This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE
12 JUNE 1996
A meeting of the Environmental Committee
was held on Wednesday 12 June 1996 at 4.00 pm
PRESENT: Councillor Carole Evans (Chairman)
Councillors Oscar Alpers, Anna Crighton,
Newton Dodge, Lesley Keast
and Charles Manning.
APOLOGIES: Apologies for absence were received and accepted
from Councillors Pat Harrow and Barbara Stewart. Councillor Alpers arrived at 4.25 pm and was
present for all clauses except clause 1.
The Committee reports that: PART A - MATTERS REQUIRING A COUNCIL DECISION
1. DEPUTATIONS BY APPOINTMENT
NEW ZEALAND FIRE SERVICE UNION
Messrs Denis Fitzmaurice and Steve Warner spoke regarding the effects of the changes to the fire service fire appliance manning requirements. Mr Warner backgrounded the fire service review that had taken place and the cost saving measures that were proposed. One of these of concern to them was the cutting of staff on the fire appliances, which impacted directly on workload and safety measures. Community Safety Team personnel would be employed to man the initial response fire appliance, but these officers had only 13 weeks training. Mr Fitzmaurice advised that the proposed practice was courting disaster, as the Community Safety Team personnel would be acting at a level of responsibility of that of a station officer, which took a minimum of five years experience and training to achieve. How the night shift would be rostered was also of extreme concern, as from information obtained it would be drawn from the Community Safety Team personnel and volunteer fire fighters. This could lead to double shifts being worked by team personnel and dangers were seen with this. Their concern was for the public and for the fire fighters as well. Recommendation: That the Council formally write to the New Zealand Fire Service requesting that the manning of fire appliances by community safety teams be only on the basis of there being an experienced fire fighter as part of the appliance fire crew.
2. REMOVAL OF NOTICE ON TITLE -
136 PANORAMA ROAD RR 3016
Officer responsible Author Environmental Services Manager Building Control Manager Corporate Plan Output: Environmental Services Unit - Building Control
The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authority to remove a notice on a property title at 136 Panorama Road. In 1985 a building permit was issued for a dwelling to be built at 136 Panorama Road subject to a notice under Section 641(a) of the Local Government Act being placed on the title noting the possibility of instability. The notice was required because of the conclusions of a report by Soils and Foundations on the site conditions. Since 1985 remedial work to reduce the risk has been undertaken and two reports by Soils and Foundations in March 1990 and March 1996 have been produced for the owner of the site. The latest report concludes that the site is now sufficiently stabilised for the restriction on the title to be lifted. The owner has requested the notice on the title be removed. Staff of the Building Control Section have reviewed the report and inspected the site and agree with the conclusion of the latest report. Recommendation: That pursuant to Section 641A(5) of the Local Government Act 1974 the Council determine the entry on the title of 136 Panorama Road is no longer required and that notice of this determination be sent to the District Land Register to amend his records.
3. DOG CONTROL, PROPOSED POLICY DOCUMENT RR 2521
Officer responsible Author Environmental Policy and Planning Terence Moody Manager Corporate Plan Output: Environmental Health PolicyThe purpose of this report is to present for consideration a proposed draft policy on dog control for the City of Christchurch as is required under the provisions of the new Dog Control Act 1996. Background
The Act, which replaces the Dog Control and Hydatids Act 1982, comes into force on the 1 July 1996 The Act requires the Council to adopt a policy on dogs in public places, and this must be introduced by the special consultative procedure set down in the Local Government Act 1974. Specific notice of the draft policy must be given to each owner of a registered dog in the district.
3 Cont'd The policy must contain information on proposed bylaws to be made under the Act; public places in which dogs are prohibited; public or other places in which dogs are to be controlled on a leash; public places where prohibition or leashing is not required; areas designated by a bylaw as dog exercise areas; identify land which is either a controlled dog area or open dog area under the Conservation Act 1987, or a National Park under the National Park Act 1980. The policy may contain policy in relation to fees or proposed fees; owner education programmes; dog obedience courses; classification of owners; the disqualification of owners; the issuing of infringement notices; and other information and advice relating to dogs as the Council thinks fit. The Council will be required to give effect to the policy adopted by making bylaws to come into force currently by not later than 1 July 1997, and by repealing any bylaws inconsistent with the policy by that date. No bylaws may be made that would be inconsistent with the policy. Any amendments to the policy must be undertaken in accordance with the special consultative procedure. Proposed Policies
Attached is a copy of a recommended draft policy. This reflects the current dog control bylaw, which contains details of areas where dogs are prohibited, areas in which dogs are required to be controlled on a leash, and other matters of control. The present bylaw does not include a list of public places in which dogs are neither prohibited nor required to be on a leash (as required by the new Act). The definition of public places in the Act is wide and would include all other public places where dogs are neither prohibited nor required to be on a leash. It is presumed the requirement for defining other areas in the latter category arises from the need to have regard to the exercise and recreational needs of dogs and their owners. The current dog park areas are at the Groynes and Horseshoe Lake but these are not currently specified as such in the dog control bylaw. Information on possible areas to be declared under the Conservation Act 1987 as controlled or open dog areas is still to be obtained for inclusion. The above information covers that which is required to be included in the policy but some decision needs to be made as to that which may be included. Currently some matters such as fees and classification of owners are tentatively included but education programmes, and dog obedience courses, are not included as details of these may change from year to year. In the case of disqualification of owners and the issuing of infringement notices it is considered the policy on these will be required to be determined. A letter has been received from the Chief Executive of the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of cruelty to Animals advising that their Annual General Meeting resolved that all local bodies be requested to ensure that all unclaimed dogs in their pounds be desexed before they are rehomed to members of the public. He was advised that the Council had previously considered a similar request on the basis that the new owners pay for the desexing. This was similar to the practice being undertaken in the Wellington and Hutt areas. 3 Cont'd This Council did not consider that such cost was acceptable as a charge on dog registration fees for all owners, nor was the Council willing to subsidise such costs from rates. As a new dog control policy is being prepared it is considered that this policy should be reviewed. The decision to release dogs from the pound only if they have been desexed has some financial implications, either to the general ratepayer or the bulk of the dog owners, if the cost is borne by the Council and not recovered by a charge on the new owner. The costs for undertaking desexing ranges from $80 for castration to $130 for desexing a female. If the new owner is required to pay the cost there is a view that this would mean a reduction of rehousing dogs from the pound and a subsequent increase in dogs having to be "put down". The Save Animals From Exploitation (SAFE) organisation wrote to all territorial authorities in June 1995 seeking information on their policies on releasing dogs to laboratories for research purposes. This Council, along with many others, advised that it was not the practice to do this but there was no written policy on the matter. A further letter from SAFE has been received suggesting that this should become a written policy. This is the most appropriate time to include such a policy statement should the Council wish to do this and the discussion paper includes such a policy. The Council at its meeting on the 29 February 1996 resolved that the draft policy contain options including the banning of potentially dangerous breeds of dogs in living zones. The Dog Control Act 1996 includes the power to classify a dog as a dangerous dog. This is required of the Council in cases of dogs where the owner has been convicted of an offence relating to attacking persons or animals, or on sworn evidence as to aggressive behaviour and a reasonable belief it constitutes a threat to safety. Such classification requires the dog to be kept in a securely fenced area of the property; be muzzled in public places; be neutered; and pay dog fees at 150 per cent of the level for such a dog each year. The classification must be entered into the register and it applies throughout the country. The Act also, in section 78, now contains the power for regulations to be made, by order in Council, for the following purpose: (c) Subject to subsection (2) of this section, regulating or prohibiting the keeping or possession, either generally or within any specified district or within any specified part of New Zealand, of dogs of any specified type or breed or cross-breed:
Subsection (2) referred to above is as follows: (2) Regulations made under paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of this section that relate to a particular breed or cross-breed of dog shall specify, with due particularity, the criteria that are to be used for the purpose of determining whether a dog is of a particular breed or cross-breed.
3 Cont'd The provision to enable the breed criteria to be set in regulations will enable such provisions to apply nationwide. Depending on how the regulations are written it may be that this Council could seek to have them applying in the city. Conclusions
The current dog control bylaw expresses the current policy on dog control in the city, and with the exception of including specified dog exercise areas and areas in which public places are identified as not being prohibited or requiring leashes, fulfils the proposed requirements of section 10 of the Act. The matter of the prohibition of keeping potentially dangerous dogs in certain areas of the city requires to be further addressed, once the regulations are released. Recommendation: 1. That a Sub-committee comprising Councillors Manning, Dodge, Stewart and Evans be established to consider the draft policy for reporting back to the July meeting of the Environmental Committee. Following the acceptance of the draft it be prepared for issue under the Special Consultative Procedure under the Local Government Act 1974, as required by the Dog Control Act 1996. 2. That prior to the draft policy being reported back to the Committee, a focus group and the Community Boards be consulted.
4. 210 TUAM STREET RR 3054
The Committee considered the following two reports:
"Officer responsible Author Environmental Policy and Planning John Dryden Manager Corporate Plan Output: City Design and Heritage Policy Advice
The purpose of this report is to draw attention to an opportunity to reuse 210 Tuam Street. Previous reports on this Council owned building have concluded that from a property investment point of view this building should be demolished and the site added to the car parking pool. Because of the heritage values of the building (Group 4 City Plan) various Councillors have suggested that as a Council we should set an example in finding new uses for this old building.
A recent review of corporate accommodation needs for the Council have concluded that important operations efficiencies could be gained by the better grouping of Units within the Civic Offices and that would be greatly facilitated if the Parking Operation Unit were to relocate to 210 Tuam Street.
4 Cont'd There is an opportunity therefore for the Council to again demonstrate in a practical way, the reuse of another heritage building that it owns. Costs however would be significant - about $340,000 for renovation and about $130,000 for strengthening together with fees and GST. Rental income could be $45,000 per annum providing a return of about 9%.
Further work is required to refine this proposal and there is no provision for this work in the draft Annual Plan. The Environmental Committee however might consider such work has merit and could make a submission to the Council through the Annual Plan process."
"Officer responsible Author Director of Finance Bob Lineham/Paul Melton Corporate Plan Output: City Design and Heritage Policy Advice
The purpose of this report is to advise a source of funds for strengthening and renovating the heritage property at 210 Tuam Street.
I have been asked to comment on whether it is possible to fund this project from the 1995/96 budget.
The Environmental Policy and Planning Manager advises that $150,000 from the Heritage Buildings Retention Fund will be unspent at the end of this financial year. This money would therefore be available to part fund the upgrade of this historic building.
The remaining funds could come from the commercial property section of the Property Unit. Commercial Property will end the year with $200,000 additional revenue on the Moorhouse Avenue property plus underexpenditure of $200,000 on Carruca House and some other miscellaneous properties.
These sources of funding would negate the need to make a submission on the Draft 1996/97 Annual Plan and will allow the preliminary planning work to commence this financial year. The unspent funds would be carried forward to the new financial year."
Recommendation: 1. That the strengthening and renovation of the heritage property at 210 Tuam Street be funded from the 1995/96 surplus funds. 2. That the Property be allocated to the Parking Operations Unit for customer service/accommodation purposes and preliminary planning work be commenced this financial year. PART B - ITEMS DEALT WITH BY THE COMMITTEE AND
REPORTED FOR INFORMATION ONLY
5. CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAMMES:
KEEP CHRISTCHURCH BEAUTIFUL RR 2882 The Committee received a report on the programmes operated by the Keep Christchurch Beautiful campaign which introduced children to environmental education and care for the environment. The matter of new directions for the programmes is to be looked at at the Annual Report time, when consideration is given to funding for the various programmes. It was resolved that the Environmental Committee show its appreciation for the work of Keep Christchurch Beautiful by attending the organisation's Annual General Meeting.
6. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL, PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES RR 2750 The Environmental Policy and Planning Manager provided a report to keep members of the Committee informed on current issues to be actioned. The 1996 NZ Planning Institute Conference being held in Auckland is a combined international conference with EAROPH (an east-Asian based organisation relating to housing and planning). It was resolved that Councillors Cox and Evans be authorised to attend the conference as Council representatives.
7. HERITAGE TRUSTS RR 2876 A report was received reviewing the options of establishing a heritage trust in Christchurch to promote the retention of heritage buildings. Existing trusts in Christchurch, the Napier Art Deco Trust and the Dunedin Heritage Trust objectives and workings were examined. The potential role of a heritage trust in Christchurch needs to be considered in relation to: * The existing range of heritage trusts within the city.
* The scope of heritage activities for which the Council is currently responsible.
* The extent to which these activities could be transferred to or be complementary to the role of an independent trust. It was resolved: 1. That the Council convene a forum to which members of the Environmental Committee, representatives of other Canterbury local authorities and groups with an interest in heritage protection be invited, with a view to developing a co- ordinated approach to: 7 Cont'd (a) Raising and distributing regional heritage funding. (b) Promotion of heritage protection. (c) To investigate the establishment of a heritage conservation trust. 2. That the Environment Committee meet to review the Council's heritage policy.
8. GLASS WASTE INDUSTRY/SUMMARY REPORT RR 2904 The Waste Manager provided a report updating the Committee on the glass waste/reuse industry and provided information on the initiatives the Waste Management Unit is undertaking to foster recycling/reuse of glass waste in Christchurch. The report had also been considered by the City Services Committee. It was resolved: 1. That the recommendations of the Sustainable Cities Trust listed (a) to (h) and more particularly described in the Stage 1 report be adopted as Council policy. 2. That the Action Plan (a) to (f) be adopted with (b) amended to: "Stockpile glass at a site where it will be visible to the public and industry and stimulate ideas for use."
(The Committee did not support proposals to crush the glass stockpiled until appropriate uses have been investigated.)
9. WAIMAKARIRI DISTRICT COUNCIL SOLID WASTE RR 2905 This report dealt with the progress of the Canterbury Regional Waste Working Party in developing and implementing a solid and hazardous waste management strategy for the Canterbury region on a co- operative basis. The second part of the report dealt with the difficulties of Waimakariri District Council to dispose of their domestic waste and utilising the principle of co- operation the Council's approval for Waimakariri to dispose of its domestic waste at the Burwood Landfill was sought. It was seen that it was good sense to help our neighbours now on the basis that we will seek their help later. It was resolved: 9 Cont'd 1. That in the interests of current and future mutual co-operation and goodwill the Council agree to Waimakariri's request to dispose of their domestic refuse at Burwood Landfill until 30 June 1999. 2. That the charge for disposal direct to Burwood Landfill be $20/tonne excluding GST.
10. ITEMS RECEIVED The Committee received the following reports: 10.1 Amendment to Food Act and its Impact on the Council RR 3006 This report advised the Committee of a proposed amendment to the Food Act 1991, which will have an impact on the revenue collected by the Environmental Health (Licensing) Section. The Bill provides for the streamlining of the food standards setting mechanism to bring this activity in line with the Australian system and for the implementation of food safety programmes in food premises. 10.2 Road Designation Alteration -
State Highway 1 - Harewood Road RR 2997 The Environmental Services Manager provided a report on the alteration of road widening designation of the intersection at State Highway 1 and Harewood Road, which is reflected in the City Plan output of the Environmental Services Unit. 10.3 Alteration and Removal of Designations RR 2852 This report advised the Committee of the changes to designations for: * Former Telecom Sockburn Line Depot - Lowther Street/Main South Road, Telecom New Zealand Ltd * Railway Land, Partial Designation Removal - Mona Vale Avenue, New Zealand Railways Corporation * Burwood Telephone Exchange - Mairehau Road, Telecom New Zealand Ltd * Road Designation Alteration - State Highway 1/Avonhead Road 10.4 Land Transport Pricing Study RR 3009 This report from the City Streets Manager and Environmental Policy and Planning Manager drew attention to land transport pricing study, for which discussion documents have recently become available. 10 Cont'd An officer project team has been established to review the study and formulate a submission. The submission will be reported through the August round of meetings. 10.5 Waste Managers Attendance at 3rd Australian Hazardous
and Solid Waste Convention/Issues Arising RR 3032 The Waste Manager recently attended the Solid Waste Management Conference in Sydney which was valuable in providing up to date information on current and best practice trends in solid waste management. The report covered leadership on waste minimisation strategy, new refuse collection/kerbside recycling contracts, Burwood Landfill, compost facility, hazardous waste and glass cullet. The meeting concluded at 5.55 pm CONSIDERED THIS 26TH DAY OF JUNE 1996
MAYOR