This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
17. 12. 97
PROJECTS AND PROPERTY COMMITTEE
12 DECEMBER 1997
A meeting of the Projects and Property
Committee
was held on Friday 12 December 1997 at 2.00 pm
| PRESENT: | Councillor Ron Wright (Chairman), The Mayor, Councillors Oscar Alpers, Carole Anderton, Ishwar Ganda, Denis O'Rourke and Gail Sheriff. |
| APOLOGIES: | Apologies for absence were received and accepted from Councillors Morgan Fahey and Ian Howell. |
| ABSENT: | Councillor Alister James. |
| The Mayor left the meeting at 2.20 pm and was present for clauses 6.1 and 7 only. | |
| Councillor Ganda retired from the meeting at 3.35 pm and was present for all clauses with the exception of clauses 10, 11 and 12. | |
| Councillor O'Rourke retired from the meeting at 3.55 pm and was present for all clauses with the exception of clause 12. |
The Committee reports that:
PART A - MATTERS REQUIRING A COUNCIL DECISION
| 1. | DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY. - 620 WATERLOO ROAD, TEMPLETON | RR 6558 |
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Property Projects Manager | Property Projects Officer, Steve McCarroll |
| Corporate Plan Output: Surplus Property | |
The purpose of this report is to consider a recommendation to adopt a resolution pursuant to Section 230 of the Local Government Act 1974, along with a resolution to dispose of land at 620 Waterloo Road.
HISTORY
Details of the original purchase have been difficult to obtain other than the fact that the land was acquired in 1933 in the name at the time of the Christchurch Tramway Board. There was a later name change to the Christchurch Transport Board in 1952 for transport purposes. The land is surplus to the operational requirements of the Council.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The above property is a 911m2 site zoned Living 1. The site currently contains a relatively run-down garage building on a portion of the site with the balance being vacant.
It is considered that the highest and best use of this site is as a vacant single lot with the existing improvements being removed from the site.
We have been advised by the Senior Planner, Planning Projects that the building on the property is a non-conforming use in terms of the City Plan rules and should be removed. It is therefore intended that the buildings be demolished prior to sale and that the cost of this demolition be met by EPPU non-conforming use funds.
CURRENT SITUATION
All other Council units have been advised of the proposed disposal of this property under the surplus property decision making flow chart, with no interest being expressed in its retention.
The Wigram/Community Board has however recommended that the Council consider a request by the Templeton Residents Association to retain the funds from the sale. The text of the Board's letter is as follows:
'Thank you for the courtesy of consulting the Residents Association on the matter of the possible future use of this site and building.
The Association is of the opinion that the property could be disposed of by Council as it is unable to identify a constructive community use for it.
The Council is aware that the Templeton community is presently engaged in activities which may led to the provision of a new community centre on the KIRK ROAD RESERVE.
We suggest to Council that a significant portion of the proceeds of the sale of this WATERLOO ROAD PROPERTY be retained within the budget for the proposed new community centre.'
VALUATION
Independent valuation advice has been received and the current market value assessed.
It is then intended to place the property on the market in accordance with the Council's policy for disposal of property.
Section 230 Resolution
In order to comply with the Local Government Act, the Council should adopt the following resolution:
| Resolution |
| 1. Pursuant to
Section 230 of the Local Government Act 1974 the Council
hereby resolves to dispose of the property described in
the schedule: |
| Schedule |
| All that land situated at 620 Waterloo Road being part RS 3124 contained in Certificate of Title 436/253. |
The Community Manager, Sockburn reported:
'Further to the above report I wish to advise that the Templeton Residents Association has offered to provide a sum of money from the proceeds of an existing property, owned by them, to add to the proceeds from the sale of 620 Waterloo Road. The reason behind this is the Association's wish for a new facility to be provided in Templeton.
The Association has viewed the opportunity to create a new community facility on the nearby Kirk Road Reserve. A conceptual plan for this reserve, prepared earlier in the year, has identified a footprint on the reserve which could be compatible with other development aspects of the reserve.
The Riccarton/Wigram Community Board, in support of this offer, has resolved to contribute to the cost of a needs analysis for the Templeton area. The outcome from this study is expected to be presented to the Board in April 1998.
A recreation survey conducted in April 1993 identified a community desire for a multi-use facility to meet the rapidly expanding residential growth in the area, and it is likely that the latest study will endorse this desire.
The Board does not wish to delay a decision on the sale of 620 Waterloo Road but it does seek (in terms of its resolution of 1 October 1998) the support of the Council in retaining the funds for the 'local'; use identified.
The basis of the request to retain the funds is in accordance with the Council's policy register 'Proceeds from the Sale of Council Property' (page 81) which talks about 'extenuating circumstances for the retention of monies in a local area to meet local needs'.
The capital works budget includes small amounts of money for work to be done on Kirk Road by the Parks Unit. The attached plan of April 1997 identifies the footprint for a local community facility.
The Board wishes to be heard in support of this submission.'
Submissions in support of the Community Board's request were made by Mr Mike Mora, the Board's Deputy Chairperson. The Director of Operations pointed out that the Board's proposal ran counter to the following policies regarding the proceeds from the sale of Council property previously adopted by the Council on 24 August 1994:
"1. That unless there are legal requirements or other extenuating circumstances, the proceeds from the sale of Council-owned property be redistributed through the annual plan process; extenuating circumstances to include the fulfilment of local needs identified as having a very high priority for land purchase in the immediate area where the land is located, and where a case is presented to the Council for determination by the relevant Community Board or Standing Committee.
2. That where land held under the Reserves Act 1977 is revoked and sold the funds be held in the Cash in Lieu Account and redistributed through the annual plan process for Parks capital works."
The Committee concluded that there was insufficient justification for any departure from the foregoing policy in the present instance, and that the Board should be encouraged to pursue its proposal in the normal way through the annual plan process.
| Recommendation: |
|
2. DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY HUNTSBURY SPUR RR 6763
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Property Manager | Pamela Ellis, Property Services Manager 2/21/1 |
| Corporate Plan Output: Holding Property Development: Huntsbury Spur. Page 8.8.9 | |
The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval for the disposal of surplus property on Huntsbury Spur.
BACKGROUND
Following completion of the Huntsbury Spur development, there remain two lots in Council ownership, namely Lot 11 DP 75284 of 4654 square metres and Lot 12 DP 75285 of 4.1230 hectares (see plan attached). In terms of the Property Decision Making Flow Chart process, other units of the Council and Community Boards have been circularised for possible registration of interest to retain the land. No such interest has been received and the land is now available for disposal as surplus property.
Lot 11 DP 75284 is ideally suited to further subdivision into three or four residential lots. Major services are readily available as a result of the previous development and construction of a proposed right-of-way and some minor services can be cost-shared with a neighbour who is also subdividing. The survey, engineering and construction of the subdivision of Lot 11 can be achieved at reasonable cost and with minimal effort by Council staff.
Lot 12 DP 75284 cannot currently be subdivided into more than 3 lots because of the restriction on availability of sewer connections. Further sewer capacity will not be available until a new main is installed in the adjoining Broad Oaks subdivision being undertaken by Fulton Hogan. Their development is currently proceeding from the bottom of the hill upwards and unless they decide to also develop at the top of their property (the old Coronation Hospital site) the new sewer main is unlikely to be available for 3 to 5 years. Lot 12 is part zoned Rural Hills and part Living Hills, with the rural portion being steep hillslope. It has potential for a subdivision of an estimated 16 lots when full services are available.
The Council has been a major contributor to the Huntsbury Spur development in this area, both as a landowner and financially by initially funding the subdivision. Realisation of these remaining property assets will substantially reimburse the Council for the considerable resources invested in this project over a number of years. The revenue from these sales is also included in the Property Unit's capital budget for the disposal of surplus properties in the current and following year.
There is no doubt that when the Broad Oaks development reaches the top of the hill its presence will enhance the value of the Council's adjoining block. However having consideration to the importance of realising on surplus properties to offset the Council's capital expenditure programme and the uncertainty as to Broad Oaks development which will provide the additional services for Lot 12, it is considered that this lot should be offered for sale as a whole block in an undeveloped state to test the market. If an acceptable offer is received, the property could then be sold. The Council's valuer supports this course of action.
Because the subdivision of Lot 11 can be easily and economically achieved to provide maximum return to the Council, it is considered that this subdivision be undertaken by the Council and the sections sold as soon as possible.
At the time of writing this report, there are several small residential lots being marketed by an adjoining owner who was party to the original Council development. They are being marketed in the range $115,000 to $130,000 but there is little other sales evidence in this immediate area on which to assess the Council's land holdings. A formal valuation is however being sought in order to establish minimum reserve prices.
In order that these disposals comply with the requirements of Section 230 of the Local Government Act 1974, it is necessary for the Council to adopt the necessary formal resolution. Public notification of this intention has been given.
| Recommendation: |
|
| 3. | SECTION 230 RESOLUTIONS - PROPOSED DISPOSAL OF LAND ON CORNER MADRAS AND WINTON STREETS, ST ALBANS AND CORNER WAKEFIELD AVENUE AND WIGGINS STREET, SUMNER | RR 6759 |
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Property Manager | Property Projects Officer, Steve McCarroll |
| Corporate Plan Output: Surplus Property | |
The purpose of this report is to consider a recommendation to adopt a resolution pursuant to Section 230 of the Local Government Act 1974.
SITUATION
All Council units have been notified of the proposed disposal of the two foregoing properties (which are both potentially surplus to the Council's operational requirements) with no interest being expressed in their retention.
Detailed reports on the possible disposal options which exist for the two sites will be prepared in the new year. Public notification however of the Council's intention to consider these 230 resolutions has been made and the following letter has been received in response from Mr B R Hansen in regard to the site on the corner of Wakefield Avenue and Wiggins Street.
'As advertised in the Press 1/12/97 as Lot 22 DP 14878 - Disposal of Surplus Land.
It is my view that this City Council parcel of land should remain Commercial and not to be rezoned L3 as stated in the new City Plan.
The said parcel of land should be retained for employment use, since Sumner needs such facilities.
I believe that with the RSA cellphone complex nearby it would be unwise to have intensive residential development. Who would wish to live so close to a cellphone complex?
I have spoken to several other local residents and they feel that it should be for Commercial use.'
Mr Hansen's letter deals with issues in relation to zoning and the City Plan and does not materially affect the question of disposal of this land.
At this stage in order to comply with the Local Government Act, the Council should adopt the following resolution:
| Resolution |
| 1. Pursuant to Section 230 of the Local Government Act 1974, the Council hereby resolves to dispose of the property described in the Schedule: |
| Schedule |
|
Recommendation: That the above Section 230 resolution be adopted.
4. DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY - 26 PHILPOTTS ROAD RR 6748
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Property Projects Manager | Property Projects Officer, Steve McCarroll |
| Corporate Plan Output: Surplus Property. | |
The purpose of this report is to consider a recommendation to adopt a resolution to dispose of land at 26 Philpotts Road.
HISTORY
This section was purchased in 1960 by the Christchurch Drainage Board for the laying of the Dudley Creek Diversion. A 2.1 metre diameter pipeline has since been laid within the site as per the attached plan.
Following the installation of the pipeline the property was filled and grassed. Reservations were expressed at the time by the Water Services Unit as to the extent of the excavations and the nature of the filling carried out at the time the pipeline was installed. As a result of this concern, comprehensive soils investigation tests were undertaken by consulting engineers, the conclusions of which were as follows:
It can be seen from the attached plan that despite the fact that a seven metre wide easement is required, there is sufficient area remaining for a buildable site.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The above property is a 809m2 site zoned Living 1 in the proposed City Plan. The site is vacant at present.
CURRENT SITUATION
While the site has some obvious detrimental factors associated with the pipeline and seven metre wide easement, there is sufficient space for a building platform and interest has been expressed in the site on a number of occasions over recent times.
As mentioned previously in this report, any building erected on this site is likely to require special foundations design but this will not deter prospective purchasers. The detrimental features of the site will, however, ultimately reflect the price obtained.
A current market valuation has been requested for this site. The current Government Valuation is $47,000.
The possible disposal of this property has been notified to all other Council units under the property disposal flowchart, with no interest being expressed in its retention.
SECTION 230
In order to comply with the Local Government Act, the Council should adopt the following resolution:
Resolution
1. That pursuant to Section 230 of the Local Government Act 1974 the Council hereby resolve to dispose of the property described in the schedule:
Schedule
All that land situated at 26 Philpotts Road being Lot 22 DP 14878 contained in Certificate of Title 575/7.
| Recommendation: |
|
PART B - REPORTS FOR INFORMATION
5. FUNDRAISING RR 6761
The Council's Fundraising Co-ordinator, Alex Davis, submitted a report bringing the Committee up to date on progress on fundraising for major projects. In her report, Ms Davis advised that recent applications for grants had resulted in the following allocations:
An application to the Lottery Community Facilities Committee for a grant of $400,000 towards the Centennial Pool redevelopment had resulted in a grant of $90,000.
An application to the Lottery General Committee for a further grant of $3.164 million for the WestpacTrust Centre had been declined, on the basis that the Committee felt that its July 1996 grant of $4 million for this project represented a significant contribution. An appeal was being pursued against the Board's decision not to grant any further funding, with a further application being lodged with the Board in May 1998.
Ms Davis advised that further fundraising strategies had been researched and were being drawn up for the WestpacTrust Centre, Christchurch Convention Centre, Centennial Pool redevelopment and Pioneer Pool redevelopment. Sponsorship opportunities are being quantified and other fundraising opportunities evaluated so that a realistic and systematic approach can be taken in the New Year to achieving contribution targets.
The Committee received the report and requested the Fundraising Co-ordinator to report back with further information on major grants made from lottery funds over the last 10 years, and the percentage of national lotto ticket sales made to South Island residents.
6. ITEMS RECEIVED
The Committee received the following reports:
| 6.1 | Monthly Report by Major Projects Co-ordinator on Progress on the WestpacTrust Centre Project | RR 6674 |
| 6.2 | Monthly Report by Major Projects Co-ordinator on Progress on the Christchurch Convention Centre | RR 6754 |
| 6.3 | Monthly Report by Major Projects Co-ordinator on Progress on the Centennial Pool Redevelopment Project | RR 6753 |
| 6.4 |
Report by Property Manager Listing
Properties Purchased Pursuant to Delegated Authority for
the Period to 30 September 1997 |
RR 6683 |
PART C - REPORT ON DELEGATED DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE
7. WESTPACTRUST CENTRE: BUILDING CONTRACT VARIATION FOR PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
In his monthly report on the WestpacTrust Centre, the Major Projects Co-ordinator sought approval for a $549,610 variation to the building contract for the procurement and installation of kitchen-related equipment, which had been budgeted for in the schedule of furniture, fittings and equipment for this facility.
The main contractor, C S Luney Limited, was asked to price the kitchen catering equipment from the FF&E Schedule as it was considered that the co-ordination for installation and commissioning of this equipment was best placed with the main contractor. The company was supplied with a list of recommended tenderers for the supply of equipment which was produced by the project team after expressions of interest were called. The company was also invited to offer alternatives for consideration where appropriate.
C S Luney Ltd submitted prices for the equipment as follows:
| No |
Trade Package | Budget | Proposed Acceptance | Variance |
| B1 |
Cooking Equipment | $227,200.00 | $298,075.00 | $70,875.00 |
| B2 |
Beverage Equipment | $24,500.00 | $25,185.00 | $685.00 |
| B3 |
Display Cabinets/Servery Equipment | $253,100.00 | $182,482.00 | ($70,618.00) |
| B4 | Refrigeration and Storage Equipment | $45,630.00 | $20,970.00 | ($24,660.00) |
| B5 | Scullery Equipment | $91,500.00 | $46,578.00 | ($44,922.00) |
| D3 | Laundry & Cleaning Equipment (DR/WM) | $6,000.00 | $10,372.00 | $4,372.00 |
| Change of front concession to merchandising and minor alterations | (34,052.00) | |||
| $647,930.00 | $549,610.00 | ($98,320.00) Under Budget |
The following equipment suppliers were included in C S Luney's submission:
The Major Projects Co-ordinator advised that a variation order had been issued to CS Luney Ltd for implementation of this work to avoid any potential delays. The cost of the items was budgeted expenditure and the transfer of this money from the FF&E schedule to the main building contract required a variation. As the amount of this variation ($549,610) exceeded the delegated authority of both the project team and Council officers, the Committee's endorsement was sought for this variation.
The Committee resolved to endorse the issue of a contract variation order to C S Luney Ltd valued at $549,610 for the supply, installation and commissioning of kitchen equipment.
8. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC
The Committee resolved that the draft resolution to exclude the public set out on page 21 of the agenda be adopted.
CONSIDERED THIS 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 1997
MAYOR