. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central 2025-26 Discretionary Response Fund Application - Papanui Leagues Club Inc. - Replacement of Chiller
Reference Te Tohutoro:	26/59091
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Jason Chee, Community Development Advisor
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, General Manager Citizens and Community

Author	Jason Chee - Community Recreation Advisor
Approved By	Stacey Holbrough - Community Development Advisor