Agenda of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board

4. Pigeon Bay and Duvauchelle Campgrounds - Annual Sites
Reference Te Tohutoro:	26/600928
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Colin Jacka, Manager Activities and Events Outdoors Paris Porter, Community Engagement Advisor
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 present Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board with options for achieving compliance with Section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977 in relation to the Annual Sites currently in place at the Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground.

1.2 The report has been prepared following a request from the Community Board on 11 March 2024 for staff to investigate the unauthorised use of reserves and provide options addressing the ongoing non‑compliance of permanent and annual site arrangements at both campgrounds.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board recommend to the Chief Executive to:

1. Receive the information in the Pigeon Bay and Duvauchelle Campgrounds - Annual Sites Report.

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

3. Approve Option 3 – Allow annual sites to remain with operational changes, and grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act 1977, as outlined in this report.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 Annual sites at Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground are currently non‑compliant with Section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977, which limits the length of time that vehicles, caravans, tents, or removable structures may remain on a recreation reserve during the period 1 November to 31 March, unless consent is granted by the Minister of Conservation. The longstanding practice of annual site occupation at both campgrounds therefore requires a lawful pathway to continue.

3.2 This report presents options to address that non‑compliance and seeks a recommendation from Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board to the Chief Executive. The Community Board’s role is to consider the options and provide a recommendation to Council. The Chief Executive holds delegated authority from the Department of Conservation to grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act for reserves it administers, and the Chief Executive is the decision‑maker for any consent.

3.3 The preferred option is Option 3 – Allow annual sites to remain with operational changes and grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act. This option reflects community feedback and provides a balanced and legally robust approach that addresses the issues previously associated with long‑term occupation of reserve land.

3.4 Under Option 3:

3.4.1 Existing annual site holders would continue under their current arrangements.

3.4.2 When an annual site is relinquished, all caravans, annexes, and associated structures must be removed from the reserve.

3.4.3 Vacated sites would convert to one‑year annual sites, allocated through an annual public ballot, improving equitable access over time.

3.4.4 All future caravans must remain road legal, and hard annexes or semi‑permanent structures would not be permitted, with only removable canvas awnings allowed.

3.5 Option 3 is recommended because it:

3.5.1 Provides a lawful pathway to compliance under Section 44 of the Reserves Act through Council’s delegated authority.

3.5.2 Addresses issues of permanence, transferability, and equitable access that previously prevented approval by DOC.

3.5.3 Supports a managed transition rather than immediate full removal of annual sites.

3.5.4 Aligns with long‑standing reserve management principles while responding to current community use and expectations.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground are located on recreation reserves administered by Christchurch City Council and have operated for several decades as community‑focused camping facilities. Both campgrounds have historically included a mix of casual camping sites and longer‑term annual sites, with the latter forming an important component of campground operations, community use, and financial sustainability.

Statutory Context

4.2 Section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977 restricts the length of time that any vehicle, caravan, tent, or removable structure may remain on a recreation reserve during the period from 1 November to 31 March, unless consent is granted under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act. The long‑standing presence of annual sites at both locations is therefore non‑compliant with the Act in the absence of such consent.

Draft Reserve Management Plans

4.3 Draft reserve management plans were prepared for:

4.3.1 Duvauchelle Recreation Reserve (2004), and

4.3.2 Pigeon Bay Recreation Reserve (2006).

4.4 Both draft plans identified issues relating to long‑term occupation, the presence of semi‑permanent structures, and the need to ensure equitable public access to reserve land. The draft plans also explicitly acknowledged the constraints of Section 44 of the Reserves Act and, in both cases, identified annual allocation of long‑term sites by public advertisement and ballot as a potential means of preventing permanent occupation and improving fairness of access.

4.5 However, neither draft management plan was formally adopted under Section 41 of the Reserves Act. This was because campground operations at the time continued in ways that were not fully aligned with the policy settings proposed in the draft plans, particularly in relation to long‑term occupation and semi‑permanent structures. As a result, both plans remain non‑operative and do not have statutory force.

4.6 Previous Engagement with the Department of Conservation

4.6.1 During the preparation of the draft management plans in 2004–2006, the issue of non‑compliance with Section 44 of the Reserves Act was formally identified and discussed between the Reserve Management Committees, Christchurch City Council’s predecessor (Banks Peninsula District Council), and the Department of Conservation (DOC).

4.6.2 In January 2006, the Banks Peninsula District Council, as administering body, submitted a formal request under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act seeking consent to allow long‑term camping arrangements to continue at both Duvauchelle and Pigeon Bay. That request was made concurrently with the drafting of the management plans, with the intention that Ministerial consent would enable the plans to be finalised and adopted.

4.6.3 DOC acknowledged the broader national challenges associated with campground viability and long‑term occupation on reserve land. However, DOC advised that it could not support the continuation of the existing arrangements, particularly at Duvauchelle, due to concerns about permanent occupation, semi‑permanent structures, and the effective exclusion of the wider public from prime camping sites. Ministerial consent was not granted, and Council was advised that the non‑compliance with Section 44 of the Reserves Act would need to be addressed.

4.6.4 Following DOC’s response, Christchurch City Council engaged further with the Duvauchelle Reserve Management Committee. In October 2006, Council formally advised the Department of Conservation that operational measures had been introduced to reduce permanence, including prohibiting future on‑selling of caravans, requiring removal of caravans and associated structures upon sale or relinquishment, and clarifying the non‑transferable nature of occupation. These measures were implemented in the context of ongoing national discussion at the time about the application of section 44(2), including DOC’s concurrent review of camping opportunities. While these steps represented a positive move toward addressing the issue, Ministerial consent under Section 44(2) was not granted and the fundamental compliance issue was not fully resolved. As a result, neither management plan progressed to adoption.

4.6.5 In 2006, the Department of Conservation published the Review of Camping Opportunities in New Zealand, which examined the intent and practical application of section 44(2) of the Reserves Act. The review acknowledged that while the provision was intended to prevent semi‑permanent occupation of reserve land during peak summer periods, long‑term camping structures had developed on some reserves and were relied upon to support campground viability. It noted that strict enforcement could remove a significant revenue source for some campgrounds and advised that enforcement decisions should be informed by analysis of impacts on existing camping areas and their economic sustainability. This broader context contributed to uncertainty about how section 44(2) should be applied in practice and helps explain why the issue remained unresolved following earlier Council and DOC engagement.

4.7 Alignment of Operational Practice and Statutory Requirements

4.7.1 Over time, the management of annual sites at Duvauchelle and Pigeon Bay evolved in practice in ways that were not always fully aligned with the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977. While Christchurch City Council clarified expectations with respect to the non‑transferable nature of occupation and the removal of caravans on sale or relinquishment in the mid‑2000s, those settings were not applied consistently over subsequent years. As a result, operational practices developed that differed from the underlying statutory framework.

4.7.2 Increased statutory scrutiny, changes in governance, and a renewed focus on compliance and equitable access to public reserve land have now prompted Council to formally revisit this long‑standing issue and consider options to restore alignment between operational practice and legislative requirements in a managed and prospective manner.

4.8 Delegation and Current Governance Context

4.8.1 Since that time, the Chief Executive has been delegated authority by the Minister of Conservation to grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act for reserves administered by the Council. This means that decisions on whether to allow longer‑term occupation can now be made by Council (via the Chief Executive), within the scope of that delegation, without requiring Ministerial approval.

4.8.2 This report is therefore presented as a Part A report. The role of the Community Board is to consider the options and make a recommendation to Council. The Chief Executive is the decision‑maker and holds the relevant delegated authority to approve or decline consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act.

4.9 Need for a Managed Compliance Pathway

4.9.1 The current report revisits a long‑standing and unresolved statutory issue, rather than introducing a new policy position. It reflects both the historic context and the current legal and governance environment, including community consultation undertaken in 2025–2026.

4.9.2 The options presented seek to establish a clear, legally compliant framework for the future operation of annual sites that:

· addresses the concerns previously raised by DOC,

· improves equitable access to public reserve land over time,

· clarifies the non‑transferable nature of site occupation, and

· enables Council (via the Chief Executive) to exercise its current delegated authority in a transparent and defensible manner.

5. Key Issues – Ngā Take Matua

5.1 The options presented in this report respond to the following inter‑related issues affecting the ongoing operation of annual camping sites at Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground:

5.2 Compliance with the Reserves Act 1977

5.2.1 Annual camping sites at both locations operate in a manner that is not compliant with Section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977 unless consent is granted under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act. The absence of a formal compliance mechanism presents ongoing legal and governance risk for Council as the administering body of the reserves.

5.2.2 The options differ in how this compliance issue is addressed, ranging from full enforcement of Section 44 of the Reserves Act, through to granting consent with or without changes to current operations.

5.3 Permanent and Semi‑Permanent Occupation

5.3.1 Historic operating practices, particularly at Duvauchelle Holiday Park, have enabled the long‑term occupation of sites and the establishment of semi‑permanent or permanent structures, including solid annexes, decks, and caravans remaining on site year‑round. These practices are inconsistent with the temporary nature of reserve occupation and were a central concern raised in earlier engagement with the Department of Conservation.

5.3.2 The options vary in the extent to which permanence is reduced, from immediate removal of annual sites, to allowing annual sites to remain subject to operational controls that progressively reduce semi‑permanent structures.

5.4 Transferability and Succession of Site Use

5.4.1 At Duvauchelle, historic practices have enabled the on‑selling of caravans and associated improvements on‑site, creating expectations of transferable or ongoing occupation rights. These arrangements are not supported under the Reserves Act and contribute to inequitable outcomes by allowing private transactions to influence access to public reserve land.

5.4.2 The options address this issue to varying degrees, including whether such practices are discontinued immediately, phased out over time, or permitted to continue.

5.5 Equitable Access to Public Reserve Land

5.5.1 Both draft reserve management plans and consultation feedback highlight the need to ensure fair and equitable public access, particularly during peak summer periods. Long‑term occupation of prime sites limits availability for casual campers and contributes to perceptions of exclusivity on public land.

5.5.2 The options differ in how equitable access is achieved, including whether annual sites are removed, retained without change, or progressively transitioned to one‑year, publicly allocated arrangements.

5.6 Community, Operational, and Financial Impacts

5.6.1 Annual sites provide financial stability, year‑round stewardship, and a strong sense of community within both campgrounds. Consultation demonstrates strong support for retaining annual sites, particularly among existing site holders, alongside broader community concerns about access, fairness, and appearance.

5.6.2 Each option carries different community and operational consequences, ranging from significant disruption to existing users, through to more gradual change designed to maintain campground viability.

5.7 Historic Attempts to Resolve Compliance

5.7.1 Council has previously attempted to address these issues through draft reserve management plans and a formal request for consent in 2006. That consent was not granted, and the management plans were not adopted, leaving the underlying compliance issue unresolved.

5.7.2 The current options reflect different approaches to resolving a long‑standing issue, informed by past experience and updated governance arrangements.

5.8 Governance, Delegation, and Decision‑Making

5.8.1 Christchurch City Council (via the Chief Executive) now holds delegated authority to grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act for reserves it administers. This provides Council with the ability to resolve the compliance issue locally. The Community Board’s role is to consider the options and recommend a preferred approach to Council through this Part A report.

5.9 Need for a Managed Transition

5.9.1 A key consideration across all options is whether change occurs immediately or through a managed transition. A defensible solution must balance legal compliance with fairness to existing users, operational practicality, and long‑term reserve stewardship.

5.9.2 The options differ substantially in the scale and speed of change proposed, and in how transitional arrangements for existing annual site holders are handled.

6. Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

6.1 The following reasonably practicable options were considered to address the ongoing management of annual camping sites at Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground while responding to the key issues outlined above, including statutory compliance, permanence, equitable access, community impacts, and governance.

6.1.1 Option one

Full compliance with Reserves Act, which includes removing long-time sites over summer.

· Enforce a policy where no vehicle, caravan, tent, or removable structure remains on the reserve for more than four weeks during the peak summer season (1 November – 31 March).

· This could mean the long-term sites are balloted over winter, or not having long-term sites at all.

6.1.2 Option two

Allow annual sites as is, and seek consent from the Minister

· Seek consent for structures to remain on the reserves for more than four weeks during the peak summer season (1 November – 31 March) (No operational changes).

6.1.3 Option three

Allow annual sites to remain but with operational changes and seek consent from the minister. Changes may include:

· Implementing changes to reduce the number of annual camping sites.

· Adjust operating procedures to increase equitable access to camping sites.

6.2 For clarity, references to seeking consent ‘from the Minister’ reflect consultation wording at the time and should be read as seeking consent under section 44(2) of the Reserves Act through the Chief Executive, who now holds delegated authority.

6.3 No additional practicable options were identified that would:

6.3.1 adequately address statutory compliance,

6.3.2 maintain campground viability, and

6.3.3 respond to historic equity and permanence concerns.

6.4 Hybrid approaches that retained transferability or permanent structures without ballot‑based reallocation were considered but ruled out due to ongoing legal risk.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

6.5 Preferred Option: Option 3: Allow Annual Sites to Remain with Operational Changes and Grant Consent

6.6 Under this option, Council would grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act while implementing operational changes designed to address permanence, transferability, and equitable access over time.

6.7 Key operational elements may include:

6.8 Existing annual site holders continuing under current arrangements.

6.9 All caravans, annexes, and associated structures being fully removed from the reserve when a site is relinquished.

6.10 Vacated sites reverting to one‑year annual sites allocated by public ballot.

6.11 All future caravans required to remain road legal.

6.12 No hard annexes or semi‑permanent structures permitted, with only removable canvas awnings allowed.

6.13 On‑selling of caravans or annexes on‑site not permitted.

6.14 Response to Key Issues

6.14.1 Compliance: Provides a lawful pathway under Section 44 of the Reserves Act using Council’s delegated authority.

6.14.2 Permanence: Progressively reduces semi‑permanent structures and long‑term site fixation.

6.14.3 Transferability: Removes on‑selling and perceived succession of occupation rights.

6.14.4 Equitable Access: Improves fairness and transparency through annual ballot allocation as sites become available.

6.14.5 Community and Operational Impacts: Balances community reliance on annual sites with the need for change.

6.14.6 Governance: Enables Council to exercise delegated authority in a defensible manner.

6.14.7 Transition: Establishes a managed and staged transition rather than immediate disruption.

6.14.8 Option 3 is consistent with approaches supported by local Reserve Committees, including managed reductions in annual site numbers, clearer operational controls, and periodic review to balance annual and casual use over time.

6.14.9 Option 3 addresses the compliance and governance risks while recognising the social and operational role of annual sites.

6.14.10 Option Disadvantages

6.14.11 While Option 3 provides a managed and legally robust pathway to compliance, it has the following disadvantages:

6.14.12 Slower transition to full equity outcomes:
Improvements to equitable access occur incrementally as sites are relinquished, meaning some features of long‑term occupation will remain during the transition period.

6.14.13 Increased administrative complexity:
Ongoing management of compliance requirements, public balloting processes, and site transitions requires more active administration than either full compliance or maintaining the status quo.

6.14.14 The shift to one‑year annual sites as vacancies arise increases turnover over time and reduces long‑term certainty for future site holders.

6.14.15 Dissatisfaction among existing site holders:
Some existing site holders may be dissatisfied, particularly those who had intended to sell caravans or annexes in situ, as Option 3 prohibits on‑selling and requires removal of improvements on site relinquishment.

6.14.16 Perceived lack of equality during transition:

Allowing current annual site holders to continue under existing arrangements while new sites are allocated by ballot may be perceived by some as unequal treatment, despite being intended as a transitional fairness measure.

6.14.17 Residual reputational and challenge risk:
Although reduced, there remains some risk of criticism or challenge if the transition is perceived as too slow or if operational rules are not applied consistently.

6.14.18 Despite these disadvantages, Option 3 is considered to provide the most appropriate balance between achieving statutory compliance, managing community and operational impacts, and improving equitable access to public reserve land over time. It addresses the core legal and governance risks while avoiding the significant disruption and financial uncertainty associated with immediate full compliance, and provides a clear, transparent framework for future site allocation and management.

6.15 Option 1: Full Compliance with the Reserves Act 1977 (No Consent Sought).

6.16 Under this option, Council would not grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act. Annual sites would be discontinued, and Council would enforce a policy whereby no vehicle, caravan, tent, or removable structure remains on the reserve for more than four weeks during the period 1 November to 31 March, in accordance with Section 44 of the Reserves Act.

6.17 Response to Key Issues

6.17.1 Compliance: Achieves immediate statutory compliance.

6.17.2 Permanence: Removes all long term and semi permanent occupation.

6.17.3 Transferability: Eliminates any transfer or succession of site use.

6.17.4 Equitable Access: Maximises availability of sites for casual campers during peak periods.

6.17.5 Governance: Does not require the Chief Executive to exercise delegated consent authority.

6.17.6 Option Disadvantages

6.17.7 Community and Operational Impacts: Has significant impacts on existing annual site holders and campground revenue models.

6.17.8 Transition: Represents an immediate and disruptive change with limited transition arrangements.

6.18 Option 2: Allow Annual Sites to Remain as Currently Operated and Grant Consent

6.18.1 Description

Under this option, Council would grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act allowing annual sites to remain, with no substantive changes to existing operational arrangements.

6.18.2 Response to Key Issues

6.18.3 Compliance: Addresses statutory non‑compliance through consent alone.

6.18.4 Permanence: Allows continuation of existing long‑term occupation and semi‑permanent structures.

6.18.5 Community and Operational Impacts: Minimises immediate change for existing annual site holders.

6.18.6 Option Disadvantages

6.18.7 Transferability: Does not resolve historic on‑selling practices or perceptions of succession, particularly at Duvauchelle.

6.18.8 Equitable Access: Retains the current allocation model, limiting broader public access to annual sites.

6.18.9 Governance: Relies on delegated consent authority but retains higher long‑term compliance risk.

6.18.10 Transition: Does not provide a pathway to address underlying concerns identified in earlier DOC engagement.

Earlier engagement with the Department of Conservation indicates that consent without accompanying operational change does not address the issues that previously prevented approval, including permanence and equitable access.

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

6.19 The options presented in this report have been assessed against the following analysis criteria. These criteria reflect the key issues identified and provide a consistent framework for comparing the advantages, disadvantages, and risks associated with each option.

6.20 Statutory Compliance

The extent to which each option achieves compliance with Section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977, either through enforcement of the Act or through the lawful granting of consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act, and the degree to which ongoing legal and governance risks are mitigated.

6.21 Permanence and Nature of Occupation

The extent to which each option reduces or allows long‑term or semi‑permanent occupation of reserve land, including the presence of hard annexes, decks, non‑mobile caravans, and structures remaining on site year‑round. This includes consideration of whether each option aligns with the temporary use of recreation reserve land.

6.22 Transferability and Equity of Site Allocation

The degree to which each option addresses the transfer, succession, or on‑selling of occupation rights and improves fairness in the allocation of annual sites. This includes consideration of transparency, non‑transferability, and Council’s ability to retain control over allocation of public reserve land.

6.23 Equitable Public Access

The extent to which each option promotes fair and equitable public access to camping opportunities, particularly during peak summer periods, and reduces perceptions of exclusivity or privileged occupation of public land.

6.24 Community and Social Impact

6.24.1 The impact of each option on:

· existing annual site holders, broader community users,

· reserve committees, and

· the social and community value associated with long‑standing campground use.

6.24.2 This includes consideration of the magnitude and pace of change, and how disruption to existing users is managed.

6.25 Operational and Financial Sustainability

6.25.1 The extent to which each option supports the ongoing operation and financial viability of the campgrounds, including year‑round caretaking, maintenance standards, and the ability to fund reserve‑related services and facilities.

6.26 Governance and Delegation

6.26.1 The degree to which each option enables Council to exercise its delegated authority under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act, in a clear, defensible, and transparent manner, and the extent to which decision‑making responsibilities between the Community Board and Council are appropriately respected.

6.27 Transition and Implementability

6.27.1 The feasibility of implementing each option, including:

· the clarity of operational requirements,

· the need for transitional arrangements,

· the ability to progressively move toward compliance, and

· the practicality of enforcement and administration over time.

7. Option Comparison Summary – Whakarāpopoto Kōwhiringa

Analysis Criterion	Option 1: Full Compliance (No Consent)	Option 2: Consent with No Operational Change	Option 3: Consent with Operational Changes (Preferred)
Statutory Compliance	Achieves immediate compliance by enforcing Section 44 limits.	Achieves compliance through consent alone but retains underlying risks.	Achieves compliance through consent supported by operational controls.
Permanence and Semi‑Permanent Structures	Removes all long‑term use and semi‑permanent structures immediately.	Allows continuation of long‑term occupation and existing structures.	Progressively removes semi‑permanent structures as sites are relinquished.
Transferability and Succession	Eliminates all transfer or succession by removing annual sites.	Does not resolve historic on‑selling or perceptions of succession.	Removes on‑selling and succession by requiring removal and reallocation.
Equitable Public Access	Maximises access by converting all sites to short‑term use.	Maintains current access arrangements with limited change.	Improves equitable access over time through one‑year, balloted sites.
Community and Social Impact	High impact on existing annual site holders and community use.	Lowest immediate impact on existing site holders.	Moderated impact through managed transition and continuation for existing holders.
Operational and Financial Sustainability	Significant risk to campground revenue and year‑round viability.	Retains current revenue model but with higher long‑term compliance risk.	Retains revenue while improving long‑term sustainability and defensibility.
Governance and Legal Risk	Low ongoing risk once enforced, but high disruption risk.	Higher ongoing risk if consent conditions are challenged or reviewed.	Lower long‑term risk by aligning consent with operational practice.
Implementability	Simple to implement but difficult to manage community impacts.	Simple administratively but difficult to justify defensibly.	More complex to implement but clear, staged, and manageable.
Transition and Fairness	No transition; immediate change.	No transition; retains current arrangements.	Provides a staged transition that recognises existing users while changing future allocation.

7.1 The comparison highlights that Option 3 best addresses statutory compliance while balancing community, operational, and governance considerations through a managed transition.

8. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Option 3: Consent with Operational Changes (Preferred)	Option 2 - Consent with No Operational Change	Option 1: Full Compliance
Cost to Implement	Nil.	Nil.	Some additional Opex likely to remediate sites
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	Maintenance costs broadly consistent with current arrangements over the short to medium term.	Existing maintenance arrangements continue.	Potential increase due to higher site turnover and reduced on‑site stewardship.
Funding Source	Existing campground operational budgets. Retains current annual site revenue.	Existing campground operational budgets. Retains current annual site revenue.	Existing operational budgets, with potential shortfall due to removal of annual site revenue.
Funding Availability	Fully funded within existing budgets.	Fully funded within existing budgets.	Would require adjustment if revenue declines materially.
Impact on Rates	No impact on rates anticipated.	No impact on rates anticipated.	Potential indirect impact if campground revenue becomes insufficient to cover operating costs.

8.1 Summary of Financial Implications
The financial implications of the options primarily relate to the sustainability of campground operations, the degree of revenue certainty, and the potential for additional operational or compliance costs over time. Both campgrounds operate on a largely self‑funding basis, with a combination of annual site fees and casual camping revenue supporting day‑to‑day operations, maintenance, and staffing.

8.2 Option 1 – Full Compliance
This would achieve immediate statutory compliance through the removal of annual sites. However, it presents a material financial risk to campground operations due to the loss of predictable, year‑round income. This could undermine the current self‑funding model, increase reliance on Council funding, or require a reduction in service levels.

8.3 Option 2 – Consent with no operational change
This would maintain existing revenue streams in the short term but would retain higher long‑term legal and governance risk. If enforcement action were later required, or if conditions were imposed following further review, this could result in unplanned financial impacts, transitional costs, or disruption to campground operations. The ongoing risk of non‑compliance also creates uncertainty for long‑term financial planning.

8.4 Option 3 – Consent with operational changes
This retains the financial stability provided by annual sites in the short to medium term while progressively transitioning to a more legally defensible and equitable operating model. By way of context, annual site fees accounted for approximately 20% of total campground revenue at Pigeon Bay in the most recent financial year ($10,200 of $50,087) and approximately 17% of total revenue at Duvauchelle ($51,741 of $310,255).

Any additional operational costs associated with introducing balloted annual sites, compliance monitoring, or site transition are expected to be minor and manageable within existing operational budgets.

8.5 Impacts on Existing Annual Site Holders
A number of submitters raised concerns about the potential financial and personal impacts on existing annual site holders, particularly where caravans or annexes are not readily transportable and represent significant personal investment. Option 3 avoids the immediate removal of existing sites and structures and instead provides a managed transition that mitigates abrupt financial hardship while establishing clearer and more transparent future arrangements.

8.6 Infrastructure and Peak‑Season Demand
Some submitters noted that a rapid increase in peak‑season casual use could place pressure on toilet and wastewater infrastructure. The staged approach proposed under Option 3 avoids a sudden increase in peak demand and allows infrastructure capacity to be managed within existing constraints and review processes.

8.7 Overall Financial Assessment
Overall, Option 3 provides the best balance between financial sustainability, legal compliance, and operational certainty. It preserves the viability of existing campground operations while enabling a lawful transition over time, without requiring additional capital investment or creating any immediate impact on rates.

9. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

9.1 Risk 1: Ongoing Statutory Non‑Compliance

9.1.1 Annual camping sites at Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground currently operate as licences to occupy public reserve land, rather than leases or tenancies. In the absence of consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act 1977, this creates ongoing legal and governance risk for Council as the administering body.

9.1.2 Mitigation:
Granting consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act, supported by clear operational controls, provides a lawful pathway to continued operation while reducing ongoing compliance risk.

9.2 Risk 2: De Facto Permanence of Occupation

9.2.1 Historical operating practices—particularly at Duvauchelle Holiday Park—have enabled semi‑permanent structures and long‑term occupation patterns that are inconsistent with the temporary nature of reserve land use. These practices have created expectations of permanence that increase legal and policy risk.

9.2.2 Mitigation:
Option 3 introduces operational controls that progressively reduce permanence, including prohibiting hard annexes, requiring caravans to remain road legal, and mandating removal of all structures when a site is relinquished.

9.3 Risk 3: Transferability and Succession of Site Use

9.3.1 At Duvauchelle, historical on‑selling of caravans and associated improvements has created implied rights of transfer or succession that Council is not legally empowered to grant under the Reserves Act.

9.3.2 Mitigation:
Prohibiting on‑selling or transferral of sites and requiring removal of caravans and annexes on relinquishment removes implied transfer rights, restores Council control over site allocation, and reduces precedent risk.

9.4 Risk 4: Inequitable Access to Public Reserve Land

9.4.1 Long‑term occupation of prime sites can limit availability for casual campers and contribute to perceptions of exclusive or privileged use of public land.

9.4.2 Mitigation:
The transition to one‑year annual sites allocated through public ballot, as vacancies arise, incrementally improves equitable access while avoiding abrupt disruption.

9.5 Risk 5: Community and Reputational Impact

9.5.1 Introducing change to long‑standing arrangements carries a risk of community dissatisfaction, particularly among existing annual site holders who have economic and social investment in the campgrounds.

9.5.2 Mitigation:
Option 3 provides a managed transition that allows existing site holders to continue under current arrangements, reducing immediate impact while clearly signalling future settings.

9.6 Risk 6: Governance and Decision‑Making Risk

9.6.1 Failure to clearly distinguish between Community Board and Council decision‑making roles could create confusion or challenge.

9.6.2 Mitigation:
This report is clearly structured as a Part A report, with the Community Board providing a recommendation and Christchurch City Council (via the Chief Executive) exercising delegated authority under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act. This governance pathway has been made explicit throughout the report.

9.7 Risk 7: Implementation and Operational Complexity

9.7.1 Operational changes such as balloting, compliance monitoring, and site transition introduce additional administrative requirements.

9.7.2 Mitigation:
These changes are incremental, align with existing campground management practices, and can be implemented within current operational structures and budgets.

9.8 Risk 8: Financial and personal impact on existing site holders

9.8.1 Some site holders expressed concern about potential financial loss associated with relocating or disposing of caravans or annexes if changes were implemented abruptly.

9.8.2 Mitigation:
Option 3 enables existing annual site holders to continue under current arrangements and applies new requirements only as sites are relinquished, significantly reducing the risk of sudden financial or personal hardship.

9.9 Overall Risk Assessment

9.10 With the proposed mitigations in place, the residual risks associated with Option 3 are assessed as manageable and proportionate, particularly when compared to the risks associated with either full enforcement or consent without operational change.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

9.11.1 Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground are located on recreation reserves administered by Christchurch City Council under the Reserves Act 1977.

9.11.2 Section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977 restricts the length of time that any vehicle, caravan, tent, or removable structure may remain on a recreation reserve during the period from 1 November to 31 March, unless consent is granted under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act.

9.11.3 The Chief Executive holds delegated authority from the Minister of Conservation to grant consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act for recreation reserves that it administers. Accordingly, Ministerial approval is not required for the proposals outlined in this report, provided Council exercises that delegation in accordance with its terms.

9.11.4 This report is presented as a Part A report. The role of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board is to consider the options and provide a recommendation to the Chief Executive is the decision‑maker and has the statutory and delegated authority to approve or decline consent under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act 1977.

9.12 Other Legal Implications

9.12.1 The proposals in this report do not:

· grant any leasehold, ownership, or proprietary interest in reserve land;

· create transferable or inheritable occupation rights; or

· alter the classification or legal status of the reserves.

9.12.2 No additional statutory consents or approvals are required beyond Council’s decision under Section 44(2) of the Reserves Act.

9.12.3 Annual camping sites operate as licences to occupy, which are personal, time‑limited, and non‑transferable, and do not confer any leasehold, ownership, or permanent occupation rights under the Reserves Act 1977. While some submitters referred to historic practices or approvals that allowed caravans or annexes to be established, Christchurch City Council has previously clarified that any right to occupy a site is non‑transferable and that caravans and associated structures must be removed from the reserve upon sale or relinquishment. This position was communicated to the Department of Conservation in October 2006 and reflects Council’s long‑standing approach to addressing non‑compliance associated with permanent occupation at Duvauchelle Holiday Park. The operational controls proposed under Option 3—including removal of caravans and annexes on site relinquishment, prohibition of on‑selling, and requirements for removability—are consistent with the Reserves Act 1977 and established Council practice for occupation of public reserve land.

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

9.13 The required Decision:

9.13.1 Aligns with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework.

9.13.2 Is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by <enter text>.

9.13.3 Is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

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

9.15 Parks, Heritage and Coastal Environment

9.15.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.0.1 All Community Parks are managed and maintained in a clean, tidy, safe, functional, and equitable manner (Maintenance) - 90% Maintenance Plan key performance indicators are achieved Provide citizens access to fit-for-purpose network of recreation and sporting facilities
Level of Service 7.0.7, Deliver a high level of satisfaction with the range and quality of facilities.

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

9.16 Consultation started on 17 December and ran until 31 January 2026.

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

· An email sent to 20 identified stakeholders, as well as Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee (6), Duvauchelle Reserve Committee (5), all annual site holders (92) and those waitlisted for annual sites (33).

· Consultation documents delivered to Pigeon Bay households (50).

· Flyers and posters at Pigeon Bay Hall.

· Two signs up at each campground and posters in each toilet cubicle.

· Two social media posts to Banks Peninsula Community and Akaroa – What is happening?

· A link to the consultation site on the Duvauchelle Holiday Park webpage.

· Consultation information emailed out in the post-stay survey over the consultation period.

9.18 The Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk page had 1,792 views throughout the consultation period.

Summary of Submissions Ngā Tāpaetanga

9.19 Overall, 321 submissions were received from three organisations and 318 individuals. All submissions are available on the Kōrero mai | Let’s Talk page.

Pigeon Bay campground

9.20 176 submitters provided feedback for Pigeon Bay campground, including three organisations (Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee, Pigeon Bay Boating Club, Penny) and 173 individuals.

9.21 Submitters were asked to select their preference out of three options:

· Option one – Full compliance with the Act, which includes removing long-time sites over summer (hereinafter referred to as ‘full compliance’)

· Option two – Allow annual sites as is, and seek consent from the minister (hereinafter referred to as ‘status quo’)

· Option three – Allow annual sites to remain but with operational changes, and seek consent from the minister (hereinafter referred to as ‘operational changes’

9.22 Overall, 64% (113) supported maintaining the status quo, 20% (36) supported making operational changes, and 15% (27) supported enforcing full compliance.

9.23 Of those in support of maintaining the status quo, 31% (34) were annual site holders or knew someone with a site, 31% (33) were casual campers, and the remainder were residents near Pigeon Bay, bach holders, or others.

9.24 There were varying levels of support for maintaining the status quo across submitter groups. Most (76%) annual site holders or those who knew someone with a site supported the status quo with the remainder supporting operational changes. There were comparably lower levels of support for the status quo across bach holders in or near Pigeon Bay (59%), casual campers (60%) and residents in or near Pigeon Bay (46%).

Figure 1. Support for each option by respondent group

9.25 The main themes expressed by submitters in support for maintaining the status quo included:

· That the Pigeon Bay Boating Club depends on the use of annual sites, and any removal would jeopardise its future (26)

· Annual site holders contribute to the community (23)

· Annual site holders keep the camp tidy and well maintained (17)

· Annual site holders provide security for the campground (11)

· Annual site holders help keep the campground occupied during quieter periods (11)

· Annual sites provide a guaranteed income for the campground (11)

9.26 The main themes expressed by submitters in support of other options (making operational changes, or enforcing full compliance) included:

· Some annual sites are not occupied at peak times or not used for long periods of time (12)

· The best sites are occupied by annual sites (12)

· Removing annual sites would allow more equitable access (11)

· The sites should be freed up over the summer period (11)

· The caravans are untidy and contribute negatively to the aesthetic of the area (7).

9.27 Suggestions from submitters for operational changes included:

· Changes to the occupancy rules including increasing the minimum nights (9)

· Decrease the number of annual sites over time (9)

· Caravans must be warranted, registered/maintained and moveable (6)

· Increase the charges for the sites (5)

· Ballot sites over summer (5)

· Prime spots to be reserved for casual campers (3)

9.28 The Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee submitted in support of retaining a reduced number of annual sites at Pigeon Bay. The Committee noted that changes had already been made to improve fairness and access and expressed support for a gradual reduction in annual sites over time. The submission highlighted the contribution of annual site holders to campground operations, local activities, and the Pigeon Bay Boating Club, and raised concerns about infrastructure capacity and site suitability if overall occupancy were to increase during peak periods.

Duvauchelle Holiday Park

9.29 188 submitters provided feedback for Duvauchelle Holiday Park, including one organisation (Duvauchelle Reserve Committee) and 187 individuals.

9.30 Submitters were asked to select their preference out of three options:

· Option one – Full compliance with the Act, which includes removing long-time sites over summer (hereinafter referred to as ‘full compliance’)

· Option two – Allow annual sites as is, and seek consent from the minister (hereinafter referred to as ‘status quo’)

· Option three – Allow annual sites to remain but with operational changes, and seek consent from the minister (hereinafter referred to as ‘operational changes’

9.31 Overall, 87% (164) supported maintaining the status quo, 5% (10) supported making operational changes, and 7% (14) supported enforcing full compliance.

9.32 Of those in support of maintaining the status quo, 58% were annual site holders or knew someone with an annual site, 25% were casual campers and the remainder were bach holders, residents and others.

9.33 There were varying levels of support for option two (status quo) across submitter groups. Most (98%) annual site holders or those who knew someone with a site supported option two, as well as all Duvauchelle bach holders who responded (14). There were comparably lower levels of support for option two across casual campers (82%) and residents in or near Duvauchelle (47%).

Figure 2. Support for each option by respondent group

9.34 The main themes expressed by submitters in support for maintaining the status quo included:

· Annual sites provide a guaranteed income for the campground (31)

· Council ought to follow the historic precedent/this arrangement has existed for generations (26)

· Annual site holders have fostered a sense of community at the campground (26)

· There is sufficient room for casual campers in the current arrangement (24)

· Annual site holders keep the campground tidy (13)

9.35 The main themes from those in support of other options (making operational changes, or enforcing full compliance) included:

· Removing annual sites would allow more equitable access (8)

· The annual sites look untidy (5)

· Removing annual sites would free up sites over summer (5)

9.36 Suggestions for operational changes included:

· Clearly defined areas for annual compared to casual sites (2)

· Vehicles must be roadworthy or maintained to a certain standard (2)

· Increased charges (2)

9.37 The Duvauchelle Reserve Committee supported retaining annual sites under existing arrangements, noting that the current operating model supports ongoing maintenance of the reserve, local employment, and year‑round economic contribution to the community. The Committee also referenced existing operational controls, including no further solid awnings being permitted and a reduction in annual site numbers over time to increase availability for casual campers.

9.38 Operational Context – Pigeon Bay Annual Site Proportions

· The draft Pigeon Bay Reserve Management Plan policy identified a policy intent to ensure that longer‑term camping sites comprise no more than 50% of total camping capacity.

· In 2006, annual sites comprised approximately 50% of available sites (20 of 40). Since that time, the number of annual sites has been progressively reduced to approximately 37% of capacity (17 of 48 sites).

· The Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee has indicated an intent to further reduce the proportion of annual sites to approximately 32% (15 of 48 sites) through natural attrition by October 2029.

· The Committee has advised that, if reductions are not achieved through natural attrition, it may consider additional operational measures—such as increased minimum stay requirements or adjustments to annual site fees—to encourage turnover over time.

9.39 Operational Context – Duvauchelle Annual Site Proportions

· The draft Duvauchelle Reserve Management Plan did not specify a fixed proportion for longer‑term camping sites; however, historic management discussions have consistently considered the balance between annual and casual use. In 2006, annual sites comprised approximately 62% of total campground capacity (76 of 122 sites). Of these, a substantial proportion included solid annexes.

· Since that time, the number of annual sites has been reduced to approximately 48% of capacity (58 of 122 sites). The current annual sites comprise a mix of site configurations, including 36 sites with solid annexes and 22 sites with canvas structures. Reductions have occurred through natural attrition and tighter operational controls rather than enforced removal.

· It has been reported that during site visits in the mid‑2000s, the Department of Conservation expressed a preference for campground arrangements to work toward a balance in which longer‑term sites did not exceed approximately half of total capacity. While this was not formalised and does not constitute policy direction, the reduction in annual sites at Duvauchelle over time reflects ongoing consideration of that balance alongside campground viability and operational constraints.

9.40 The decision affects the following wards/Community Board areas:
Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula.

9.41 The Community Board view is being sought in this report.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

9.42 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.

9.43 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.

9.44 The proposals relate to operational management of existing campground use on established recreation reserves and do not involve whenua modification, changes to reserve classification, or impacts on sites of cultural significance. Council officers have discussed the issues with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga, and no specific impacts or engagement requirements have been identified in relation to this decision.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

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

9.16 The proposals involve administrative management of existing camping use and are not expected to have any material impact on climate change mitigation or adaptation.

10. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

10.1 The Board's recommendation will be reported to the Chief Executive of the Council for a final decision on the Duvauchelle Holiday Park and Pigeon Bay Campground Annual Sites.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Pigeon Bay Reserve Committee Submission	26/672613	28
b ⇩	Duvauchelle Reserve Committee Submission	26/672617	42
c ⇩	Akaroa Wairewa Community Board 10 June 2015 Inward Correspondence from Duvauchelle Reserve Management Committee dated 13 May 2015 re Reserve Management Plan	15/613040	43
d ⇩	Duvauchelle Recreation Reserve Management Plan 2006	18/586726	60
e ⇩	Draft of Pigeon Bay Recreation Reserve management plan 2006	10/505594	80
f ⇩	Duvauchelle Reserve Committee Rules and Policies 12 September 2025	26/672537	97
g ⇩	Pigeon Bay Camping Ground Rules	26/672622	105
h ⇩	Reserves Act 1977 – Instrument of Delegation for Territorial Authorities	26/635669	109

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

Document Name – Location / File Link

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Colin Jacka - Manager Activities and Events (Outdoor)

Paris Porter - Engagement Advisor

Approved By

Nigel Cox - Head of Recreation, Sports & Events