This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
27. 11. 96
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
13 NOVEMBER 1996
A meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee
was held on Wednesday 13 November 1996 at 4.00 pm
PRESENT: Councillor Gordon Freeman (Chairman),
Councillors Carole Anderton, Graham Berry,
David Buist, Graham Condon, David Cox,
Ishwar Ganda and Gail Sheriff.
IN ATTENDANCE: Councillor Ron Wright.
The Committee reports that:
PART A - MATTERS REQUIRING A COUNCIL DECISION
1. HIGH SCHOOL OLD BOYS CRICKET PAVILION -
proposed redevelopment RR 4017
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Parks Manager | Dean Aldridge |
| Corporate Plan Output: Consents and Applications |
The purpose of this report is to provide an assessment of and recommendations for the proposed new High School Old Boys' (HSOB) Cricket Club pavilion in Hagley Oval. The club has an existing pavilion in Hagley Park near the Canterbury Horticultural Society's building.
INTRODUCTION
The HSOB Cricket Club now have a membership of approximately 230 and wish to upgrade the facilities to effectively cater for that number. The club would like to attract new members but feel this is unlikely given the state of the existing pavilion. For this and other reasons, renovation of the existing building is unworkable and a totally new building is proposed. The Parks Unit agrees with the need for a building more in keeping with the aesthetics of Hagley Oval.
Hagley Oval is the home of cricket in Canterbury. The recently renovated Canterbury Umpires' pavilion is the oldest known cricket pavilion in the southern hemisphere. Hagley Oval rivals Lancaster Park for its importance to cricket in Canterbury, especially since it is used only for cricket, and is the most significant cricket area owned by the Council. In recent seasons interprovincial games have been held at the Oval, and it is likely more games will be played there given the overlap between winter and summer sports seasons, when Lancaster Park is not available for early or late season cricket matches.
The building designs submitted to the Parks Unit with the application were unsatisfactory mainly because of the loss of car parks at the rear of the building. An on site meeting was held with senior representatives from the club and their architect, Parks Unit and Design Services Unit staff. Several issues relating to the proposal were discussed including car parking, general appearance, siting and use of the proposed building. As a result of these discussions the club have made significant changes to the original design. The proposed plans are tabled.
LANDSCAPE
The Council's Landscape Architect, Sean O'Mahoney, has made an assessment of the proposed pavilion's impact on the site, and this is included below along with comments from key staff members. The revised plan, which responds to comments made on the original proposal during the 26/9/96 site meeting, is much better integrated into the site. In particular it minimises encroachment onto the eastern (roadway) side of the site, which was a significant negative feature of the original scheme.
NOTIFIED RESOURCE CONSENT AND LEASE APPROVAL
The floor area has been increased by 90% from 262m2 to 497m2. Under the new City Plan a notified resource consent will be required as the proposed building's area is over 100m2 in the O2 zone A new lease will be required for the increased floor area and for the outdoor seating area. Both of these will need to be publicly advertised and the lease will require the Minister of Conservation's consent.
PHYSICAL IMPACT
The new plan shows a building having a significantly larger ground floor area than the existing pavilion. Most of the extended area is on the west (playing field) side of the hedge boundary and does not significantly intrude on the playing surface. A significant outdoor seating area is also proposed to allow viewing of matches and socialising outdoors in fine weather. The concrete paving around the pavilion would be extended and a low brick wall established to indicate the extent of the leased area.
The extended floor area on the east side occupies an area partly comprising pedestrian paving and partly some of the planting very recently established as part of the forecourt/car park upgrading. One new tree on the south side will be relocated together with a small area of shrub/groundcover planting. To balance this the existing building perimeter has been pulled back to allow a new planting strip approximately 1 metre wide and 13 metres long. There is no encroachment onto existing parking space.
To sum up, the proposed building would have a minor negative impact on public use and access, and on existing amenities. The north east corner of the building encroaches onto the recently constructed footpath, but this could be remedied by a slight adjustment to the building's placement and/or overall dimensions.
ACCESS AND ORIENTATION
The new building's main entry faces north along the new footpath, allowing for public access under the entry canopy. As noted above, the footpath width is reduced unduly at the north east corner, and the existing angled kerb does not relate satisfactorily to the building orientation. It may be necessary to `square up' the block of four parking bays to fit the new layout. There may also be a need for some cycle parking which can be provided only at the expense of car parking space or planting (or both) if congestion is to be avoided.
A new service entrance is indicated on the east side of the building, intended to serve the bar and kitchen. Access is directly off the public footpath, and since there is no yard space attached to the building, all storage will have to be inside. There may be some occasional conflict between building servicing (at peak use times) and pedestrian traffic to and from the Horticultural Centre.
BUILDING PROPORTIONS AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The new structure will have considerably more architectural presence than the existing, if only because of its larger bulk. While the complex outline and multiplicity of roof planes serves to reduce the apparent bulk, it also creates a degree of visual complexity. The nearby historic umpires pavilion has strong simple horizontal lines, but the proposed structure's emphasis is on vertical features. Without attempting to imitate the stylistic details of the older structure it should be possible to achieve a more sympathetic overall character.
CAR PARKING
Under the initial HSOB plan at least three car parks would have been lost as the building's footprint was enlarged. At the meeting this was discussed and Parks Unit staff informed the club that car parks were at a premium in this area, and that the loss of more would not be supported. HSOB was informed that the car parks adjacent to the Netball Headquarters were free to be used by anybody and it appears the club were not aware of this.
The new hospital car park being built near the Tuam St/Hagley Ave corner should help to lessen the demand for car parks around Hagley Oval as a significant proportion of cars using Hagley Oval car parks have been for visitors to the hospital. Car parking will need to be addressed as part of a resource consent and HSOB will be required to provide additional car parks, however since this is not possible inside Hagley Park, the club may be asked to contribute towards the cost of providing car parks near South Hagley Park, for example at the Deans Avenue sale yards site.
CONCLUSION
The Hagley Park Management Plan is quite specific in its requirement that any new structures take into account the effect of the building on the park environment, increased car parking and building colour schemes and the effect of new buildings on the convenience and well-being of park users.
The overall Management Plan objective is "to keep to a minimum the number of new buildings on the park and to coordinate and integrate the existing Hagley Park buildings. To protect historic buildings within the park."
In this case the Parks Unit does not count the proposed pavilion as a new building since it is a replacement for an existing building in a prime site for cricket in Canterbury. The buildings around the Hagley Oval should be first class and the Parks Unit would like to encourage a higher standard of architecture than is present in some cases. The historic Umpire's pavilion can be seen as a benchmark in this respect.
The existing building is visually unsatisfactory and does not meet the club's needs. It is considered that the proposal is generally sound and can be approved to be further evaluated in depth, including car parking assessment via the notified resource consent and lease processes. The Parks Unit therefore supports the concept of renewing the Cricket Club building subject to the following recommended conditions:
1. The application being publicly advertised and the Minister of Conservation's consent being gained.
2. The club obtaining resource and building consents before work commences on the site.
3. The club agreeing to comply with all bylaws, regulations and statutes pertaining to the construction and operation of the building.
4. The exterior colour scheme for the proposed building being submitted to the Parks Manager for approval before construction commences.
5. Any landscaping around the building that is required by the Parks Manager being the club's responsibility.
6. The area being maintained in a safe, clean and tidy condition to the satisfaction of the Parks Manager or his designate at all times.
7. A bond of $2,000 being paid by the successful principal contractor to the Christchurch City Council before work commences on the site. The bond, less any expenses incurred by the Council will be refunded to the contractor on completion of his contract.
8. A representative of the club contacting the Curator, Botanical Services before commencing construction of the building to ascertain the Council's requirements through the development phase of the project.
9. Permission to undertake the proposed development to lapse if construction has not commenced within two years of obtaining Council permission.
10. All costs associated with this application and resulting development being paid for by the club.
Recommendation: That approval be given to vary the High School Old Boys' Cricket Club lease to allow for the redevelopment of the pavilion subject to conditions 1-10 above.
2. NODDY TRAIN CONCESSION - SUMNER FORESHORE RR 4002
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Parks Manager | John Allen, Area Parks Officer |
| Corporate Plan Output: Consents and Applications - Leases (9.4.14) |
Mr R Clark and Mrs B Hancock who jointly operate a noddy train called "Little Hoot" have made application to operate on the Sumner Beach promenade on Sundays, some public holidays, and some school holidays during the summer months. The purpose of this report is to enable Council approval to be gained for this concession.
HISTORY AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
This train has been operating at New Brighton Mall on Saturdays and school holidays for the last 14 years. The train is registered as an Amusement Device with the Department of Labour (Device No 418). The Certificate of Registration of the Noddy Train states that the maximum speed allowed when laden is 4.83 kilometres per hour. The owners pride themselves on a safe and attractive children's ride, currently charging $1 per ride, the children receiving a free lollipop at the end of the ride. They wish to continue this form of attraction if their application for Sumner promenade is approved.
Officers are unaware of any incidences that have occurred between the Noddy Train and pedestrians during its period of operation at the Mall.
SITE APPLIED FOR
The owners wish to operate the Noddy Train from outside the entrance off the promenade into the paddling pool area, and make a six minute return trip from this point, westward along the promenade. It is anticipated that the point of turning will be approximately opposite the stairway over the sea wall at the junction of the Esplanade and Menzies Street. The owners have approached the Sumner Residents Association, who have supported the application for a trial period. I have suggested that the applicants discuss their proposal with the Lessee operating from Scarborough Fare restaurant as a matter of course, although the area they are operating on is outside that lease area.
TRIATHLONS FROM SCARBOROUGH PARK
Up to eight triathlons are held each year from Scarborough Park. Officers believe that it would be inappropriate for the Noddy Train to operate at these times because of congestion in the area.
ACCESS TO THE SITE
Access to the site would be gained through the vehicle entrance by Cave Rock along the Promenade. The operator would be given a key to the locked bollard at this entrance to enable access to the concession area, and would be required to lock the entrance after gaining access, and when leaving the promenade.
The above report was considered by the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board at its meeting on 6 November 1996. The Board supported the application subject to two minor amendments to the conditions of operation which have been incorporated in the recommendation which follows:
Recommendation: That the application by Mr R Clark and Mrs D Hancock to operate a Noddy Train called "Little Hoot" on the Sumner promenade on the Sumner foreshore during the summer months on Sundays, some public holidays and some school holidays be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. A licence being for a trial period for the 1996/97 summer to ensure that the operation of the concession does not cause any problems along the Sumner Foreshore.
2. The applicant furnishing a Health and Safety Plan to the Parks Manager for approval before the operation commences.
3. The registration of the vehicle as an amusement device with the Department of Labour (Device No 418) being kept current.
4. The applicant furnishing evidence of having obtained $1,000,000 Public Liability insurance before the operation commences.
5. Concession operating only during daylight hours.
6. The concession not operating during the period when triathlon events are being held from Scarborough Park (on a maximum of eight days per year as per the policy).
7. The charges for the rides being approved by the Parks Manager before being implemented.
8. The rent for the Licence being negotiated with the Property Manager in consultation with the Parks Manager.
9. The Parks Manager being the duly authorised officer of the Council to liaise with the Lessee on any matters requiring attention during the operation of this Licence.
10. On-site signage being kept to a minimum and approved by the Parks Manager.
11. The Parks Manager or his nominee being authorised to withdraw the licence at his discretion at any time.
3. VICTORY PARK BOARD RR 4007
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Leisure and Community Services Manager | Alistair Graham |
| Corporate Plan Output: Major Stadia |
The purpose of this report is to respond to a request by Council to report to the Parks and Recreation Committee on the possibility of further Council representative/s being appointed to the Victory Park Board.
Background
The Canterbury Cricket and Athletic Sports Company Ltd was floated in 1880 with the intention of promoting sports gatherings. Lancaster Park was officially named on the 28 July 1881 at a meeting of cricketers intent on forming a club under the auspices of the sports company.
From 1881 to 1919, the company changed names and owners but maintained its original intention. While a range of sporting events were held including trotting, cycling, football, rugby, cricket etc, the one constant was the lack of income to enhance the facilities. It was this issue that led to the move to vest the land with the Crown and with the support of the Canterbury Commercial Travellers' and Warehousemen's Association, the mortgage was discharged at the same time.
The Victory Park Board was brought into being through the Victory Park Act of 1919, commemorating the victory of the Allies in World War I and of the Canterbury soldiers who died in the service of their country. The Board is a body corporate in its own rights and although Lancaster Park is owned by the Crown, as distinct from the Victory Park Board, the Crown is only a trustee of that land for the Board.
Make Up of Board
The Victory Park Act incorporates within the need for the Board of control to manage the facility and pursue the original objectives set out by the Canterbury Cricket and Athletic Sports Company Ltd. The original Board of ten represented the interests of rugby football, cricket and two seats to elected members of the Commercial Travellers' and Warehousemen's Club Ltd (now the Commerce Club). Additionally, it included the Mayor of Christchurch and one other person to be nominated representing other sports.
The Act states as follows:
12. (1.) The Board shall be the persons named or indicated in the Second Schedule to this Act, who shall hold office until their successors come into office in that behalf, and shall then retire from office.
(2.) Their successors shall be the following:
(a) Three persons elected by the committee for the time being of the Canterbury Cricket Association;
(b) Three persons elected by the committee for the time being of the Canterbury Rugby Football Union;
(c) Two persons elected by the committee for the time being of the Canterbury Commercial Travellers' and Warehousemen's Association (Incorporated);
(d) The Mayor of Christchurch for the time being; and
(e) One person representing sports or athletic pastimes other than cricket or rugby football to be appointed by the Board.
The following matters are also provided for in the 1919 Act:
(a) Section 3 defines the purposes for which the land is to be used, namely, for cricket, rugby football matches and other sports, exhibitions, amusements and entertainments approved by the Board.
(b) Section 4 provides that the land is to be under the exclusive control and management of the Board;
(c) Section 7 gives the Board wide powers of leasing, development and improving the land;
(d) Section 8 gives the Board management control and direction in all things of the land but with restricted powers relating to mortgaging or selling the land.
(e) The Board is independent of any financial or other control by the Crown or any other person except that its bylaws must be approved by the Governor-General and it is required to keep accurate accounts and exhibit its balance sheet each year on some prominent place on the land or a building.
(f) Section 18 provides that the Board, subject to the provision of the 1919 Act, has all the powers, rights and authorities of an absolute owner.
The Act is specific in the membership of the Board and would therefore require a change through Parliament to alter the present composition.
Victory Park Legal Comment
The Victory Park Board Solicitor, Geoff Saunders, has responded as follows:
It is noted that the Christchurch City Council would like further representation on the Board other than through the Mayor. We suggest there are only three alternatives.
(a) The Board needs to prepare rules that would enable the Mayor to appoint an alternate representative.
(b) The Commercial Travellers could perhaps have one of their two members elected by their Committee to be a Council representative.
(c) Perhaps there could be a Council representative representing sports or athletic pastimes other than cricket or rugby to be appointed. This could perhaps be a member of the Council's committee on sports or recreation and this type of person is really contemplated by S 12(2)(e) of the Act.
The only other option we can see is to amend the Act by way of a Private Members' Bill allowing for a different make up of the Board. We can provide you with further details of this procedure, if necessary.
In response to the above, I comment as follows:
(a) Councillor Buist presently attends Board meetings on behalf of the Mayor. The Legal Services Manager advises that in his opinion Councillor Buist cannot be appointed as an alternate as this would not be valid under the Act. At the moment he attends in an informal capacity.
(b) While no approach has been made to the Commercial Travellers it is unlikely they would release a membership for Council purposes.
(c) This is a possibility and is a decision made by the Victory Park Board on an annual basis. They have just recently appointed the "other sports" representative to their Board.
Conclusion
Having considered the statutory requirements that would be necessary to change representation of the Victory Park Board and taking into account the current management contribution and general responsibilities of the Board and the Council to Lancaster Park I do not believe it is an appropriate time to seek any amendment to the Act to allow increased Council representation.
Rather I feel positive dialogue already takes place between Council officers and Victory Park Board Members and Staff on a number of matters and Councillor Buist and I can still continue to inform the Council on appropriate issues as and when they arise.
Notwithstanding this, the Council may wish to pursue the question of increased representation in the future should it become more involved in the proposed ongoing development of Lancaster Park.
Recommendation: That to establish an ongoing liaison between the Victory Park Board and the Council, the Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee together with appropriate Council officers hold bi-annual meetings with the Victory Park Board.
4. CHRISTCHURCH OLYMPIC CITY COMMITTEE -
APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES RR 4068
The Leisure and Community Services Manager submitted a comprehensive report detailing the background to the establishment of the Christchurch Olympic City Committee and outlining some of the major events and programmes undertaken by the Committee since it was first established in 1991.
Since its inception Councillor David Buist has served as the Council's representative on the Christchurch Olympic City Committee and has also chaired the Committee for the past five years.
The Council's representation on the Committee was not reviewed at the commencement of the current term of the Council. As the Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee also chairs the Olympic City Committee it would be appropriate for Councillor Freeman to be appointed as one of the Council's representatives on the Committee.
Recommendation: 1. That the Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee and Councillor Buist be appointed as the Council's representatives on the Christchurch Olympic City Committee.
2. That Councillor Buist chair the Committee in the absence of the Chairman.
PART B - ITEMS DEALT WITH BY THE COMMITTEE AND
REPORTED FOR INFORMATION ONLY
5. SUPPLEMENTARY ITEM
SHOWTIME CANTERBURY - LITIGATION SETTLEMENT RR 4127
The Chairman sought the leave of the Committee to introduce a supplementary report on the above topic. The report had not been included in the main agenda as the issue arose while the agenda was being prepared. The report could not wait for the next meeting of the Committee as the matter was of current public interest.
It was resolved that the report be received and considered at the present meeting.
6. DEPUTATIONS BY APPOINTMENT
(a) HALSWELL DOMAIN SPORTS ASSOCIATION
Mr Kevin J Clarke, Chairman, Halswell Domain Sports Association, and Mr Ron Fensom, Chairman, Halswell Residents' Association, addressed the Committee in support of an application from the Sports Associations for a review of the provision of sports grounds in the Halswell area.
The submission was held over to be considered in conjunction with the Leisure and Community Services Manager's report on the application.
(b) LANCASTER PARK SPORTS MUSEUM TRUST
Mr David Gallop and Mr Russell Vine presented an application on behalf of the Trust for a grant of $10,000 per annum for two years for the Lancaster Park Sports Museum.
The Committee resolved that the Leisure and Community Services Manager report back on the grant application.
(c) RAWHITI PARK CAMPING GROUND -
PROPOSED LEASEHOLD
Mr Paul Rutledge presented the Rawhiti Camping Ground Group's redevelopment proposal for the Rawhiti Park Camping Ground. Mr Rutledge outlined the key features of the proposal and the community consultation which had taken place since the proposal was initially presented to the Burwood/Pegasus Community Board at its October meeting.
Mr E J Tait, solicitor for the lessees of the South New Brighton Camping Ground, addressed the Committee on behalf of his clients. Mr Tait, in noting that the Rawhiti Camp was approximately 3 kms from the South New Brighton Camping Ground sought clarification on the research which had been undertaken on:
The economics of developing a further camp in this area of the city.
The demand for further camping ground facilities.
The effect of the new camping ground on the South New Brighton operation.
Mr Tait also tabled for the Committee's information a facsimile message from the New Zealand Insolvency and Trustee Service of the Ministry of Commerce regarding the business activities of one of the applicants.
7. HALSWELL DOMAIN SPORTS ASSOCIATION -
REVIEW OF THE PROVISION OF SPORTS GROUNDS RR 4009
The Committee gave consideration to a submission from the Halswell Domain Sports Association seeking Council support for a number of proposals for meeting the shortage of sports grounds in the Halswell area, including:
1. The development of four senior winter sports grounds and two cricket blocks located off the proposed winter sports ground at Halswell Quarry Reserve.
2. Relocation of the Halswell Pony Club to the Curletts Road land.
3. The acquisition of additional land adjacent to the domain.
The Committee resolved:
1. That the HDSA be congratulated and thanked for their initiative and their proposals for sports ground development in Halswell.
2. That the short, medium and long terms proposals recommended in the HDSA application be implemented in accordance with staff comments with particular reference to the following:
(i) That the HDSA request for sports grounds at Halswell Quarry be designed in a concept plan which will complement the Quarry Reserve and as such be considered as a change to the current management plan and the Kennedy's Bush Residents Association and the local residents in the area be notified.
The concept plan when completed be brought back to a future meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee to be considered along with comments by the local residents.
(ii) That a concept plan incorporating the relocation of the Halswell Pony Club from Halswell Domain to Curletts Road Reserve be drawn up and this along with the associated costs be presented to a future meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee for consideration.
(iii) That the Parks and Recreation Committee give staff a mandate to consult with the local land owners adjoining Halswell Domain to investigate the acquisition of up to 10ha of land for future sports grounds.
(Councillor Cox requested that his vote against recommendation 2(iii) be recorded.)
8. ASCOT GOLF PARK - IMPLEMENT/STORAGE SHED RR 4038
The Leisure and Community Services Manager reported in response to concerns raised regarding the erection of an implement/storage shed adjacent to the driving range bays of the Ascot Golf Park without Council approval. The lease agreement with NZ Premier Golf Ranges Ltd provides that any site works (including buildings) are to be approved by the City Manager or his nominee.
The Committee concurred with the staff view that as the building shell had been erected the building should be allowed to remain on its present site at the discretion of the Council subject to measures being taken to improve the aesthetics of the building and surrounding area.
The Committee resolved:
1. That the implement/storage shed be permitted to remain on the site shown on the plan attached to the agenda.
2. That the shed be painted to blend in with the surrounding area to the satisfaction of the Leisure and Community Services Manager.
3. That the surrounding area be landscaped to the satisfaction of the Leisure and Community Services Manager.
4. That Premier Golf be advised that any future improvements must be authorised in line with the lease or agreement to lease documented conditions.
5. That the pending lease conditions be amended to include provision for the implement/storage shed to remain at the discretion of the Council.
9. AVONHEAD PARK CEMETERY -
further proposal for memorials RR 4070
The Acting Parks Manager reported on a proposal to develop a further memorial area within the Avonhead Park Cemetery.
The Committee resolved that, following consultation, designs and plans for a small form of memorial within the "no memorial area" at Avonhead Park Cemetery be brought back to the Parks and Recreation Committee for consideration.
10. DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY RR 3740
The Acting Parks Manager reported on the findings of an investigation into the drainage problems at Memorial Park Cemeteries and on discussions held with two local funeral directors regarding the future development of this cemetery.
The Committee resolved that a special meeting be held to consider the development options for the Memorial Park Cemetery.
11. SHOWTIME CANTERBURY - LITIGATION SETTLEMENT RR 4127
The Committee received a report from the Legal Services Manager detailing the terms of a recent settlement concerning the use of the name Showtime Canterbury by the Council as follows:
1. That the Council would have the right to use the name "Showtime Canterbury" to promote the Showtime festival;
2. That the Council would pay Showtime Limited the sum of $10,000 in settlement of all claims against the Council;
3. That the Council would pay Showtime Limited legal costs not exceeding $2,500 for that Showtime Limited shareholders warranted that they would obtain the consent of any future purchaser of the company to the use of the name.
12. ITEMS DEFERRED
The Committee deferred the following reports:
12.1 Drainage Investigation Sydenham Cemetery RR 3829
Consideration of this report was deferred until the special meeting of the Committee referred to in clause 10 above.
12.2 Rawhiti Park Camping Ground - Development Report RR 3731
Consideration of this report was deferred to enable the issues raised by one of the deputations to be clarified.
13. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC
The Committee resolved that the draft resolution to exclude the public set out on page 36 the agenda be adopted.
CONSIDERED THIS 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1996
MAYOR