Report to Council of the Strategy and Resources Committee 8 December 1997

17. 12. 97

STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

8 DECEMBER 1997

A meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee
was held on Monday 8 December 1997 at 4.00 pm

PRESENT:	Councillor David Close (Chairman), The Mayor, Councillors Oscar Alpers, Carole Evans, Gordon Freeman, Pat Harrow, Ian Howell, Alister James, Garry Moore, Margaret Murray, Denis O'Rourke and Ron Wright.
	Councillor O'Rourke arrived at 5.15 pm and was present for all clauses except clauses 8.4 and 16.
	Councillor James arrived at 5.45 pm and was present for all clauses except clauses 1, 8.4 and 16.
	Councillors Evans and Freeman retired at 6.35 pm and were present for clauses 1, 8.2, 8.4 and 16.
	The Mayor retired at 6.35 pm and was present for clause 1, 2 and 16.
	Councillor Wright retired at 8.45 pm and was present for all clauses except clauses 13, 14, 15 and 22.

The Committee reports that:

PART A - MATTERS REQUIRING A COUNCIL DECISION

1. COMMUNITY REPRESENTATION ON CROWN HEALTH ENTERPRISE BOARDS

The Mayor has received the following letter from the Hon Bill English, Minister of Health:

"This week I announced that the Government will appoint two community representatives to Crown Health Enterprise boards, who will be nominated by local authorities.

I am writing to give you more information about how that process will work. My intention is to take a practical, low cost approach to this that is flexible enough to meet the needs of the different communities around the country.

I believe that the appointment of directors nominated by local authorities will give the public greater confidence that our hospitals are aware of community needs. Our public health service of the future will be about partnerships. I believe appointing community representatives to CHE boards is a further step towards achieving a partnership between the Government and the community in health.

Each local authority should advertise publicly for expressions of interest in the positions, making it clear that nominees must meet the usual requirements for appointment as a director. You should be aware that people currently elected to office will not be eligible for appointment.

Where there is more than one local authority in a CHE region, the authorities should liaise in determining the names of people to put forward. As with other CHE directors, final appointments to boards will be made by myself and the Minister of Finance, as the shareholding Ministers. I would ask that you ensure all candidates are aware of this.

Local authorities are free to choose the number of people nominated and are not expected to provide a pool of names for us to choose from unless they wish. CVs of people nominated by local authorities should be forwarded to the Crown Company Monitoring Advisory Unit (CCMAU) for inclusion in the candidate appointment process.

There is, however, no obligation on local authorities to nominate community representatives. If nominations are not received, no appointments will be made.

Once appointed, directors nominated by local authorities will take a full role in the board's activities. They will have the same role, responsibilities and accountabilities as other directors, and will have no additional responsibilities regarding their community role than the other directors. Appointments are made in terms of the Companies Act 1993 and are generally made for two terms, each of three years. A position description for board directors is tabled.

I expect to be able to start making the community appointments by the middle of next year. Some may be able to be completed more quickly where there are existing board vacancies and where nominations are received quickly. At present each board has between five and eight directors and I do not envisage boards being bigger than seven or eight directors in most cases.

These appointments will not, of course, diminish the requirement on the Transitional Health Authority and its permanent successor to consult with communities regarding health services. Under the Health and Disability Services Act 1993 the Transitional Health Authority is the body responsible for ensuring that community values and concerns are reflected in the contracts for health services purchased.

It is also my intention to encourage CHEs to set up community stakeholder groups, which have already been successfully established in some areas. These are groups of 30 to 40 people representing a wide range of community organisations who are regularly briefed in detail by the CHE on its activities. While not involved in the board's decision-making processes, members of the stakeholder group have a much more detailed understanding of what is being done by the CHE and can communicate that through their own networks."

In considering the above proposal, reservations were expressed by several members about the concept, on the grounds that conflicts of interest could arise between the directorship role and the community representation role of the new appointees. The Committee considered that the best way of overcoming this difficulty would be for the majority of the members of CHEs, including the community representatives, to be directly elected.

The Committee also considered that if the Council decides to respond to the Minister's request and nominate two representatives to serve on the two Canterbury CHEs then the nominees should be selected in consultation with other Canterbury local authorities to ensure only the required number of representatives are nominated.

The Committee also endorsed a suggestion by Councillor Alpers that the Council recommend to the Minister that he give consideration to creating a "community share" in CHEs, along the lines of the so called golden share the Government holds in Telecom. The Committee requested that a report be prepared for the Council's consideration on the feasibility of a community share to be held by the community possibly through local authorities, with the right to appoint some directors to CHE Boards.

Recommendation:

That the Minister of Health be advised that this Council would prefer to see the majority of the members of Crown Health Enterprise Boards to be elected and to suggest that there is an opportunity for this to occur at the 1998 local body elections.
That the letter to the Minister also highlight the dilemma in which the community representatives will be placed as a result of their conflicting roles.
That the Council liaise with other Canterbury local authorities on this issue.

HERITAGE BUILDINGS - WARNERS HOTEL CATHEDRAL SQUARE

RR 6758

Officer responsible	Author
Manager Environmental Policy and Planning Unit	Gilbert Van Schaijik and Neil Carrie
Corporate Plan Output: Heritage Building Retention

The purpose of this report is to seek some guidance from the Council to the proposition of a substantial financial contribution to the preservation and retention of the facades of the historic buildings in the square being Warners Hotel, 50 Cathedral Square and Star Times Building, 134 Gloucester Street and Building 56, Cathedral Square.

Two officers are reporting on this issue, the first report is from Gilbert Van Schaijik and the second is from Neil Carrie, Senior Planner, City Design and Heritage.

The Property Projects Manager reported:

SITUATION

Council staff have been in negotiation with the owners representative of these properties, Mr Angus MacFarlane, for some time now with a view to coming to an agreement for the retention of these listed historic buildings in Cathedral Square. A point has been reached where a concept for the retention of the facades only has been developed and costed, which needs some consideration by the Council before further work is undertaken. Mr MacFarlane had made application for demolition of the buildings which was subject to a resource consent hearing. This hearing has been deferred pending discussions on the contribution the Council may be expected to make for the retention of the facades. The position has now been reached where a decision is required so that Mr MacFarlane can proceed either with the hearing or defer the hearing in the knowledge that the facades will be retained at the cost of the Christchurch City Council.

COST OF DEMOLITION

An independent report was commissioned by the Council from the engineering consultancy Powell Fenwick Limited (Barry Ramsay) which detailed the engineering required for the retention of the facade. This engineering detail was then costed by Ryder Hunt in order for us to consider this matter in a financial context. Presently the owner has no plans for a development of the site and therefore stand alone support was the methodology used. The breakdown of costs are as follows:

Warners Hotel Facade	$1,040,000
56 Cathedral Square	$340,000
Star Times Building	$450,000
	------------
Total	$1,830,000

In addition to this physical construction cost, Mr MacFarlane has contended that there is a detrimental effect due to the facade retention on the potential development opportunity that would be achievable from the site. He is seeking compensation from the Council of this amount in addition to the $1,830,000. At the time of drafting this report his valuation evidence was not yet available. However, it is anticipated it would be in the vicinity of $1.5 million. The total cost of facade retention, including this opportunity cost is therefore in the vicinity of $3.2 million.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The Council has already indicated its intention to preserve the Coachman Inn and is presently working on resolving this issue which could very well lead to the Council's purchase of this building for a sum in the vicinity of $1 million. Mr MacFarlane is property adjoins the Coachman and he has expressed an interest in the purchase of the Coachman Inn for inclusion in his land for a comprehensive redevelopment. It is not Mr McFarlane's immediate intention, however, to retain the Coachman Inn at this stage. However, there could be some room to negotiate facade retention at the same time if the Council was to take an interest in the retention of Mr McFarlane's buildings.

A WAY FORWARD

Recently Mr MacFarlane has made an application to the High Court to have his resource consent application for demolition of these buildings heard. Mr MacFarlane, through his solicitors, has sought a hearing date for the matter to be finalised and the Council must proceed with a hearing on the matter. Logically a decision is required from the Council to either defend this matter on historic grounds or not stand in the way of the resource consent process for the demolition consent. Should the Council decide to defend the resource consent matter then it is appropriate and expected that compensation would be payable to the property owner in order to compensate him for the costs to retain the historic features of these buildings.

FUTURE SCENARIOS

Mr MacFarlane has confirmed that he has no firm development proposals for the sites. A concept development proposal has been sighted by staff and could possibly be initiated. However, it is very early days in this regard and no detailed plans or costings have been developed. Equally, Mr MacFarlane has no immediate plans for demolition of the buildings but merely wishes to preserve his options in this regard should a suitable development plan come to pass. Without this right of demolition or clarity in this matter Mr MacFarlane is unable to proceed with certainty with any development plans for the area. This fact has resulted in this area of the Square looking as dilapidated as it currently does and is not assisting with Council's objectives for enhancing the inner city.

SUMMARY

The Council has undertaken research into the costs for facade retention alone. Construction costs alone are estimated at approximately $1.8 million, additional to that is an anticipated lost opportunity cost assessed by the property owner at $1.5 million, indicating a total expected compensation of $3.2 million. The owner has commenced legal proceedings in order to have the matter heard in accordance with the Resource Management Act. The issue will therefore need to be considered through that process without delay. In order to proceed logically with this matter to a conclusion Council are being asked to consider in earnest whether they will contribute this significant amount of money to the retention of the facades of these buildings.

The Senior Planner reported:

INTRODUCTION

Consideration of the retention of the facades of the Group 2 heritage Warners Hotel and the Lyttelton Times buildings in Cathedral Square and the Star building in Gloucester Street, should be made with regard to the importance of the heritage of Christchurch and Cathedral Square, the individual heritage, architectural and streetscape values of the facades in their contribution to the character and identity of the central city and the opportunity to promote commercial, retail and inner city residential activities in this area.

These concerns must be addressed in relation to the likely commitment and costs which the Council must consider with the facade retention proposals

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

Together the former Star Building (Gloucester Street), the Lyttelton Times Building, (Cathedral Square) and Warner's (Cathedral Square), mark significant economic and social change in the history of Christchurch. In contrast with last two decades of the nineteenth century, the first decade of the twentieth saw significant economic growth.

The 'heritage buildings' on the north eastern corner of the Square - the former Lyttelton Times (1902-3), the former Savoy Theatre (1917- dem. 1996-7), Warner's Hotel (1897, 1900-3, 1910), the Press Company Offices (1909) and the former Government Buildings (1911-3) are in many ways the architectural expression of economic growth and optimism. The buildings also stand as the last significant group which represent the character of the commercial enterprises and other activities which were once prominent in the Square - hotels, cinemas, governmental offices and the printing and publishing trade.

Equally, these buildings are notable examples of the work of many of Christchurch's early and most talented architects - Collins and Harman, the Luttrell Brothers and J C Maddison. Each building is, in its own way, a fine example of the architecture of the late Victorian and Edwardian periods and helps defines the character of the north-eastern corner of the Square. Together they form the last significant precinct of late Victorian and Edwardian commercial and public buildings, a precinct which is unrivalled for its streetscape qualities anywhere in New Zealand.

Detailed heritage descriptions of the individual buildings are tabled with historic photographs.

CATHEDRAL SQUARE STREETSCAPE

Cathedral Square is the focus of not only the centre of the city, but also of the distinctive heritage of Christchurch. The Square, in addition to the Cathedral, Godley Statue and the War Memorial, has two significant heritage precincts remaining. These are the Central Post Office and the Regent and Avon buildings, and the Lyttelton Times, Warners, the Press Building and the Government Buildings.

The significance of these heritage building precincts and their cumulative impact on the identity of the Square can be seen clearly by comparison with the Servicke Jones building which, although also a Group 2 heritage building, remains in an isolated position, contributing less to the heritage character of the Square.

The retention of the continuity of heritage streetscapes is clearly an important objective if the character of the Square is not to be substantially compromised. The demolition and replacement of the United Service Hotel with the new ANZ Bank demonstrates that the loss of heritage cannot be compensated for by new development, and also the extent of the loss of a vital part of the CPO precinct when two heritage buildings were removed.

It can be difficult to appreciate the importance and contribution that heritage buildings can make in terms of streetscape when our perception of the buildings is coloured by their present poor condition. Imagination is needed to see the opportunity that these facades actually present in terms of both use and visual character when these buildings are returned to their original state. This is true of the Government Buildings for example. The visual impact of the Regent building can also be seen in a different light with repainting in sympathetic colours, even although this building has been kept in a good state of repair.

Warners facades, already truncated by the Savoy site, can be said to be of a modest architectural character. This was nevertheless typical of many of Maddison's hotel designs. However, as seen in original photographs, it is the simple, formal elegance of these facades with the fine decorative cast iron entry canopy which so appropriately completes the heritage precinct. It achieves this by providing a visually understated continuity of facades between the strong architectural forms and details of the Lyttelton Times Building and the Press and Government buildings which frame the eastern entry to the Square. Imagine if you can, the effect on the heritage precinct by the replacement of this finely composed and scaled Warners building with any of the contemporary buildings and architectural styles in the Square. In general, it is my opinion that the Square has been poorly served by inappropriate contemporary additions to its streetscape and character.

The Lyttelton Times building facade was, even for its relatively small size, a brilliantly conceived Colonial interpretation of the Chicago skyscraper style. For all its considerable strength of visual character and architectural bravura, the small frontage has allowed the building to be perceived as both pedestrian friendly and as a strong presence in this corner of the Square.

GLOUCESTER STREET STREETSCAPE

The Star building completes the western edge of the important Gloucester Street heritage precinct which includes the Coachman Inn, the early and later Theatre Royal and New Regent Street.

The Star four storey building is the most architecturally significant example of a brick Commercial Classical building style in Christchurch. Apart from the ground floor, the facade is remarkably intact. The facade, with its strong stone and brick detailing and modelling, articulation of the fenestration, cornices and balcony is critical in defining the character and streetscape value of this section of Gloucester Street. This vigorous character combined with the size of the building, provides a singular landmark presence matched by few other heritage buildings in central Christchurch.

CATHEDRAL SQUARE RE-DEVELOPMENT

The success of the proposed development of Cathedral Square has been recognised as being dependent to a substantial degree on pedestrian activity around the periphery of the Square. The north-east sector of the Square is at present, the least attractive and is perceived as the least safe of any area of the Square. Re-development of this block, including Warners, Savoy and the Lyttelton Times/Star buildings could be a critical contributor to the successful re-development of the Square.

The option of facade retention, without a development scenario for the site would therefore seem to make no sense either as a city planning objective or as a financial proposition. The Council has a significant financial stake in the success of the new Square. This must extend to promotion of commercial activities on the periphery.

SITE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Discussions with Mr MacFarlane has included consideration of the options of commercial development for the site. Prior to the investigation of the possible costs of facade retention, an outline plan for the whole of the site, including the Coachman, was prepared by a consultant for Mr MacFarlane.

FACADE RETENTION WITH NO DEVELOPMENT - OPTION 1

This retention option was considered by Powell Fenwick as detailed in Gilbert Van Schaijik's report, on the basis that no specific development scheme existed. The proposal therefore solely considered the retention of the facades as free-standing structural elements. Multiple concrete frames at approximately three metres spacing and four metres in depth were to be constructed along the facades, complete with new foundations. See tabled drawings.

No provision was considered for these frames to function as part of a new structure. No cognisance was given of the unacceptable constraint that these frames would have on the planning of any new development.

I consider that the structural solution proposed and the extraordinarily high costs for the construction of largely redundant, dysfunctional structural frames is an unrealistic and untenable solution to facade retention and future redevelopment of the site.

FACADE RETENTION WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT - OPTION 2

At a meeting with the Mayor, Councillor Wright, Mr Chapman (Duncan Cotterill) and Council staff on 3 December 1997, Mr MacFarlane gave an undertaking that, even if he had a consent for demolition of the heritage properties, he would not do so without a development option in place. This could be with or without facade retention.

It seems more reasonable therefore, to consider the costs of facade retention as part of a proposed new development where there would be no high costs for a substantial, redundant and dysfunctional structure and the actual additional costs of facade retention could be realistically considered.

I therefore commissioned City Design to consider the engineering, construction and cost options in outline terms for facade retention in a new development. The structural solution for the facades was agreed to be by a concrete skin on the interior of each facade so as not to limit flexible internal planning. City Design has extensive experience in the engineering and costing of this type of structural solution for heritage facades. In addition they consulted a building contractor for advice on the methods of retention, demolition and reconstruction constraints and costs on this site.

ADDITIONAL COSTS - FACADE RETENTION

Option 1 - Facades only	$1,830,000
(Warners, Lyttelton Times, Star)

Option 2 - Facades with New Development
City Design cost estimate as per tabled summary	$900,000
(Less cost of new facade for a new development)	$450,000
Total additional cost of facade retention	$450,000
(all costs are exclusive of maintenance, professional fees, credit for salvage, GST and escalation)

COMPENSATION

The possible costs for facade retention and loss of development potential have been identified to the extent that has been detailed above. To the best of my knowledge there have been no negotiations on the types and magnitude of compensation that Mr MacFarlane might seek. The Council has contributed approximately $50,000 for consultant costs for the present investigations.

With the potential strategic, planning, financial and heritage objectives of the Council in this area, and the opportunity to maximise the benefits for possible expenditure, it would appear that there is a potential for the Council to have a more direct involvement in the development than simply a large cost sum for compensation. Additional opportunities for a strategic involvement could include consideration of the Coachman site where the Council already has an interest. Mr MacFarlane has said that the development of the site would benefit from the addition of the Coachman and adjoining Press site to the west of Press Lane.

The issue of compensation/development needs to be assessed both as to what form the Council's interest might take and also the time scale to which a commitment by Council might reasonably be extended if a new development with facade retention was seen as the most viable option for Council objectives for the Square and the Central City.

SUMMARY

The redevelopment of the Warners, Savoy, Lyttelton Times, Star and Coachman site are of strategic importance to the central city.

The heritage facades of these buildings are of special significance for the Cathedral Square and Gloucester Street heritage precincts.

The cost and functionality of a freestanding structural solution to facade retention, independent of any other site development is difficult to justify at $1.83m.

But the redevelopment of the site incorporating facade retention within a new structure could best meet Council planning and heritage objectives at an achievable additional cost for facade retention of $450,000.

The range of additional costs with these options could be from $1.95m to $3.3m if a development cost of $1.5m is included.

A Council involvement in the overall development objectives and implementation of redevelopment could maximise the benefits to the Council of these strategic sites.

A definite commitment by the Council at this time is necessary to provide a direction to the owner and could avoid the necessity for a public Resource Consent Hearing for demolition

The Chairman commented:

The sum of $3.2m for facade retention is difficult to justify as the Council's investment would be 'lost', except insofar as the city would own a view. If the Council is to invest large sums in the retention of heritage buildings, it is preferable that more than the facade be retained, as with the Government Buildings, and that the Council have some equity in the retained building if a seven figure sum is required as an inducement.

Recommendation:

That consideration be given to more economic forms of facade retention, or to the Council contributing equity to the project.
That the Council acknowledge:
(a) That the facades of all three buildings are worthy of preservation and would seek to do so if that is practical.
(b) That development of the site as soon as practicable is desirable.
That a sub-committee work with the owner(s) and report on possible development options including, for example, apartments, and/or bus terminal possibilities and report to the Council before the resource consent hearing in February.
That the sub-committee consist of the Mayor and the Chairmen of the Community Services, Central City, Environmental, Projects and Property and City Services Committees.
That the Council:
(a) As a matter of principle take a holistic view of the north-east block of Cathedral Square.
(b) Define its objectives for conservation of historic buildings, for a long term bus terminal, for improved pedestrian amenity and for the tram and Cathedral Junction development, and for this purpose establish a sub-committee to consult all directly and indirectly interested parties and to facilitate a set of complementary decisions by the end of June 1999.
That a submission be made to the appropriate Minister urging the Government to make a contribution towards the retention of Category 1 and 2 heritage buildings.
That Local Government New Zealand be asked to include heritage buildings as a topic for discussion at the workshop sessions at the 1998 Local Government Conference.

REVIEW OF FIREARMS CONTROL - COUNCIL SUBMISSIONS

RR 6740

Officer responsible	Author
Director of Policy	Peter Mitchell
Corporate Plan Output: Policy Advice to Strategy and Resources Committee

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to consider the submissions made by the Council to the review of firearms control in New Zealand carried out by Sir Thomas Thorpe.

The Council submissions were heard in January 1997 and Sir Thomas has submitted his report to the Minister of Police in July this year. This report before the Committee will consider how the Council submissions were dealt with by Sir Thomas in his review.

2. COUNCIL SUBMISSIONS REFERRED TO IN THE REVIEW REPORT

The Council submitted that the sale, ownership and possession of automatic and semi-automatics be banned and that there be an amnesty and buy-back scheme for all such firearms.

This submission has, in relation to military style semi-automatics, been taken up in the report and is one of the recommendations Sir Thomas has made to the Minister of Police.

He has also recommended that there be an exemption for those engaged in animal pest control where no other firearm would provide effective control for that business and that a technical committee be formed to settle the listed makes and models of firearms within the military semi-style semi-automatics class.

He has also recommended that the duration of the buy-back of these types of weapons be for six months, that compensation be paid at market value for banned firearms and accessories which can only be used with banned firearms, that compensation be paid to firearms dealers for their proven loss of profits and that a procedure be established for settling disputes regarding compensation.

It is estimated in the report that it would cost approximately $21M to achieve these objectives.
The Council submitted that penalty for breaches of the Arms Act 1982 be reviewed and greatly increased to ensure that they become a real deterrent to the irresponsible, careless or illegal possession, use or storage of firearms.

In his report Sir Thomas has recommended that there be enacted a new Firearms Act to implement the recommendations he has made.

He considers that the penalties in the current Arms Act for the carrying or possession of a firearm(s) (save for lawful, proper and insufficient purpose) of up to four years imprisonment and a fine not exceeding $5,000.00 had given the Courts adequate power to impose penalties appropriate to the nature of the offending and does not propose any general increase above current levels.

He notes that two areas which require attention where there is no penalty at all, short of revocation of the licence, is for breach of conditions of security and firearm licences and the need to introduce new offences for breach of obligations arising from his recommended combined licensing/registration system.

Particularly in respect of the second area he acknowledges that significant penalties must be provided and has recommended accordingly.
The Council submitted that Police establish secure facilities in urban areas where firearm owners who choose to do so would be able to store their firearms when they are not required.

In his report Sir Thomas considers that this arrangement deserves consideration while acknowledging that it would have limitations in rural areas.

He notes that armouries would need to be built to a very high standard of security and if containing substantial numbers of firearms would need to be staffed 24 hours a day. He believes that consideration be given to the Police providing firearm storage facilities for a moderate fee and that there be prototype armouries established in two metropolitan centres for a trial period of up to two years.

Such a trial would then indicate whether they should be made more widely available.
The Council submitted that firearms control legislation require the annual re-licensing of both all firearms and all firearm owners.

Sir Thomas has recommended that there be a combined licensing of owners and registration of firearms but that it be based upon a three year firearms specific licence with this new system to be introduced over three years commencing on 1 July 1999.
The Council submitted that at the time of licensing and re-licensing the licensees be required to show that they are fit and proper persons to hold a licence and that they have good reason for owning the firearms registered in their name. The Council had also submitted that the term "fit and proper persons" be clearly defined to exclude persons convicted of violent offences, criminal offences involving firearms and persons where there is reasonable cause to believe that having a firearm poses a threat to themselves or others.

The review noted that the current police arms manual stipulates that a person is not "fit and proper" if persons have convictions for violet crimes or criminal offences involving firearms. Sir Thomas sees benefit in having those criteria and other criteria presently in the police manual being set out in statutory form.

He also notes that if they are to be included in the statute, representatives of the police, psychiatrists, firearms users and family violence workers should have some input.

3. THE SUBMISSIONS NOT ADDRESSED IN THE REPORT

The following Council submissions to Sir Thomas have not been specifically referred to in the report by recommendation or otherwise.

Those recommendations are:

That the Government adopt in firearms control the same precautionary principle that operates in environmental health legislation;
That the ownership and possession of pistols be banned except for legitimate target shooting pistols;
That owners who choose the option to use police secure facilities or public armories be given a discount on their annual owners and firearms licence fees;
That the minimum age for possession of a licence be 18 years;
That the full cost of managing firearm ownership be met by registration fees;
That police be given the power in attending domestic violence incidents to remove any firearms from the house immediately.

At the present time the report is being considered by the Government and if the Government adopts the recommendations in the report to enact a new Firearms Act then the Council will have the opportunity to further address this issue of firearms control when submissions are called for on a Firearms Bill.

Recommendation:

That the Council write to the Minister of Police and to the Christchurch police commander affirming the Council's support for a trial of urban armouries and indicating the Council's willingness to see one of the trial sites being Christchurch.
That the Minister of Police be advised that the Council generally supports the report's recommendations.
That the Minister of Police be also advised that based on the Council's experience in other areas, annual licensing would be more effective than three yearly licensing.

REMISSION OF RATES - KOHANGA REO LANGUAGE NESTS

RR 6360

Officer responsible	Author
Funds and Planning Manager	Wayne Hann
Corporate Plan Output: Volume I Page 5.2.text.6

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authority to remit rates in respect of three Kohanga Reo Language Nests under the provisions of Section 179 of the Rating Powers Act 1988.

Applications have been received from three Kohanga Reo for remission of rates on properties used and occupied for the purposes of learning institutions and language nests under the umbrella of the national Te Kohanga Incorporated. These properties are as follows: Te Reo Tuatahi Kohanga Reo, 24 Ventnor Crescent; Te Kohanga Reo O Te Rangimarie Whanau Incorporated, 242 Bower Avenue; and Te Kohanga Reo Trust Incorporated, 4 Gregory Avenue. While each Kohanga Reo is under the umbrella of the national organisation, they are however autonomous and responsible for their own funding. They cater for children between the ages of 0 to 6 years with the principal object being to teach the Maori language in the medium of the same. This service is also offered to their parent/parents, families, friends and the wider community.

They are not a creche, kindergarten or a pre-school and therefore are not considered to be educational institutions as defined in the Rating Powers Act and do not therefore qualify for non-rateable status.

They do however qualify for remission of rates under the provisions of Clause (n) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Act which provides that a local authority may remit rates on land owned or occupied by or in trust for any society or association of persons, whether incorporated or not, whose object or principal object Ö is to promote generally the arts or any purpose of recreation, health, education, or instruction for the benefit of residents or any group or groups of residents of the district.

Details of the various organisations are as follows:

Te Reo Tuatahi Kohanga Reo, 24 Ventnor Crescent

Government Valuation 1 September 1995:

Capital Value	$95,000
Land Value	$32,000
Value of Improvements	$63,000
1997/98 Rates	$619.35

Te Kohanga Reo O Te Rangimarie Whanau Incorporated, 242 Bower Avenue

Government Valuation 1 September 1995:

Capital Value	$113,000
Land Value	$43,000
Value of Improvements	$70,000
1997/98 Rates	$717.75

Te Kohanga Reo Trust Incorporated, 4 Gregory Avenue

Government Valuation 1 September 1995:

Capital Value	$125,000
Land Value	$54,000
Value of Improvements	$71,000
1997/98 Rates	$783.35

This matter was originally considered by this Committee at its November meeting but was referred back for additional information relating to the use of the subject properties for possible residential purposes and also for a summary of other rates remissions granted by the Council under Section 179 of the Rating Powers Act.

Verbal assurances have been given by representatives of the various Kohanga Reo to the effect that no residential activity takes place and that the premises, respectively, are used only as language nests as detailed further in this report.

Schedules detailing rate remissions at present granted by the Council were submitted to the Committee for the four categories of remission:

Category 4.2.1 (Full discretionary remission)
Category 4.2.2 (50% mandatory/50% discretionary remission)
Category 4.2.3 (50% mandatory)
Category 4.2.4 (33¹/₃% or 50% discretionary remission)

1. Category 4.2.1

Included in this category are Plunket rooms, Scout dens, and community halls (other than those under the direct control of the Council) plus other sundry properties where the Council has exercised its discretion and remitted the whole of the rates.

2. Category 4.2.2

Included in this category are a number of properties which qualify for a 50% mandatory remission of rates and where the Council has exercised its discretion as to the balance of rates payable. In a number of cases the Council has granted remission subject to the payment of certain separate rates.

3. Category 4.2.3

Properties included under this category are predominantly of a sporting nature and which therefore qualify for a 50% mandatory remission. Included also are properties owned by private schools, over and above the mandatory Non-rateable part (Non-rateable to a maximum of 1.62 ha), being land used as playing fields.

4. Category 4.2.4

This group comprises those properties where the Council has exercised its discretion variously as to a one-third or 50% remission. They cover a fair cross section of organisations active within Christchurch.

Under each category a figure is given representing the quantum of remission for the 1997/98 rating year. While this figure is indicative, it is an estimate only.

Recommendation:

That, in recognition of the educational nature of the various organisations detailed, a 50 per cent remission of rates be granted under the provisions of Section 179 of the Rating Powers Act 1988, with effect from 1 July 1997.

FURTHER REPORT ON CLEAN AIR INCENTIVES PROGRAMME

RR 6724

Officer responsible	Author
Environmental Policy & Planning Manager	Terence Moody, Principal Environmental Health Officer
Corporate Plan Output: Environmental Health Policy Vol II P.7.2.Text.12

The purpose of this report is to provide additional information on a proposed programme by which the Christchurch City Council will make available financial incentives to encourage city residents to convert to non-polluting forms of heating. The report has been prepared in conjunction with the Accounting Services Manager, the Inventory Manager, the Energy Manager, and the Senior Purchasing Officer.

INTRODUCTION

The Strategy and Resources Committee on 15 September 1997 adopted the following recommendations.

1. That the Council adopt the following, subject to the Legal Services Manager confirming that the Council has the power to spend money for the purpose, as the policy for the incentives programme

(a) The incentives be granted for changing to non-polluting forms of home heating to householders and home owners closing off or removing open fireplaces.

(b) These incentives be provided in conjunction with any energy efficiency measures as provided for from any Energy Saver Fund.

(c) That the Council pursue this programme irrespective of whether any proposed regulatory measures are or are not introduced by the Canterbury Regional Council under the Resource Management Act.

(d) That discussions be continued with the Regional Council; energy supply authorities; and relevant industry groups to develop the specific details of the incentives scheme for reporting back to the November meeting of the Council.

2. That consideration also be given to introducing a programme of incentives for the replacement of non-complying wood and coal burners.

3. That the specific details of the incentives scheme be considered at a special joint meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee and Environmental Committee to be held immediately prior to the 17 November meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee.

4. That the Council invite Housing New Zealand to meet to discuss a plan to implement energy efficiency measures (such as insulation) in all their housing stock in Christchurch.

At the special joint meeting held on 17 November a draft preliminary programme design prepared by experienced energy consultants was presented.

The consultants suggested the following as the basis for the programme.

(a) The programme will be available to Christchurch City residents who have open fires and coal burners. Housing New Zealand or other government agencies which own houses would not be eligible. Participating residents will be required to permanently seal the open fire or remove the burner. A permanent seal will involve the complete air tight seal of the open fire place with suitable materials, such as: bricks and mortar; sealed frame with wood/metal panel; or eligible heater (i.e. heater designed as a fireplace insert). The aim is to ensure that fireplaces can not be easily made re-operatable.

(b) Eligible technologies for the replacement of open fires and coal burners would be:

flued gas heaters
fixed electric heaters with thermostatic controls
flued diesel heater
complying wood fired heater (that meets the CRC target for year 2000 compliance)
electric heat pumps

(c) Eligible technologies for improving home energy efficiency would be:

ceiling insulation (no existing insulation present)
under floor insulation
weather strip

(d) Only those residents that are replacing their open fires or coal burners would be eligible for the home energy efficiency incentives.

On the basis of their preliminary analysis the consultants suggest the residents that participate in the clean air programme be offered a grant of $500 for the conversion of open fireplaces or coal burners to eligible heating appliances, including heat pumps, but excluding fixed electric heaters. For the latter category they consider a grant of $100 is more applicable.

In the case of the home energy efficiency measures they suggest an incentive of 50% of the installed cost of measures that meet the requirements of the Energy Saver Fund would be sufficiently attractive to encourage participation. The pay back period for those using day rate electricity would be less than two years.

The programme application process will be developed to ensure it is easy for householders to understand and participate and include sufficient quality control to ensure funds are being utilised efficiently. Staffing requirements for the programme have been estimated as approximately 1000 hours in application processing, approval and data entry/checking plus 500 to 1000 hours answering telephone enquiries, marketing the programme and reporting on programme progress. This suggests a need for a full time person for the administration and marketing of the programme.

The joint meeting recommended the adoption of the following.

1. That the programme, in general, follow the principles set out in the report, and in particular:

(i) That the programme be available to residents with regularly used open fires and coal burners.

(ii) That eligible replacements be flued gas heaters, fixed electric heaters, flued diesel heaters and electric heat pumps.

(iii) That eligible energy efficiency improvements be ceiling insulation, underfloor insulation and weather stripping (draught stopping).

(iv) That incentives be by way of cash grants or rebates, not by loans.

(v) That grants for energy efficiency improvements be available only to applicants also changing to clean air heating methods.

2. That the City Manager be requested to designate an officer to oversee the programme.

3. That grants for the installation of fixed electric heaters be set at not less than 80% of the cost to a maximum of $300.

4. That a further report be prepared for the December meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee on the following issues:

(i) Whether complying log burners should be considered as an eligible replacement and the appropriate conditions.

(ii) The most appropriate body, whether a community trust or registered energy appliance retailers, for making payment of grants to participants.

(iii) The most appropriate body, whether the City Council, a community trust or registered appliance retailers, to administer the programme.

(iv) The procedures for registration of contractors and calling of tenders for supply and installation of a range of standard heating appliances and insulation.

(v) The role of contractors in verifying installation of heating appliances and insulation in accordance with the required standards.

(vi) The method of paying the rebate, whether to the contractor or the resident.

(vii) Estimates of tender prices for the supply and installation of heating appliances and insulation.

(viii) Ways and means of minimising publicity costs by making use of existing publications such as "City Scene" and Southpower's "Energy News".

(ix) On incentives in regard to dwellings with more than one fireplace.

(x) Adequacy of incentives for low income groups and means of assistance.

5. That the legal opinion be received.

DISCUSSION

At the time of writing the Council had not considered the above recommendations so this report is written as if they were confirmed. It should also be noted that it has not been possible for the consultant to undertake the further analysis of data and undertake modeling of the options in the appropriate cases. The following comments, however, are made on each of the matters raised for this further report.

4(i) Whether complying log burners should be considered as an eligible replacement and the appropriate conditions.

The Regional Council has yet to finalise the options for the preparation of a Draft Air Plan [this will occur at its meeting on 5 December] but the Resource Planning Committee has recommended a number of matters including the acceptance of burners complying with the particulate emission criteria of 1.5 g/kg of fuel burnt for use in the Christchurch Clean Air Zone. In the question above the term is used of log burners but it is presumed that what was meant was "wood" burners as some wood pellet fired appliances meeting such criteria are becoming available.

The Regional Council Air Plan will include as permitted heating appliances those meeting such criteria as will reduce the particulate loading of the air. The number of such appliances which can operate before the ambient air quality guideline for PM₁₀ is exceeded has been estimated by Regional Council officers. A number of assumptions have been used in arriving at the possible maximum numbers that would be able to be used before the guideline was breached. These assumptions include the contributions made to ambient PM₁₀ levels by both industry and transport. The maximum numbers of woodburners range from 27000 in 2007, comprising 14000 older burners and 13000 that met the 1.5 criterion, if industry and transport contributions increase at predicted rates with no additional management measures, to 45000 in 2015 with contributions from industry and transport maintained at 1997 levels and all older burners [over 1.5 g/kg] phased out.

The Regional Council officers point out that these figures are based on meeting the air quality guideline of 50 micrograms per cubic metre and if this was lowered in the future different numbers would be applicable. They consider that a conservative approach is appropriate, particularly in regard to new homes installing such fuel burning equipment but accept that in the case of older, larger homes these might be the most realistic option to replace open fireplaces.

In the context of the incentives scheme even if the total money available over the five years from the Council was used to replace open fireplaces with complying wood burners only an additional 4800 could be installed.

If the incentives were only available for the 1.5 g/kg burners this would mean that persons changing to this option would be unlikely to choose the still currently approved 3g/kg burners. These would replace, in general, open fireplaces which are a major source of the winter air pollution in Christchurch and very energy inefficient.

This Council should probably not attempt to influence the choice of complying heating appliance, whether it uses electricity, gas, liquid or solid fuel provided it complies with the criteria contained in any Air Plan under the Resource Management Act 1991. The removal of this choice may reduce the number of participants in the incentives scheme. It is recommended that this Council's incentives include grants for the installation of wood burners complying with the 1.5 g/kg criteria of the Canterbury Regional Council.

4(ii) The most appropriate body, whether a community trust or registered energy appliance retailers, for making payment of grants to participants.

and

4(iii) The most appropriate body, whether the City Council, a community trust or registered appliance retailers, to administer the programme.

It is intended to administer the Clean Air Incentives funds of the City Council and the Energy Efficiency funds from EECA, as two parts of the same incentives programme, from a single administrative body. This would allow to reduce administration and publicity costs and maximise the overall effectiveness and attractiveness of the programme.

EECA expressed their ability and willingness to administer the Clean Air Incentives funds. This, if legally possible, would be the most appropriate option as:

(a) EECA is an independent agency experienced in the implementation of similar programmes;

(b) The programme reliability would increase with EECA's direct involvement, and subsequently the Council's chances to be successful in its bid for Energy Saver Fund would increase;

The option of setting up a community trust seems less effective as this would incur additional legal and administration costs.

The option of registered appliance retailers administering the programme would be less effective as in this case it would not be possible to administer both the Clean Air Incentives and Energy Efficiency funds from a single body. EECA expressed their objection to the money from their Energy Saver Fund being administered by appliance retailers.

The role of the registered appliance retailers would, however, be considerable in the process. It is expected that they will be the contact point for householders wishing to take advantage of both the clean air incentives and home energy efficiency schemes. The process would be that the retailers would hold details of the criteria of the incentives scheme, the acceptable fuel burning appliances permitted, the insulation requirements to be met, and the various approvals necessary for compliance. The householder would approach the retailer, be provided with information of the choices available, and advice on the most appropriate option for their purpose, and if satisfied would arrange for the installation to be undertaken. Once the work had been done and certified the retailer would then make the application for the payment of the appropriate incentive(s).

It is recommended that this option be further developed through discussions with EECA.

4(iv) The procedures for registration of contractors and calling of tenders for supply and installation of a range of standard heating appliances and insulation.

The procedures should be as follows:

Advertise in the local press for registration of interest for the supply and installation of qualifying equipment and home insulation products. Consisting of flued gas heaters, fixed electric heaters with thermostatic controls, flued diesel heater, complying wood fired heaters (that meets the CRC target for year 2000 compliance), electric heat pumps, ceiling insulation, underfloor insulation and weather strips. Information required to be submitted with the registrations would be; the technical details of all products offered, prices and commercial terms being offered, installation costs and details of qualifications etc for the installation trades people.
Registration of suitable equipment, suppliers and installers.
Preparation of all operating guidelines and draft agreements.
Negotiations with suppliers and completion of agreement for the payment of the incentives to the supplier. These payments will only be made to the amount specified by the Council and will be made through the Council's appointed Administrator provided that all Council specified conditions have been meet and verified.
Sign agreements.
Liaise with Communications and Promotions Unit for making available details to the ratepayers.

4(v) The role of contractors in verifying installation of heating appliances and insulation in accordance with the required standards.

As a condition of getting the rebate from the administration body, the installers will be required to present a certificate of compliance, together with any required building consent. The administration body will need to make, from time to time, sample audits of the installation quantities and quality.

4(vi) The method of paying the rebate, whether to the contractor or the resident.

The incentive payment would be made to the contractor or supplier on a monthly bulk basis to reduce administration costs.

4(vii) Estimates of tender prices for the supply and installation of heating appliances and insulation.

The estimated costs of the various approved heating options were included in the report of the consultant in Table 4-1. These are fixed electric heater $500; electric heat pump $2500; flued gas heater $1200-$1800; flued diesel heater $1800; and complying wood burner $1800. These are estimates and it is difficult to determine the range as the needs of each household are obviously different based on preferences, household layout and construction, and household composition and lifestyle. Table 4-2 sets out estimated costs for home energy efficiency measures based on certain assumptions as to house size and current insulation.

4(viii) Ways and means of minimising publicity costs by making use of existing publications such as "City Scene" and Southpower's "Energy News".

These means will be taken into account in the preparation of the publicity programme as will other possible means to minimise the costs of publicity while ensuring the message gets to possible participants.

4(ix) On incentives in regard to dwellings with more than one fireplace.

The purpose of the incentives programme was, it is understood, to provide an incentive to have households relying on an open fireplace for regular use as the means of heating during the winter months in the main living area.

This would be the regularly used means of household heating. It is not considered that the incentives should be applied for additional or occasional appliances, nor that more than one incentive payment should be made to a household.

4(x) Adequacy of incentives for low income groups and means of assistance.

This cannot be sufficiently addressed at present, only largely anecdotal information being available at present in regard to means of heating and the ability to pay for possible changes, but once the report on poverty and hardship in Christchurch is available from the study which has been undertaken in the Leisure and Community Services Unit this may provide further information on possible approaches. The consultant has been requested to comment on the effects on the incentives programme of specifically including a special case for somehow defined low income households.

LEGAL CONSTRAINTS

The Legal Services Manager in his opinion of the 13 November 1997 has stated:

In my opinion the Council does not, given its present statutory powers under the Local Government Act 1974, and given the position of the Canterbury Regional Council in relation to the controls that it imposes on open fires and pre-1989 wood burners, have the legal power to:

(a) Itself expend the $2.4M sum by way of grants to residents to convert to non-polluting forms of heating; or

(b) Make grants to third parties, such as the Canterbury Development Corporation or other community groups, to provide finance to residents.

The reasoning behind this opinion is briefly that as the use of open fireplaces and pre-1989 wood burners, or other presently non approved fuel burning equipment under the Transitional Regional Plan are not prohibited in existing dwellings not forming part of the previous Clean Air Zone Orders they do not fall within the requirement of section 675(1)(a) of the Local Government Act 1974.

OTHER OPTIONS FOR PROVIDING MONEY FOR THE INCENTIVES PROGRAMME

The funding for this programme was to be provided by allocating part of the expected dividend income specifically for the project. The Accounting Services Manager is currently investigating whether payment can be made directly from a subsidiary company to EECA for this purpose, with a corresponding reduction in dividend income to the Council.

TIMETABLING THE INTRODUCTION OF THE INCENTIVES PROGRAMME

The original expectation for the introduction of the programme was for commencement in February 1998. The consultant has suggested in order to prepare documentation and to ensure the availability of funds from the Energy Saver Fund for the Home Energy Efficiency portion of the programme a start date of March 1998 may be more appropriate. However, a start in February may require final approval before the February round of meetings and it is recommended a sub-committee with power to act be appointed for such a purpose.

Recommendation:

That the scheme be implemented as set out in the above report.
That incentives be provided for the installation of wood burners complying with the emission standard of 1.5 g/kg as set by the Canterbury Regional Council and fulfilling their compliance standards.
That the Council ask the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) to take over the administration of the Clean Air Incentives programme and making payments of grants to participants.
That the Energy Manager be responsible for the overseeing of the technical aspects of the programme and the Accounting Services Manager the financial aspects.
That the Community Energy Action Group be involved in implementing the programme.
That a copy of the above report be forwarded to Housing New Zealand with the request that favourable consideration be given to early implementation of a programme of progressively replacing open fireplaces in Housing New Zealand houses.

6. CANTERBURY SHOW DAY RR 6717

Officer responsible	Author
Susan Selway	Julie Battersby
Corporate Plan Output: Advice to the Council

The purpose of this report is to seek the Council's endorsement of a recommendation proposed by the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club, Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral Association, and the Canterbury Jockey Club to redefine the observance of Canterbury Show Day.

BACKGROUND

Canterbury Anniversary Day is 16 December. However, it has been traditionally observed as Canterbury Show Day on the third Friday after Labour Day Monday. This generally means Canterbury Show Day falls in the second week of November but can sometimes fall as early as 9th or as late as 15th or 16th November. The date of Show Day celebration dictates the timing of Showtime, the Canterbury A & P Show, the racing carnival and many other major events.

The current timing of Show Day creates a clash in two years out of every seven with the timing of Melbourne Cup Week. When this occurs there is a noted reduction in interest and focus on the Canterbury racing carnival as the Melbourne Cup dominates media and television coverage. In addition, New Zealand horses racing in Melbourne are not back in the country and available for the Canterbury Jockey Club's New Zealand Cup day. There is also a noted reduction in the number of North Island visitors who may have otherwise made the decision to visit Melbourne on tour for that major international racing event.

OPPORTUNITIES

To maximise the potential tourism and economic impact of Showtime and the large number of events, festivities and activities that happen under the Showtime banner, and to continue to grow the Showtime Festival into a major national event, it will be necessary to alter the anniversary day observance. The next clash would be in the year 2000, a major celebratory year for Canterbury with the sesqui-centennial of the province, the celebration of the new millennium, and the commitment of so many organisations in the region to ensuring the maximum profile of Canterbury to New Zealand and the World.

It is the request of the above three organisations that Christchurch City Council consider the alteration of the observance of Canterbury Anniversary Day to be "the second Friday after the first Tuesday in November". This will ensure, that as the Melbourne Cup is always the first Tuesday in November, the New Zealand Trotting Cup, Canterbury Show Day and the Canterbury Jockey Club's New Zealand Cup will always be the following week.

IMPACT ON SCHOOLS

Traditionally local schools and universities have concluded their teaching year in preparation for end of year national exams at Show Weekend. Due to the introduction of the four term year the school exam period has been pushed back to commence later in November. The NZQA have informed us that the change of anniversary acknowledgment would therefore not impact on the education year.

Likewise, Canterbury University exams would be completed each year prior to the new proposed timing. At the time of writing Lincoln University could not be contacted for confirmation of their exam timing. However, traditionally Lincoln University examination period has concluded the Thursday of Show Week to allow students the opportunity to attend Show Day.

DECISION MAKING RESPONSIBILITY

The Department of Labour have determined that regional holiday observance is a matter of form and custom, meaning that if agreement can be achieved between the major groups involved, a change can be made. There is no legislation relating to the specific date of Canterbury anniversary and traditionally the decision has been left to local governments to determine the date the anniversary will be celebrated. According to legislation, a regional anniversary is "the date of the anniversary or some other day in its place."

Supporting letters have been received from the Canterbury Tourism Council and the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce.

Recommendation:

That the Christchurch City Council support in principle the alteration of the definition of Canterbury Anniversary Day from "the third Friday after Labour Day Monday" to read "the second Friday after the first Tuesday in November".
That all other local governments in the Canterbury Region be approached to seek their support to the alteration.
That all organisations in Canterbury be encouraged to continue to acknowledge Canterbury's anniversary day through the Canterbury A & P Show Day each year.
That any alteration to the definition of Canterbury Anniversary Day timing become effective for the 1999 year.

7. DRAFT POLICY ON SEEKING COMMUNITY VIEWS RR 6450

Officer responsible	Author
City Manager	Jennifer Pitcher
Corporate Plan Output: Policy Advice to Council and Committees. P4.1.1

The purpose of this report is to submit for Council approval, the draft Policy on Seeking Community Views.

Effective consultation has been identified as a priority for the Christchurch City Council. A series of six seminars were conducted between December 1996 and July 1997 with the Strategy and Resources Committee and representatives from Community Boards. The purpose of the seminars was to gain an understanding of consultation leading to the development of a draft Policy. Feedback was sought from Community Boards during the October 1997 round of meetings. Specific recommendations from the Community Boards and the Legal Services Manager have been incorporated into the draft.

Once the policy has been adopted, work will continue on finalising the guidelines and the co-ordination of practices across the Council in light of the Policy.

Recommendation:

That the Council adopt the attached Policy on Seeking Community Views.

8. REPORT FROM CHRISTCHURCH CITY HOLDINGS LIMITED RR 8734

Officer responsible	Author
Chairman of the Board, Christchurch City Holdings Limited, Alister James	Bob Lineham
Corporate Plan Output: Monitoring of Trading Enterprises Volume I Table II

The purpose of this report is to provide information to the Council on the activities of Christchurch City Holdings Limited and to seek approval for a number of issues.

1. CHRISTCHURCH CITY HOLDINGS LIMITED - ANNUAL REPORT FOR YEAR ENDED 30 JUNE 1997

Audit New Zealand have given a clear audit report on the financial statements of Christchurch City Holdings Limited for the year ended 30 June 1997. A copy of the full Annual Report incorporating the Auditors financial statements will be circulated to the Committee as soon as it is to hand.

The Annual Report has been distributed to Councils and will be widely distributed to all Councils and Community Board members, local commercial and community groups, banking and other interests. An effort has been made to make this publication an attractive and informative document befitting the significance of the assets for which Christchurch City Holdings Limited is responsible.

The Board of Christchurch City Holdings Limited have approved the payment of a third and final dividend of $1,268,587 plus imputation credits making a total dividend for the year of $9,868,587.

As Christchurch City Holdings Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Christchurch City Council, it is not normal to hold a formal Annual Meeting but to complete the necessary procedure by formal entry in the Minute Book in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act.

Recommendation:

That the Annual Report of Christchurch City Holdings Limited be received.
That in lieu of an Annual General Meeting, the common seal of Council be affixed to an entry in the Minute Book of Christchurch City Holdings Limited.

2. CHRISTCHURCH TRANSPORT LIMITED

A meeting was recently held with Christchurch Transport Limited to discuss their quarterly results and business plans. A more detailed report is provided in the public excluded part of the Agenda due to commercial sensitivity.

CTL have commented favourably on the impact of introducing Super Low Floor buses in the last tender round and a positive result on the patronage levels. In their report to our Board, CTL have stated:

"It is clear that one key to increasing patronage is improved service and high quality (SLF at present) buses. We are actively pursuing all opportunities to provide SLF buses across the range of our service contracts and to maximise service frequency. That notwithstanding there is an underlying cost benefit equation at the Regional Council which will limit our progress in this regard. We are confident the Regional Council is addressing this constraint as well as they believe they can."

This matter was separately reported to the Council on 26 November 1997 with a view to seeking commitment from the Canterbury Regional Council for a tender round requirement of at least 23 further Super Low Floor buses.

Christchurch Transport Limited has also stated that it believes the Christchurch City Council could be assisting in the growth of patronage on the public transport system by various measures which are under its control. It considers that there are a number of measures which would discourage the use of motor vehicles such as - parking restrictions, parking cost increases, bus only lanes, public transport only streets and less parking availability. CTL have requested that the Council give consideration to these issues.

Recommendation:

That the benefits of parking restrictions, parking cost increases, bus only lanes, public transport only streets and less parking availability be referred to the City Services Committee for consideration with the purpose of assisting increased patronage on public transport.

3. GOVERNANCE ISSUES

Over recent months Christchurch City Holdings Limited has been carrying out a strategic review of a range of governance matters which affect the manner in which the Board carries out its work and relationship issues between Christchurch City Holdings Limited and its subsidiaries and Christchurch City Holdings Limited and its shareholder, Christchurch City Council. This report sets out in summary the matters considered and makes certain recommendations.

Summary of activity to date:

November 1996

A one day weekend seminar of the CCHL board, facilitated by Rob Cameron and Ian Dickson of Cameron & Co., was held to undertake a strategic review of the company's investments. Discussions centred on:

characteristics of CCHL's investments;
ownership objectives;
CCC's influence through ownership and governance;
relative importance of CCC ownership and governance;
options for capital restructuring while maintaining control;

It was concluded that Christchurch City Holdings Limited's role could be more effective through changes in its corporate governance and procedures.

December 1996

Following the above strategic review discussions, Cameron & Co produced a report setting out a number of recommendations in respect of governance issues.

1997

There have been extensive discussions throughout the year by the CCHL board on the content of the December 1996 Cameron report. The following conclusions have been reached to date:

CCHL should report to Strategy & Resources Committee at least six times a year and in addition, CCHL should from time to time, hold special meetings or seminars for all Councillors on appropriate issues;
A programme of "seminar meetings" should be set up with the 'external' directors contributing. The first of these was held in late October on the role of CCHL.
CCHL's governance and reporting responsibility to Christchurch City Council should focus on the following areas:

Ownership options

Business strategy/operating plans of subsidiaries

Capital structure

Risk management

Appointment of Directors

Annual/Special meeting representation

The role of Christchurch City Holdings Limited in each of the above areas should be explored at the first Seminar with Councillors.
The Board of CCHL should comprise 6 councillors and 3 external directors. As an interim measure until the next election, the Board considers that it should increase to 10 with the appointment of one more external 'commercial' director.
CCHL to set up sub-committees to deal with special issues such as Statements of Corporate Intent - a report would be prepared on this.
Consideration of staff resources for CCHL to be reconsidered in six months. The Company Secretary is to request any additional staff needed in the meantime.
The need for regular meetings with the subsidiary companies was recognised to provide information. Information flows from subsidiaries need to be improved to enable:

evaluation as to whether business strategies and plans are value maximising;

ability to assess implications of subsidiary strategies and plans for the achievement of CCC's strategic objectives;

input into those strategies and plans

Information flows between Christchurch City Holdings Limited and its subsidiaries need to be subject to specific processes and agreements which ensure a high level of confidentiality and trust.
The current policy of not appointing Christchurch City Holdings Limited directors to subsidiary boards was generally agreed, subject to recognition that it may be appropriate to appoint one or more of CCHL Directors to a subsidiary board in special circumstances.
The appointment of Councillors to subsidiary boards should be subject to the adopted "Criteria for Director Appointment".

While the CCHL board has reached the above conclusions, there is still a large amount of work required to translate many of them into positive action. This is an area which will be given a high priority in the coming months.

Recommendation:

That the above conclusions/recommendations be accepted in principle by the Council.
That the CCHL constitution be amended to temporarily increase the number of directors to ten during the remaining terms of the current Council.
That a sub-committee comprising the Chairman, Alister James, the Deputy Chairman, Pat Harrow, the Director of Finance, Bob Lineham, and David Stock, be appointed to interview and recommend to Council an additional experienced commercial director for appointment to the Board of CCHL.

4. DIRECTORS' FEES - CHRISTCHURCH CITY HOLDINGS LIMITED

The Board of Christchurch City Holdings Limited wishes the Council to give consideration to a review of the level of directors' fees which are paid to the Directors of Christchurch City Holdings Limited.

Background

In November 1996 a review was carried out of the level of directors' fees payable to the two external directors of CCHL but the Board decided to defer making any request for an increase for other directors at that time. Council approved the requested increase for the external directors based principally on the argument that they were foregoing earning opportunities in their professional businesses.

Current Fee Levels

Currently the Chairman receives $10,000 and each Councillor director receives $7,000 per annum, a level set in September 1995, with the two external directors receiving an additional $7,800 each.

Since the current fees were set in 1995 the workload of the CCHL directors has increased substantially, with fortnightly board meetings and other special meetings becoming the norm. The issues being considered are also more complex than was the case a year or two ago. It has been estimated that the average time commitment per annum for a director is some 120 hours for regular board business and 20 hours for additional meetings.

Under the terms of CCHL's constitution any directors' fees must be approved by the shareholder, i.e. Christchurch City Council.

Councillor directors were originally appointed to CCHL primarily to provide a liaison between the elected Council and the commercially oriented trading subsidiaries but they are selected because of their knowledge of and ability to assimilate commercial issues and because of the confidence of the Council in them to represent appropriately the views of the Council when considering the issues. Increasingly the issues being considered are more complex (e.g. Capital restructuring of subsidiaries, Crown shareholding in Airport etc.).

The board is of the view that all directors should be paid on the same basis as their responsibilities and liabilities under companies and other legislation are exactly the same as the external directors.

It is recognised that to retain and/or attract external directors of the calibre of the current incumbents, fees must be set at a realistic commercial rate.

Arriving at an Appropriate Fee Level

Potentially, there are a number of methods for establishing a benchmark level of remuneration for CCHL directors. These are considered below:

Comparison with equivalent bodies in other local councils

The only two Councils with bodies equivalent to CCHL are Wellington and Dunedin (although the former is in the process of transferring the LATE monitoring role back from Capital City Investments Ltd to the Council because so many of its investments have been sold).

Capital City Investments Limited has paid its directors $16,500 per annum for the last three years, and the chairperson $26,500. The Board has a similar mix of external and internal members to CCHL, although the chairperson is external. Until two years ago, the councillor directors received the full fee but returned it directly to the Council, and were only paid a meeting fee. Since the Companies Act 1993 came into effect, this practice has ceased and all directors now receive and keep the same amount. In discussion with a staff member from Capital City Holdings Limited it became apparent that he felt that the fees were on the low side and would have been due for review soon.

The chairperson of Dunedin City Holdings Limited received $22,000 for the year ended 30 June 1997. Three Councillor/Senior Staff directors received $14,500, and the two external directors Sir Robin Gray and Sir Robin Irvine received $8,125 and $3,562 respectively (it is unclear why the latter two received the lower amounts - probably because of broken periods of service). However, the chairperson and the two councillor/staff directors remit their fees back to the Council, although the chairperson retained some $3,000 in meeting fees.

CCHL lies between the two other councils in terms of the approach to fees.

Another potentially comparable body is the Auckland Regional Services Trust, which has holdings in Ports Of Auckland, The Yellow Bus Company, Watercare Services, Regional Forests limited and various other investments. ARST had a consolidated shareholders' equity of $1.2 billion as at 31 December 1996 (compared with CCHL's $0.5 billion as at 30 June 1996). The Trust is administered by six elected Trust members, and has an executive staff of eight. Members' fees for the six months ended 31 December 1996 were $76,000 (6 months to 31 December 1995: $67,000). There is no analysis of these amounts, but simply dividing the total by the number of trust members gives an average payment for the six month period of $12,667 (1995: $11,167). The corresponding annualised figures are $25,334 and $22,333.

Comparison with councillors' remuneration

Councillors receive a daily meeting allowance of $170 for any day on which they attend a meeting of the Council. This does not include CCHL meetings. On many occasions more than one meeting is held and so the hourly rate will vary significantly depending on whether meetings are short, long, several or attended for the full duration.

In addition Councillors receive a base salary of $14,700 p.a.

A review of the commitment of all Councillors shows that most Councillors are appointed to three committees of the Council apart from any appointment to CCHL or a trading enterprise as a director. It can therefore be reasonably argued that the remuneration as a Councillor is for the Councillor role alone.

The nature of the roles of Councillor and director are very different, given the responsibilities placed upon the CCHL directors by the Companies Act 1993, and the commercial nature of the LATEs. The directors of the subsidiary trading enterprises are remunerated as ordinary directors irrespective of whether they are Councillors or not. This further reinforces the relevance of setting fees for CCHL directors without reference to Councillor remuneration.

Comparison with the 1997 Price Waterhouse ('PW') survey of directors' fees

A copy of the PW report (part of the recently published PW survey of directors' fees) comparing CCHL directors' remuneration with the median and average fees for other companies in the same survey categories is tabled. The average for the five categories is $18,500 (based on averages) or $17,200 (based on the medians.).

The average fee for a chairperson on the same basis is $32,800 or $30,000, and for a deputy chairperson $23,400 or $22,500. The number of hours worked per annum by the CCHL directors is reasonably consistent with those reported in the survey.

Since the large majority of participants in the PW survey were trading companies in their own right, in contrast to the investment monitoring role of Christchurch City Holdings Limited, it could be argued that the directors of CCHL should not receive the same level of remuneration. While their role may be less onerous in some respects, nevertheless the responsibilities involved with a directorship of CCHL are significant and there is a discount factor built in by taking account of the fact the number of staff is relatively low for CCHL. There have been, and always will be major decisions to be taken in respect of the LATEs which will have a significant impact on the Council's financial position and these will demand time, experience and skill from the directors. It is not considered appropriate to significantly discount the above average rate simply because of the nature of the company's role.

It is noted that PW classified CCHL as being in the public sector. Had it been classified as "Private company - NZ owned", the average fee would have been $17,400. Arguments could be advanced in favour of either classification.

Comparison of Fees paid to Directors of Trading Subsidiaries

The following table indicates the fees payable to the major trading subsidiaries of the Council compares with the current CCHL fees:

	Southpower	LPC	CIAL	CTL	CCHL Currently	CCHL Requested
Chairman	$44,000	$34,000	$35,000	$22,000	$10,000	$20,000
Deputy Chair	$27,000	$26,000	$20,500	$11,000	$7,000	$15,000
Director	$25,000	$18,000	$16,750	$11,000	$7,000 &$14,800	$15,000
Number of Directors*	7	6	6	6	9	9
Total	$196,000	$132,000	$122,500	$77,000	$81,600	$140,000

*Excluding Managing Director

Conclusion

The external market evidence outlined above indicates that, prima facie, current CCHL directors' fee levels are well below average.

The Board has carefully considered this matter and recognises that in terms of market information and comparisons a case could be made for an increase in directors' fees to $30,000 for the Chairman, $19,000 for the Deputy Chairman and $17,500 for directors. It does not however wish to pursue an increase of this amount. Approval of the Council is sought for an increase which would allow the following payments:

Chairman
All other Directors

$20,000
$15,000

When this matter is discussed by Council the Directors of CCHL will not be able to take part. The Director of Finance is seeking approval from the Audit Office for any Councillors who are directors of other companies to take part.

Prior to the Committee meeting a copy of a letter from the Auditor-General was circulated to all Councillors. The Audit Office advised that all Councillors could discuss and vote on CCHL directors' fees at Committee level but Councillors who are directors of any Council subsidiary company could not discuss or vote on this issue at the Council meeting.

The majority of the members present when this issue was discussed at the Committee meeting were of the view that directors' fees should be held at their current level for the remainder of the current Council term. It was also considered that a policy on the appointment of Councillor directors should be adopted by the Council.

Recommendation:

That there be no increase in the remuneration of individual directors for the remainder of the current term of the Council.
That a report on the policy process for the appointment of Councillors as directors of trading enterprises and CCHL be prepared for the Committee's consideration.

(Note: The Mayor, Councillors Close, Harrow, James, Moore and Murray declared an interest in clause 8.4 and abstained from the discussion or voting thereon. Councillor Wright chaired this part of the meeting.)

9. ANNUAL PLAN FORMAT RR 6524

Officer responsible	Authors
Funds and Planning Manager	Paul Melton/Julie Sadler
Corporate Plan Output: Annual Plan, Volume I Page 5.1.4

The purpose of this report is to submit for Councillors' information the new format for the Annual Plan.

BACKGROUND

The staff project team established to explore opportunities for improving the format of the Council Plan discussed the issue with elected members at a seminar meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee held on 21 November. The project team's report has been circulated to all Councillors.

NEW MODEL

The model proposed by the project team, which, with a number of minor modifications, was unanimously endorsed by the Committee, is as follows.

Future plans will be organised into discrete booklets representing the three important elements of the plan as detailed below:

(a) Strategic Statement

The Strategic Statement will contain all the strategic elements, including Outcome Statements, the long term financial projections, the Funding Policy, Investment Policy, Borrowing and Debt Management Policy, together with some outcome effectiveness indicators.

It will be published every three years and publication will coincide with the three yearly election cycle. This will enable the new Council to review and set the strategic direction for the following three years. The Strategic Statement will highlight the linkages between the City Plan and the Annual Plan booklet.

(b) The Annual Plan (Service Delivery Plan)

This booklet will be published annually and will contain only a summary of the more important aspects of the Strategic Statement. It will be a concise, user friendly document in the style of the Your City Your Choice booklets and will include a summary of Council services, any changes or reduction in services and the reason for such changes, efficiency/productivity savings/gains and revenue increases. Use will be made of coloured graphs to illustrate changes.

It will be published in the current format less the strategic elements in 1998.

The 1999 edition will not include the 5 year capital programme. (This will be published separately - see Projects Plan below.)

Financial information in the activity section of the plan will be presented in a more interesting way and apart from the information needed to meet statutory requirements this section will focus on significant changes to services or activities and the reasons for such changes. Objectives will be rewritten where necessary to ensure they are concise and measurable.

The focus of this document will be on the big picture. The submission form will be included in this booklet.

In 1999 six booklets will be produced - one for each Community Board area. Each will contain a summary of metropolitan capital works, together with all the local projects for the community concerned. These booklets will be map based with all local projects being cross-referenced to a map of the particular community area.

As the map based approach is experimental and may be difficult to develop, it will be trialed in one community area in 1998.

SUPPORTING MATERIAL

(a) City Scene - Annual Plan Edition

The Annual Plan edition of City Scene goes out to every household in the city. It has therefore the largest audience of all the planning documents. It is important therefore that it highlights all the changes and all the new initiatives which have been included in the Plan as well how they will impact on rates. It is also important people are informed about how they can obtain more information. A tear-out submission form will also be included in future Annual Plan Editions of this newsletter.

(b) Video

In view of the success of this year's video it is planned to produce a video on the 1998 Plan. it is considered that this should be an ongoing annual commitment. Details of the time the video will be screened on the local television channels will be included in City Scene.

The plan presentation on the WWW will be further developed and enhanced to encourage greater use of this communication and information tool.

TIMETABLE

Given the resource limitations and the extent of the changes, the format changes will be staged over a two year period.

Those format changes which could be accommodated during 1997/98 are:

- The Strategic Statement

The strategic elements currently in the existing Plan
The Long Term Financial Strategy
Investment Policy
Borrowing Policy
Funding Policy

- The Annual Plan (Service Delivery Plan)

A summary of the Policies identified above
The existing significant activities
The existing 5 year capital programme

- Project Plans

Pilot a project plan for one community area and experiment with a map based approach.
During 1998/99 the format changes would be:

- Strategic Statement

Include a complete set of outcome statements and outcome level performance indicators.

- The Annual Plan (Service Delivery Plan)

Progress a set of outcome statements.
Remove the 5 year capital programme and include in the Project Plan.

- Project Plans

Map based approach.
Include here a listing of projects within each community area.

This timetable for the format changes ensures that some changes are in place for 1998 with the balance being achieved in 1999.

Recommendation: That the above format be developed further for implementation in 1998 and 1999.

10. PIER PROMOTION TRUST - CONTRIBUTIONS TO PROJECT RR 6737

Officer responsible	Author
Director of Finance	Bob Lineham and Gilbert van Schaijik
Corporate Plan Output: Capital Expenditure Programme - New Assets

The purpose of this report is to advise elected representatives of the situation regarding the costs of the Pier to date and a request from the Pier Promotion Trust for the Council to review the final level of contributions from the Trust.

OVERVIEW OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL AND PIER PROMOTION TRUST

The Pier was constructed on the basis of an agreement between the Pier Promotion Trust (PPT) and the Christchurch City Council which provided that the costs for the pier and the access ramps (stages I & II) would be shared on a 50/50 basis. The cost estimate for these stages of the project was $4M. The Pier Promotion Trust was committed therefore to contribute a maximum of $2M.

Payments totalling $1,440,000 from the PPT were received over the construction period in accordance with the agreement with the exception of $60,000 which was due to be paid by 30 April 1997 but was retained by PPT as working capital to assist further fund raising projects. The agreement provides for a final payment of $500,000 by 31 December 1997.

PRESENT SITUATION

The table below compares the original budget with costs incurred to date and an assessed final cost for the project.

	Budget	Assessed final cost	Incurred to date
Stage 1	$3,266,000	$3,285,306	$3,146,622
Stage 2	$ 734,000	$ 714,694	$ 119,280
Total	$4,000,000	$4,000,000	$3,265,902

The assessed final cost figures are still interim and it is still necessary to assess the cost of the ramps and toilets which will be built in conjunction with stage III but were previously intended to comprise stage II.

From these figures it can be seen that the assessed final cost attributable to the original stages I and II is still $4 million and until final costs are obtained PPT's share must be assumed to be $2 million.

PIER CONTRIBUTIONS

The PPT have met with and written a letter to the Director of Finance requesting the Council to release PPT from the payment of the final $500,000 which falls due on 31 December 1997. They are, however, offering to pay the $60,000 currently outstanding plus such additional sums which can be raised from fund raising projects in train and pledges outstanding. A schedule attached to their letter estimates that this could amount to $108,000 from the buy-a-brick campaign, harness racing and outstanding pledges. In addition it is proposed that a further approach be made to the Lotteries Board in 1998.

FUNDING FOR STAGE III

The plans for Stage III have progressed to a stage where a concept and scheme which will meet the specific requirements of the library is ready for cost planning over the next few weeks. A preliminary estimate from the Quantity Surveyor indicates that the cost will be of the order of $2.5 million excluding fees. This cost includes the ramps and toilets which were originally part of stage II.

A proper revised cost plan will be prepared once the new plans are completed. It is not anticipated to vary significantly from the budget allocation of $2.3M excluding fit out and in fact the consultants have been instructed not to exceed this figure.

The decision to site the new library for this area in the terminal building has meant the we have not had to purchase additional land for the library but this money has now been used to part fund the purchase of land for the new Parklands library. The new Brighton library will have substantial fit out costs to achieve the Council's objectives of having a "wow" library for New Brighton. The additional capital costs will need to be drawn from funds allocated for the new library building.

The fact that the total sum set aside for the New Brighton Library may not all be required should not influence the decision on the Pier funding as the library anticipate that they will need the funds for other suburban library projects and there are other areas of the capital budget which will also need additional funding

GENERAL COMMENTS

PPT have worked hard to raise the $1.44M remitted to Council to date and now that the pier is completed their task will not be easy. In addition it can be noted that a significant portion of those funds (approximately $600,000) came from a major grant from the TrustBank Community Trust. Raising a further $387,000 will not be easy.

It is clear that PPT will not be able to meet the deadline in the agreement for the final payment of $500,000 (reducible if the final costs end up less than the provision).

The Trust has indicated that it has some fund raising ventures still planned and intends to apply for a further Lotteries Grant in 1998. A favourable response to these ventures (especially the grant application) is only likely if an obligation/incentive remains for the funds to be raised. For this reason it may be appropriate to release the PPT from the time deadline for raising the balance of the funds but leave the obligation for a 50% contribution standing in the meantime.

When considering this matter the Council should be mindful of the reality that fundraising is not easy and that as a community group the PPT have done very well. Council will also need to be realistic when making budget decisions on the funds which can still be expected from outside parties for this project.

Recommendation:

That the Trust be required to complete its obligations recorded in 10(e) of the Memorandum of Understanding to pay the currently outstanding $60,000 by no later than 31 March 1998.
That the obligation in 10(g) of the Memorandum of Understanding to pay $500,000 by 31 December 1997 be varied by extending the date to 30 June 1998.
That that matter be reconsidered by the Council in June 1998.

11. AFFIXING A COUNCIL SEAL RR 6734

Officer responsible	Author
Legal Services Manager	Peter Mitchell
Corporate Plan Output: Legal Advice

The Council has previously resolved that its Common Seal be witnessed by the Mayor or any Councillor and one of the Administration Officer, the Council Secretary or the Director of Operations. On Friday 24 October 1997 the situation arose where the three Council officers were absent on leave on that day.

There were documents that needed to be sealed on that day and the writer witnessed those documents. I now seek ratification of that action.

To avoid this difficulty arising in the future I would recommend that the writer be added to the list of Council officers who are authorised to witness the affixing of the Council's seal.

Recommendation:

That the Council ratify the action of the Legal Services Manager in witnessing the affixing of the Council's Seal on Friday 24 October 1997.
That the Mayor, or any other Councillor and the Administration Officer (Corporate Services) witness the affixing of the Common Seal and that in the absence of the Administration Officer, the Seal be witnessed by the Council's Secretary, the Director of Operations or the Legal Services Manager.

12. FENDALTON LIBRARY/SERVICE CENTRE RR 6521

Officer responsible	Authors
Major Projects Co-ordinator	Albert Louman, Sue Sutherland, Stephen Phillips
Corporate Plan Output: Corporate Plan, Volume 2, Capital Output 8.3.21

The purpose of this report is to submit for the Council's approval the recommended project delivery process for the above development.

A report on the recommended project delivery process has been circulated to all Councillors and submitted to the Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board and the Community Services Committee for information and comment. The report was endorsed by both the Board and the Community Services Committee.

At the Committee meeting, the Major Projects Co-ordinator advised that since writing the report he had given further consideration to the engagement of a lead consultant. Recognising that this project is of a scale that can be handled in-house the Major Projects Co-ordinator recommended that he be authorised to negotiate a fee for this work with the City Design Manager. The Committee endorsed this approach.

Recommendation:

That the Council adopt the project delivery process, as outlined in the report.
That the Major Projects Co-ordinator be authorised to enter into negotiations with the City Design Manager with a view to arriving at a fair fee proposal (based on a clearly defined scope of work), subject to the City Design Manager considering the engagement of an outside architect and quantity surveyor, if necessary.
That a combined joint meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee and Community Services Committee and Fendalton/Waimairi Community Board be held to consider the project terms of reference and draft brief when these are available.

13. CULTURAL REPORT RR 5953

Officer responsible	Author
Communications and Promotions Manager	Kevin Roche, Committee Secretary
Corporate Plan Output: 7.5.6 City Promotion

The purpose of this report is to seek funding from the Corporate Contingency to fund the outstanding budget requirement for the 'Make a Stand' concert held in Cathedral Square on Friday 21 November 1997. The Communications and Promotions Manager reported as follows to the Community Services Committee at its meeting on 1 December 1997:

'At a meeting with the Rt Hon Mike Moore MP, the Mayor and members of the ethnic council and communities, the Communications and Promotions Unit were asked to organise an event for Friday 21 November, Cathedral Square, 7 pm - 8 pm.

Budget

Entertainment	$1,100
Stage	$500
Sound	$900
Lighting	$710
Publicity and Promotion	$4,500	(short lead in time)
Toilets	$200	(cost of keeping toilets open in Square)
Labour	$1,500
Administration	$300
	$9,710

There is a line item for special events within the Events Output.

For the period July 1997 to date the budget has been allocated as follows:

Princess Diana Memorial		$9,800
Kids Safe Event		$2,000
Brit Rally		$1,500
Time Capsule		$1,200
Suffrage Memorial		$1,000
Gymnastics		$500
Fireworks		$6,000
Showtime Support - CTV		$1,200
		*$23,200*

Summary

Given the short lead in time for this event, the unit has not been able to secure sponsorship. The line item within the Events Output for Events - Special Projects has a balance $6000 available to fund this event. The outstanding budget requirement of $3710 could come from corporate contingency. However, this effectively means that there is no budget remaining for special events and projects.

The Community Services Committee resolved to advise the Strategy and Resources Committee of its recommendation that a budget of $3,710 be granted for this event from Corporate Contingency.

Recommendation: That the outstanding budget requirement be met from Corporate Contingency.

14. SUMMER WATER CONSUMPTION RR 6745

Officer responsible	Author
Water Services Manager	Allan Watson
Corporate Plan Output: 9.3.5 Water Services: Education Programme

The purpose of this report is to respond to concerns that the Council needs to be more proactive in its response to the probability of a hot dry summer and to recommend some action to answer these concerns.

I SITUATION

(a) Weather

September, October and November have already produced lower than average rainfall and higher temperatures.

	1997Rainfall(mm)	Long term Average	Average Daily Maximum Temperature ° C	Long Term Average Maximum ° C
September	10.2	45.9	14.0	14.9
October	24.1	47.6	18.5	17.3
November	19.5	45.9	22.1	19.4

These conditions have confirmed in the public mind that the much talked about El Nino pattern is indeed affecting Canterbury's weather. Furthermore, the long range forecast produced by the Chief Meteorologist gives weight to this view. His November-December seasonal forecast states for the Canterbury Plains, including South Canterbury:

Again we remind readers, no matter what modulation of the El Nino we choose, Canterbury is usually affected the most by dryness associated with the event. At the present time, it is expected that Canterbury will experience the worst of El Nino's impact on New Zealand this summer. It is still advisable to think about contingency plans for an El Nino summer during which the combined impacts of both significant lack of rainfall and increasing likelihood of (warm) westerly winds, could be stressful on livestock and crops. With lower humidities, the fire danger is also predicted to increase to extreme levels and remain there for most of the summer. Seasonal forecast procedures are indicating that the district will have low probabilities (less than 30%) of receiving average rainfall during the late spring and summer. November and December rainfall are forecast to be 50% or less of normal across the district and come mostly from the weak southerly episodes. Temperatures will remain mild, about 1.0C above normal, due to a combination of weak southerlies and with the increasing risks of northwester events. Forecast confidence is moderate-high.

His situational comments are even less reassuring:

All the indices and benchmarks by which we judge the existence and intensity of El Nino continue to point to the fact that the current episode is indeed a strong one and suggests that the event is yet to reach its peak. I am aware that some clients may be getting a bit complacent since its impact on some areas has not been that significant Ö yet. The last half of October saw some extended dry spells, with westerlies becoming established in all dry-prone areas. The current benign stage (ie lack of weather, not necessarily lack of winds) of the El Nino should continue for another 2-3 weeks, well into November, with high pressure dominating over the central Tasman Sea and a southwest flow over most of New Zealand. Yet our advice has been, and continues to be to treat this coming summer as though it will be of the length and intensity of the 1982 El Nino summer (that is the benchmark for modern day El Ninos). We expect the volatility that characterised August and September's weather to resume again by December Ö extended dry periods of 2-3 weeks followed by some spotty heavy precipitation events.

The Council will thus be wise to assume that 1997/98 summer conditions will test the water supply system and require the cooperation of consumers if consumption is to be kept near the low levels achieved in the past few years.

(b) Consumption

The warm dry conditions over the past three months have resulted in demand rising above the five year average:

	Daily average consumption 1997 (cu.m)	5 year daily average consumption(cu.m)
September	127,700	120,600
October	145,500	141,000
November	196,200	165,600

This is against a trend recorded over the past year where per head consumption has been consistently below the 5 year average up to September:

The Canterbury Regional Council reports that the Christchurch - West Melton aquifer system is in a reasonably healthy state after a long period of recharge that began with the 1992 snow storm. Levels are now dropping with the demands being placed on the system by both city and agricultural use and remembering that the effects of the 1981 El Nino pattern persisted through to 1983, it is still essential that both rural and city users focus on efficient, non-wasteful water use. Water not used today is available tomorrow and perhaps more importantly water not used this season from the lower aquifers will be there next season. The Regional Council is conducting an active campaign involving three staff full time to monitor and check that agricultural and horticultural uses are covered by consents and that consent conditions are being complied with.

(d) System Capacity

Water supply systems are designed to deliver the high consumptions common during summer conditions but are nonetheless limited and can be over-taxed during times of peak flow. It is important to encourage consumers to move their consumption away from these peak times or to spread the same consumption (by, for example, trickle irrigation) over longer periods.

When the system demand exceeds capacity consumers will experience loss of pressure and a possible loss of water quality caused by sand intrusion. In Christchurch capacity is adequate even for peak demand, with the exception of Parklands where delays in construction of the new Marshland pump station has left the area somewhat under-supplied. This will be rectified but in the meantime some loss of pressure could occur at peak times.

II OPTIONS

(a) Current Conservation Work

The main features of water conservation activity in 1997/98 are:

Television advertising costing $60,000 this season is being used involving some slots, targeted at selected programmes and costing between $600 and $1,500 per 30 second slot.

Radio advertising is also used through the summer, using selected stations and times and requiring a budget of $40,000 for 400 thirty second slots.

Newspaper and magazine advertising is maintained through the year with emphasis on the summer period and costing $15,000 per year.

A significant effort is put into publications, this year seeing the completion of two new projects, Efficient Use of Water in Your Garden and a video/publication for schools entitled Save our Disappearing Water. Forty schools have taken delivery of 10,000 copies of the project plus 50 videos and enquiries are such that a second print run is planned. The kit is carefully prepared and targeted to ensure it meets curriculum requirements for intermediate age children.

(b) Restrictions

The Christchurch City Water Related Services By Law 1992 provides the opportunity to "restrict or prohibit the use of water for any specified purpose or for any specified period Ö"

This clause allows restrictions to be applied by resolution of the Council, or alternatively "in the case of urgency of which the Water Services Manager shall be the sole judge" the use of water may be prohibited by the Water Services Manager.

While neither consumption levels nor aquifer conditions would indicate the necessity to move to restrictions at this time, the Council could make it clear in its publicity that it will use restrictions on watering if conditions warrant it.

It has been suggested that before Christmas, recognising the long range weather forecast and the current conditions, the Council should use the opportunity to produce some extra publicity, drawing the public's attention to the need for conservative consumption behaviour in view of the likely conditions.

The Unit has already begun to publish actual consumption figures compared with the previous five years' average and in a modified form this could form the basis of a weekly press release advising how consumption is going compared to the previous averages.

To answer a previous concern, a report will be prepared for the City Services Committee on the opportunity to use meter readings to advise customers who are using significantly more than average consumptions.

Recommendation:

That the Council signal its intention to introduce watering restrictions should consumption levels rise to a point where the system is stressed either by capacity limitation or by declining water quality.
That consumption information be published weekly in graphical form showing current consumption compared with previous year and previous 5 year average levels.
That to launch the publicity a media presentation be organised, emphasising the need for conservation behaviour and explaining the weekly consumption graphics.
That a report be prepared for the February meeting of the City Services Committee covering the use of meter reading results to advise residents of excessive water use.

15.

ORDERS FOR SUPPLIES EXCEEDING 50% OF DELEGATED AUTHORITY

RR 6709

A schedule listing the orders for supplies and works approved under delegated authority and exceeding 50% of that authority is tabled.

Recommendation: That the information be received.

PART B - REPORTS FOR INFORMATION

16. DEPUTATIONS BY APPOINTMENT

CCHL DIRECTORS' FEES

Mr Mark Kunnen addressed the Committee on the above issue and expressed his opposition to the proposed level of increase in directors' fees and to the appointment of elected members as directors of Council trading enterprises.

17. MUSEUM LEVY RR 6736

The Director of Finance reported, recommending that a sub-committee be appointed to meet with the Canterbury Museum Trust Board and other contributing authorities to discuss museum funding for 1998/99.

The Committee decided that a sub-committee comprising the Deputy Chairman and Councillors Harrow and Howell be established for this purpose and to recommend a levy to the Council's 1998/99 Annual Plan meeting.

18. ITEMS RECEIVED

The Committee received the following reports:

18.1 The Leasing of Photocopiers RR 6722

The Inventory Manager reported in response to an earlier request of the Committee on the benefits of leasing photocopying equipment.

18.2 Community Trust - Funding Year 2000 RR 6662

The Communications and Promotions Manager reported on the Council seminar held on 13 November to discuss Year 2000 projects to be put forward for possible funding by the Community Trust.

The Committee noted that a further seminar for all Councillors will be held on 19 February 1998 at 12 noon to be recommended for funding from the Community Trust donation of $1.848 million.

18.3 Community Board Project/Discretionary Funding RR 6565

In response to an earlier request of the Committee a summary of Community Board allocations of project funding was submitted. A percentage breakdown of the five years 1992-97, the three years 1995-97 and the current financial year were provided.

PART C - REPORT ON DELEGATED DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE

19. SUPPLEMENTARY REPORTS

The Chairman sought approval to introduce supplementary reports on the following topics:

1. Summer Water Consumption

2. Cultural Report

3. Heritage Buildings - Warners Hotel, Cathedral Square

4. Community Representation on CHE

The reasons why the items were not included on the main agenda and why the reports could not wait for the next meeting were explained to the Committee.

It was resolved that the reports be received and considered at the present meeting.

20. THE SUPPLY OF A COPY CENTRE UNDER A FACILITIES MANAGEMENT CONTRACT RR 6507

The Inventory Manager reported seeking the Committee's approval to spend the unbudgeted sum of $66,000 on set up costs for the Civic Offices Copy Centre.

The Committee resolved:

That the unbudgeted expenditure of $66,000 for set up costs relating to the Copy Centre be approved.
The portion of expenditure not funded from savings in 1997/98, i.e. $37,000, be funded from savings identified in the six monthly review.

21. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

The Committee resolved that the draft resolution to exclude the public set out on page 42 of the agenda be adopted.

CONSIDERED THIS 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 1997

MAYOR

Top of Page ~ Council & Councillors Information