This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
26. 11. 97
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
12 NOVEMBER 1997
A meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee
was held on Wednesday 12 November 1997 at 4.00 pm
| PRESENT: | Councillor Gordon Freeman (Chairman), Councillors Carole Anderton, Graham Berry, David Buist, Graham Condon, David Cox, Ishwar Ganda and Gail Sheriff. |
| IN ATTENDANCE: | Councillors Pat Harrow and Barbara Stewart. |
| APOLOGY: | An apology for absence was received and accepted from the Mayor. |
| Councillor Graham Berry arrived at 4.12 pm, and was not present for clauses 16 and 17 and part of clause 21. |
The Committee reports that:
PART A - MATTERS REQUIRING A COUNCIL DECISION
1. RENAMING OF ROSE HISTORIC CHAPEL RESERVE RR 6330
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Parks Manager | Suzanne Weld, Parks Planner |
| Corporate Plan Output: Garden Parks Page 9.4.19 | |
The purpose of this report is to seek the revocation of a Council resolution to name a reserve at 876 Colombo Street "Historic Rose Chapel Reserve".
This report was held over from the October meeting of the Committee to enable representatives of the Rose Historic Trust to make submissions in support of the renaming of the reserve from which the Rose Historic Chapel is situated. Ms Liz McRostie of the Rose Historic Trust addressed the Committee in support of the Trust's request that the reserve on which the Rose Historic Chapel is situated be renamed. Details of the deputation are provided in clause 9, Part B of this report.
BACKGROUND
The Council may recall the recent acquisition of an historic chapel which is the only remaining building of the former St Mary's Convent in Colombo Street. A trust has been set up to look after the day to day running of the chapel which will be available to the community for weddings, meetings, exhibitions and other suitable events. The trust has registered itself as Rose Historic Chapel Trust and the chapel is now known as Rose Historic Chapel because of the rose wheel window which is a significant feature of the front of the chapel. The reserve on which the chapel sits is held under the Reserves Act 1977.
NAMING OF THE RESERVE
The Rose Historic Chapel is a listed heritage building and sits on a small reserve for which a new name has been considered. Neiel Drain from the Parks Unit researched naming options for the reserve and after consultation with the Rose Historic Chapel Trust and the Sisters of Mercy Catholic Order recommended to the Board that the reserve be named "Rose Historic Chapel Reserve" because "the Chapel is the dominant feature and indeed the reason why the land was purchased in the first place."
Following advice from the Parks Unit the Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board recommended to Council on 24 September 1997 that the reserve be named Rose Historic Chapel Reserve. The Council, however, resolved to name the reserve "Historic Rose Chapel Reserve". It is the Parks Unit's understanding that some councillors believed that the wording of "Rose Historic Chapel Reserve" was grammatically incorrect.
The Parks Unit believes that in order to avoid confusion the name of the reserve should match the name by which the chapel is now known, namely Rose Historic Chapel. This name has the approval of the council's heritage planners. Following the Council's resolution to name the reserve "Historic Rose Chapel Reserve" we now have a situation where the Rose Historic Chapel sits on Historic Rose Chapel Reserve. This is bound to cause confusion to the public.
It is the chapel which is a listed heritage building and which is the significant feature of the site. The "rose" part of the name is a recent development which comes from the formation of a trust to administer the day to day running of the Chapel.
Because of the historic nature of the chapel, its location and therefore its metropolitan significance, the Parks Unit believes that the Board's recommendation should have been referred in the first instance to the Parks and Recreation Committee.
CONCLUSION
The Committee requests that the Council consider the name of the reserve at 876 Colombo Street and the above reasoning for naming the reserve "Rose Historic Chapel Reserve".
| Recommendation: |
|
| 2. | AVONHEAD PARK CEMETERY - REQUEST FOR HEADSTONES IN THE EXCLUDED AREA | RR 5835 |
| Officer responsible | Authors |
| Parks Manager | R G Holland, Parks Policy and Quality Control Manager/Julie Sadler |
| Corporate Plan Output: Cemeteries Page 9.4.36. | |
The Parks Manager reported as follows to the August meeting of the Committee on the outcome of the consultation process which was initiated following a request for headstones to be permitted in the excluded area.
BACKGROUND
At its November 1996 meeting the Parks and Recreation Committee considered a request from the families of those persons interred in the `no memorial' area of Avonhead Park Cemetery for some form of individual headstone memorial. The Committee resolved that following consultation, design and plans for a small form of memorial within the `no memorial' area be brought back to the Committee.
In 1992 the Avonhead Park Cemetery burial policy was changed to allow memorials in part of the cemetery as the `no memorial' concept was not popular and the cemetery was under-utilised.
At its meeting on 21 September 1992 the Council resolved:
The central area of the Avonhead Cemetery was retained as a `no memorial area' to protect those families who had purchased plots in this cemetery knowing that no memorials were provided and that this was their preferred option.
Since 1993 when the new memorial area was opened there have been well over 100 interments per annum and the plot sales and interment fees for the 1995/96 financial year totalled $92,000, which meant that the cemetery only cost $22,591 to operate after the revenue was deducted from operating costs. Prior to the change in policy, interments ranged between 24 and 40 per annum.
Since 1993 requests have been received from some families to move their interred family members from the `no memorial area' into the area containing memorials. To date there have been four disinterments into this area. As well requests have been received from seven families who wish to erect some small form of memorial within the `no memorial area'.
Most requests to date have been for a small ground level type memorial rather than the larger upright type memorials.
CONSULTATION PROCESS
The Parks Unit prepared a consultation pamphlet in which the public was given the opportunity to chose if they wanted a ground level type headstone and then a preference on size was requested.
Suggestions were also requested together with the name and address of the submitters so they could be kept informed of developments. Signs were erected in the cemetery and notices placed in the newspaper. Sample headstones were available at the Parks Unit office for viewing.
The number of submissions received, however, was very disappointing with only 37 replies being received. Of those 10 wanted no memorial, 13 a large memorial and 14 a small memorial, with 1 requesting no concrete beam.
In view of the small response the Parks Unit then wrote to all 460 family members recorded as next of kin to the deceased in Avonhead Park Cemetery.
A total of 238 replies were received with 105 sent back from addresses where family members no longer resided. In the circumstances, a 52% return was considered acceptable.
The results of the two consultation processes are as follows:
CONSULTATION RESULTS
| No to memorials in the circular lawn area | 113 |
| Yes to memorials with a larger ground level headstone | 58 |
| Yes to memorials with a smaller ground level headstone | 99 |
| Total Replies | 270 |
Note: Some five people responded to the two requests but were counted only once.
The comments of those family members who did not want any form of headstone are listed below:
1. The plot had been purchased in the knowledge there was a `no memorial' concept in place.
2. The area should kept as an open lawn and treed area.
3. Keep the woodland concept but perhaps plant more trees.
4. Concrete and headstones are ugly and would ruin the outlook.
5. There are other opportunities for headstones in the cemetery within the headstone areas, or at other cemeteries.
6. The small metal disc below ground is sufficient and they are happy with the cemetery area as it is.
7. The memorial room and wall area is a tidier place for flowers and a small memorial plaque.
Of those wanting a headstone the majority preferred the smaller headstone and commented as follows:
1. It is important to mark the grave in some way.
2. The memorial is more personal than just a number in the ground.
3. Graves would be easier to locate.
4. More people would use the cemetery if graves were marked.
WHAT TYPE OF MEMORIAL?
The present Bylaw does not permit a marker of any kind in the circular lawn area. Only small metal discs below ground level mark the graves. In line with the resolution passed at the September 1992 Council meeting the central lawn area was excluded from the Bylaw change to Waimairi District Bylaw 1983 No 1 in the 1992 Amendment.
All other areas of the cemetery apart from the centre lawn area now have been changed to allow for headstones. These memorial areas are filling up fast which is further testimony to the success of the policy change in 1992. In the 1996/97 financial year revenue exceeded expenditure by $40,341 due to higher than expected revenue from interments.
Clearly, there is a choice for the Councillors to consider regarding keeping the area free of headstones as per the original Waimairi concept or changing the Bylaw again to reflect the desires of some family members.
Heed, however, needs to be taken of the significant number of people (41.8%) of those who replied, wanting to retain the open space and no memorial concept.
SUMMARY
Of those who replied to the consultation 41.8% wanted no memorials. A preference for headstones was 58.2% and of those 21.5% wanted a larger headstone and 36.7% wanted a smaller headstone.
Opposition to headstones, even to inground memorials, is still strong and it appears that many family members still support the original concept, and want it retained."
Mrs Kay Rainey addressed the August meeting of the Committee and made a strong plea for the current policy relating to the erection of memorials in the landscaped area to be retained. Mrs Rainey submitted that the earlier commitment given to the families of the deceased regarding the installation of memorials should be honoured and financial considerations should not be an issue in determining the future policy.
The Committee deferred consideration of the staff report and appointed a sub-committee comprising the Chairman, Councillors Anderton, Berry, Condon and Sheriff to inspect the cemetery and report back to the Committee.
Because of Councillor commitments the sub-committee was unable to meet until 20 October. The sub-committee met at the cemetery to view the two styles of memorials and to endeavour to find a solution to the problem which would meet the concerns of both groups. There is no doubt that the `no memorial' concept creates an aesthetically pleasing, tranquil setting and the sub-committee can fully appreciate the reason why the family members who support this style of burial wish to see it retained.
However, having experienced at first hand the difficulty in locating individual graves, the sub-committee was sympathetic to the concerns of those families seeking a change to the present policy. After considering both points of view and noting that the majority of respondents were supportive of a change to the existing policy, the sub-committee unanimously agreed that as a compromise, small inground memorials should be permitted in the landscaped section of the Avonhead Park Cemetery. This would ensure the present open tranquil setting is retained while giving those families who wish to do so the opportunity to place a small plaque on their family member's grave.
The sub-committee fully appreciate the sensitivity of this issue and sincerely hope that the compromise proposed will be acceptable to the families affected.
A copy of this report has been forwarded to all families together with the advice that they will have further opportunity to comment as part of the Special Order process.
| Recommendation: |
|
3. CASHMERE VILLAGE GREEN RR 6494
| Officer responsible | Authors |
| Parks Manager | Chris Freeman, Management Planning Officer and Deborah Hewett, Parks Planner |
| Corporate Plan Output: Parks Plans and Policy Statements | |
The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the Legal Services Manager's advice to appoint a special committee to hear and make decisions on the proposed Cashmere Village Green Recreation Reserve Declaration and, at a later stage, the Draft Management Plan.
BACKGROUND
The Cashmere Village Green, located on the corner of Dyers Pass Road and Macmillan Avenue, comprises an area of 3241m2 which is currently held as Council freehold land under the Local Government Act 1974. This area of land has been zoned as Open Space 1 (local or neighbourhood park) in the proposed City Plan.
The Parks Unit has recently invited and received submissions in relation to the proposed declaration of this park as a Recreation Reserve, pursuant to section 14 of the Reserves Act 1977. Further to this, submissions have also been received proposing establishment of a Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust Open Space Covenant, and a change in zoning from Open Space 1 to Conservation 2. These have been promoted by some submitters as alternative or non-mutually exclusive methods of protection of the Cashmere Village Green.
EXISTING COUNCIL DELEGATIONS
While the Council has delegated to community boards some of its powers under the Reserves Act 1977 it has not delegated to boards the power to hear and make decisions on submissions and objections under section 14 (declaration as a reserve) of the Act.
Accordingly, a system now needs to be put in place to hear the submissions and objections in relation to the delegation of the Cashmere Village Green, as a reserve.
PROPOSED DELEGATION
The Legal Services Manager has advised that an appropriate method of hearing submissions in relation to the Cashmere Village Green is to obtain Council approval to set up a special committee comprising three elected representatives, with power to act.
Due to the sensitive nature of this issue and the previous involvement of some community board members, the Parks Unit recommends this committee comprise two members of the Parks and Recreation Committee, and one member of the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board.
With respect to the proposed delegation, the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board at its meeting of 28 October 1997 resolved "that the matter be referred to the Parks and Recreation Committee with the recommendation that a member of the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board be part of the special committee".
In the ensuing discussion at the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board meeting Mrs Lewis and Mr Drayton indicated their willingness to serve on such a special committee if appointed.
HEARING PROCESS
To satisfy statutory requirements in respect of the Reserves Act 1977, two independent hearings will need to be held.
The Parks Unit recommends that the special committee remain in place to hear and make decisions on submissions in relation to both of these hearings.
The first hearing will deal with the matter of Declaration as a Recreation reserve (pursuant to section 14 of the Reserves Act 1977) and will also include matters raised in submissions in relation to the Queen Elizabeth II National Trust Open Space Covenant, and submissions relating to change of zoning from Open Space 1 to Conservation 2. All three have been raised in submissions as alternative or non-mutually exclusive methods for protection for the Cashmere Village Green, and its is appropriate that each be heard and examined in respect of their opportunities and constraints.
Note: Any decisions made by the special committee on the issue of QEII National Trust Open Space Covenants and Conservation 2 zoning will only form recommendations to the Council as these alternatives will involve other bodies and committees.
The Minister of Conservation must ultimately approve the declaration of land as a reserve.
The second hearing will then deal with matters raised in relation to the draft management plan for the Cashmere Village Green, including goals, objectives and policies, landscape plans and budgets. Decisions made by the special committee on the draft management plan will be final.
A total of 111 submissions have been received on the proposal to declare the Cashmere Village Green a Recreation Reserve pursuant to the Reserves Act 1977, the Queen Elizabeth II National Open Space Covenants, proposed City Plan Zoning and the Draft Management Plan.
Summary of the Process in Relation to Hearings and Decisions
Declaration as a Recreation Reserve Hearing
(a) Special Committee to hear submissions in relation to section 14 of the Reserves Act 1977, declaration as a recreation reserve.
Decision is final (subject to DOC approval).
(b) Special Committee to hear submissions in relation to the Queen Elizabeth II National Trust Open Space Covenant, and submissions relating to a change of zoning from Open Space 1 to Conservation 2 in the proposed city plan.
Decisions on the matters in (b) above may only form recommendations to Council.
Draft Management Plan Hearing
(a) Special Committee to hear submissions in relation to the draft management plan for the Cashmere Village Green.
Decision is final.
With regard to the Community Board appointment the Spreydon/Heathcote Community Board has been advised that the Parks and Recreation Committee would appreciate their consideration of Trish Hunter as the Community Board representative on the Cashmere Village Green Special Committee.
| Recommendation: |
|
4. PETRIE PARK - PROPERTY PURCHASE RR 6502
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Parks Manager | Rod Whearty |
| Corporate Plan Output: Neighbourhood Reserve Purchase | |
The purpose of this report is to obtain Council approval to purchase the property at 121 Petrie Street as an addition to Petrie Park to improve sight lines and provide a safer park environment.
SITE LOCATION
Petrie Park is a neighbourhood Park situated between Petrie Street and Stapletons Road covering an area of 8832m2. Approximately half of the total area is occupied by the Richmond Bowling Club who have been operating on their leased portion of the Park since 1972.
The remaining public open space portion of the Park is completely surrounded by neighbouring residential properties apart from a vehicle entrance off Stapletons Road and a pedestrian accessway off Petrie Street.
CAR PARKING AND PARK USAGE
For many years the Bowling Club utilised the open area of the Park for car parking on a number of days throughout the season.
In 1993 local residents requested the Parks Unit to consider installing some play equipment for the local children. Use of the reserve by the local children was severely restricted on days when the Bowling Club utilised the area for overflow car parking. Although the Bowling Club had always obtained Parks Unit approval to use the area for car parking, they had been advised for a number of years that the installation of children's play equipment was programmed and when this occurred the area would no longer be available to the club for the purpose of car parking.
The Parks Unit's position has always been that the manoeuvring of vehicles in close proximity to the playground is incompatible and subsequently the Club has not been given approval to use the area since the play equipment was installed in February 1996.
PARK LOCALITY AND CATCHMENT
Petrie Park is an important local park servicing a relatively large catchment area.
Petrie Park is the only reserve in an area bounded by Shirley Road, North Parade, North Avon Road and Hills Road, apart from the Shirley Community Centre.
Although there is play equipment and a half basketball court at the Shirley Community Centre, the restricted area does not provide the same opportunities for informal play and ball games as in the case of Petrie Park.
Since the installation of the play equipment the indication is that the use of the reserve has increased and the addition has been very well received by the local community.
PARK LAYOUT AND SAFETY
The Park is completely enclosed by neighbouring residential properties. The layout is contrary to the Council's "Safer Parks" objectives and is a classic example of what we are trying to avoid in terms of a parks layout and design. The Park is set some distance back off the street and has very poor sight lines from the street which allows little or no casual surveillance from people passing by. Additional safety benefit from properties surrounding the Park is also very limited as only one or two have formal living areas that overlook the Park. There has also been an occasion in recent months where two young girls were indecently approached by a man but fortunately a member from the Bowling Club came to their aid.
The current area of the parks is sufficient for its intended use which is a small neighbourhood reserve, however the layout is far from ideal. A longer term option could be for the Council to have a slight juggle of land holdings and the acquisition of street frontage properties could largely be funded through relinquishing the rear and more secluded portions of the park to provide a layout that has open views with good street frontage, creating a safer environment for all users.
Although Petrie Park is not in an area of high Open Space deficiency, the purchase of residential property to give a wider street frontage can be easily justified on safety benefits alone. Petrie Park is serving a reasonably large catchment area where going to an alternative park such as Richmond Park or St Albans Park involves travelling some distance and negotiating busy roads which for a number of users, particularly small children, is simply out of the question.
PROPERTY PURCHASE
The purchase of the property at No 121 Petrie Street will widen the existing Park frontage and, most importantly purchase of this property will provide a direct sight line to the play structure from the street.
The Parks Unit has negotiated a sale and purchase agreement with the current owners of 121 Petrie Street subject to Council approval. The details of the settlement are covered in the Public Excluded section of this agenda.
CONCLUSION
The Parks Unit is well aware of the undesirable layout of Petrie Park. The Park has previously been identified as part of the Parks Unit Asset Management Programme as one that will require property acquisition to improve the layout, safety and usage of the reserve. Purchase on the grounds of the "Safer Parks" policy is justifiable and although it is not in one of the areas of high open space deficiency it is important to note that opportunities do not always arise in the highest priority areas first.
There is a risk that if funds are continually held over while waiting for suitable properties to come up in the most deficient areas opportunities to address problems in other areas could be lost. Therefore it is often a matter, as in this case, of taking the opportunities as they arise. The purchase can be achieved in this financial year through the Parks Unit's "Neighbourhood Reserve Purchase Fund".
The Parks Unit therefore recommends that the property at 121 Petrie Street be purchased as an addition to Petrie Park to improve the design and layout of the existing park thus providing a safer park environment for all users.
The recommendations included in the officer report were:
The Committee appointed a sub-committee comprising Councillors Gordon Freeman, Graeme Condon and Carole Anderton to inspect the site and to report directly to the November Council meeting with a recommendation on the property purchase. As the sub-committee did not meet until Tuesday 25 November its report was not available for inclusion in this agenda. A supplementary report will be tabled at the meeting.
| 5. | TURNING POINT 2000 CASTLE ROCK/TORS PROJECT | RR 6358 |
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Parks Manager | Kelvin McMillan, Parks Planner |
| Corporate Plan Output: Parks Plans and Policy Statements | |
The purpose of this report is to seek the endorsement of the Council for the Turning Point 2000 Castle Rock and Tors Scenic Reserve Enhancement Project.
The Turning Point 2000 Committee has three millennium projects underway, namely, Godley Head Wildlife and Plant Restoration project, Castle Rock/Whaka Raupo project, and the Crater Rim Forest Park Project.
The Castle Rock/Tors, part of the wider Castle Rock/Whaka Raupo Project, before the Committee encompasses one of the City's most outstanding environmental, recreation and landmark sites. Castle Rock is one of Canterbury's most popular rock climbing sites.
The project has been divided into two parts - namely an overall long term `Vision Document' and an implementation phase for the next few years till the year 2000.
THE VISION DOCUMENT
The landscape vision for the project has been prepared by Di Lucas and Associates and is tabled. Community involvement in the wider project was sought at a public workshop/meeting held in Heathcote Valley. A range of recreational groups and representatives from Heathcote Valley Community Association and Summit Road Society attended the workshop.
Broadly the `vision' sees the restoration of native forest on parts of the Castle Rock (Christchurch City Council) and Whaka Raupo Reserves (Banks Peninsula District Council), the provision of walking tracks to allow public access to some of the quite spectacular natural features and views available; additional mountain bike tracks; loop pathways; provision of toilet facilities, seating and information panels at appropriate places; permanent and temporary fencing to protect plantings from stock and the upgrading of the Bridle Path environment with groves of Kowhai and other species. Lists of quantities are also included.
Implementation of the `Vision Document' will require long term commitment from the Council to bring the plan to fruition after the initial work which will be carried out and largely funded by Turning Point 2000 over the next two to three years.
Overall the Parks Unit is supportive of the general concept for Castle Rock and the Tors Reserve. However, a number of issues such as toilet placement and provision of car parking will need further investigation.
Final placement of many of the tracks and fences will be dependent on site constraints and further investigation of visitor use patterns.
Only tracks that are definitely needed will be constructed at this stage.
IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
Implementation of the first stages of the project to achieve the `vision' will be subject to further discussion between Parks Unit and Turning Point 2000. How much work will be completed before the year 2000 will depend a good deal on how readily funds can be raised through public and community group efforts, from various grants and through corporate subscriptions. It will also depend on the numbers of plants that can be propagated from Port Hills stocks in that time frame.
Initially small areas would be fenced off from grazing stock. Within these areas planting would be done progressively by volunteers. Eventually planted areas will be self sustaining. Planting will only be from plants sourced from the Port Hills or other ecologically appropriate areas.
The general placement of walkways will be undertaken as shown on the concept plan. In the long term walkways will be linked together to provide varied walking circuits and links with mountain bike tracks will be completed as well. Sites where stiles, seating and information panels will be located are also indicated. A special feature will be the planting of groves of Kowhai and associated species along sections of the historic Bridle Path access between the Plains and Lyttelton Harbour.
Actual implementation of the project in 1999 and year 2000, and design and placement of tracks and facilities will be in consultation with Parks Unit staff and approved by the Parks Manager. This will ensure facility design, seats, signs etc, is in conformity with standard systems in place for the Council's Port Hills Reserves, and the establishment and maintenance costs created by the project are within the Council's budget. There are unlikely to be costs to the Council in respect to ongoing maintenance until the year 2000-2001.
An estimate of the costs of the Turning Point 2000 Castle Rock/Tors project will be tabled at the meeting.
This project will significantly enhance Castle Rock and Tors Reserves, alleviate current problems and help restore the ecology of the area.
The Hagley/Ferrymead Community Board support in principle the Turning Point 2000 Landscape Development Concept.
| Recommendation: |
|
| 6. | RESERVE CHARGING DISCUSSION PAPER SPORTS CLUBS AND COMMUNITY GROUPS | RR 6366 |
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Parks Manager | Richard Holland, Parks Business Manager (Assets)/Julie Sadler |
| Corporate Plan Output: Consents, page 9.4.8 | |
The purpose of this report is to present the draft discussion paper which was circulated to Councillors with the agenda for the Committee's seminar meeting on 24 October 1997.
Following Local Government amalgamation in 1989 the need for a city-wide standard for applying a fair and equitable charging policy for sports clubs and community groups leasing park land for clubrooms became apparent. As a perusal of the schedules attached to the discussion document will show, existing rent levels are neither consistent nor equitable. They are a legacy of the policy variations between the former territorial authorities.
Recently with the introduction of the Local Government Act No 3 1996, the need for consideration of private and public benefits to the clubs and the community also needed to be considered.
The discussion paper has been compiled after extensive discussions over a long period of time by Parks, Property, Leisure and Community Services and Funds Accounting Units. The guiding principle has been to establish a fair and equitable charging policy.
In developing charges, the officers saw the need for the Council to balance obligations of prudent management of the reserve asset and related expenses, with promotion of community development. In short, this means achieving a reasonable return for use of the land while at the same time arriving at charges that do not impose an unmanageable burden on the users.
The discussion paper proposes a charging policy for the preferential use reserves by sports clubs and existing community groups occupying less than one hectare of land. Currently 155 sports clubs and 59 community groups enjoy this privilege. In most cases the sports club lease is for clubrooms; in other cases it is for social rooms attached to a Council-owned amenities block.
The current review does not address either commercial use of reserves land or sports club leases over areas of more than one hectare. These leases will be the subject of a separate review.
The discussion document was circulated to all Councillors in mid-October and was presented to a seminar meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee on 24 October 1997.
After carefully considering the key components of the proposed charging regime the Committee concluded that it provided a fair and equitable basis for charging for sports clubs and community groups for the occupation of reserves land which, if adopted, would create a "level playing field" by putting all groups on an equal footing for the first time.
The Committee referred the draft document to its November meeting with the suggestion that it be circulated to the affected sports clubs and community groups for comment.
| Recommendation: | That the draft discussion paper "Charges for Occupation of Reserve Land" be circulated to the affected sports clubs and community groups for comment and the outcome of this consultation be reported back to the Parks and Recreation Committee. |
| 7. | CERM PERFORMANCE INDICATORS REVIEW FOR JELLIE PARK, AQUALAND AND WHARENUI POOL | RR 6492 |
| Officer responsible | Author |
| Leisure and Community Services Manager | Lyall Matchett |
| Corporate Plan Output: Swimming Pools - Leased Corporate Plan Page 8.4. | |
The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the performance of our two leased pools in terms of customer service.
The review has been undertaken by the University of South Australia - The Centre for Environmental and Recreation Management (CERM) over a seven day period in April 1997.
Two hundred and twenty five patrons completed the questionnaire at Wharenui Pool and 233 at Jellie Park.
WHARENUI POOL AND RECREATION CENTRE
Positive Aspects
The CERM review highlighted the following as positive aspects:
- Activity Range
- Staff Friendliness
- Staff Responsiveness
- Staff Presentation
Areas for Improvement
Safe and secure car parking - additional comments were - "car broken into, need secure bike rack, dangerous for children".
Facility Cleanliness - additional comments were - "change room, showers, toilets" as problem areas.
Water Quality - This attribute recorded the equal highest expectations score suggesting it is regarded as a high priority of swimmers. The low performance score suggests some level of dissatisfaction with the current quality. Water temperature was also of concern.
JELLIE PARK AQUALAND
Positive Aspects
The CERM review highlighted the following positive aspects:
- Information
- Start and Finish Times
- Activity Range
- Organisation
- Food and Drink Facilities
- Child Minding
Areas for Improvement
Safety and Security of Parking - the issue of safe and secure parking is of significant concern for centre users. The number of people who access the pool is very high making this an issue of significance for the majority of customers. The review also identified that 74% of users were females, indicating a strong concern for personal safety.
CONCLUSION FROM CERM REVIEW
The reviews clearly highlighted the areas where public expectations are not being met and where improvements can be made.
The high proportion of female use, especially at Jellie Park indicates that security and safety of car parking needs closer examination.
The programme to upgrade changing rooms at Jellie Park and filtration at both pools should go a long way to meeting water quality and centre maintenance issues.
The main conclusion reached was that the lease documents of both facilities should be updated to include performance standards which would enable Council staff to ensure that facilities were being properly cleaned and maintained.
| Recommendation: | That the relevant lease documents be amended to include performance standards to enable Council staff to ensure the facilities are being properly managed, cleaned and maintained. |
| 8. | NATIONS IN BLOOM 97 IFPRA EUROPE CONGRESS 6-10 OCTOBER 1997 | RR 6487 |
The Parks Manager reported on the Nations in Bloom competition and IFPRA Europe Congress attended by Councillor Freeman and Mr Neiel Drain.
NATIONS IN BLOOM
As Councillors will be well aware, Christchurch was successful in winning first place in the `top' section (populations over 300,000) in the Nations in Bloom '97 international competition.
Christchurch was one of seven finalists in Category D. The other finalists in our Category were: Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emerates), Barcelona (Spain), Durban (South Africa), Lisbon (Portugal), Omiya (Japan) and Leeds (England).
Each contestant was allotted a half hour for their presentation with a further 10 minutes allowed for the judges to ask questions.
Our presentation was in two parts, namely a short (7 minutes) video giving an overview of Christchurch and some of its achievements, followed by a selection of 35 mm slides with personal commentary, which complemented our initial Nations in Bloom submission and provided further examples of various initiatives of the city within the competition's criteria.
A television company filmed the proceedings including personal interviews with the winners. This footage was to be distributed to 40 countries world wide.
Needless to say the announcement of Christchurch as winner of such a prestigious event was a moment of intense pleasure and satisfaction for both Councillor Freeman and Mr Neiel Drain. Most importantly however the award reflects the many initiatives and considerable achievements of this Council in the areas of planning, environment, heritage, and community involvement and also the many contributions of individual citizens and groups who have helped make Christchurch what it is today.
It is important that, in line with the resolution on promotion of the award passed by the Council at its October meeting, opportunities are not lost to further build on and promote what has been achieved and to ensure there are ongoing benefits to Christchurch such as in the fields of tourism, and other business opportunities and encouraging the ongoing support and co-operation of the community at large in the further enhancement of the city. Action is in fact currently being taken to convene a meeting of interested parties, the outcome of which will be reported to a future meeting of the Committee.
1997 IFPRA EUROPE CONGRESS
Approximately 300 delegates attended the congress, countries represented including: Spain, France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Lithuania, Slovakia, England, Ireland, Norway, Finland, Holland, Monaco, Japan, China, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Brazil, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Mexico.
The central theme of the congress was municipal parks and gardens and their relevance to the environment, leisure and culture. This was divided into three main areas for papers and discussion, namely, development and maintenance in the Mediterranean; environment, recreational and didactic use of parks; and problems associated with green belts around cities.
Much of the content of the congress was relevant to aspects of development and management of our parks here in Christchurch. However, it was interesting to observe that in a number of areas, particularly those of planning, conservation and environmental management, Christchurch compares very favourably with some of our European counterparts. All in all, some useful information was gathered and a bound copy of the Congress proceedings and papers is held by the Parks Unit.
PART B - REPORTS FOR INFORMATION
9. DEPUTATIONS BY APPOINTMENT ROSE HISTORIC CHAPEL TRUST
Ms Liz McRostie of the Rose Historic Trust addressed the Committee in support of the Trust's request that the reserve on which the Rose Historic Chapel is situated be renamed. The text of the deputation was circulated in the form of a letter to the Committee members in conjunction with a letter in support from Tim Barnett MP.
10. WORLD JETSPRINT CHAMPIONSHIPS NOVEMBER 1998 RR 6505
This report advised the Committee of endeavours by Southern JetSprint Promotions in obtaining the necessary approvals for the purpose of hosting the 1998 World Jetsprint Championships on the South Branch of the Waimakariri River adjacent to Lake Roto Kohatu.
Southern JetSprint Promotions have obtained the required access privilege to the proposed site and are currently liaising with the Christchurch City Council Environmental Services Unit with regard to obtaining a resource consent. Based on a draft proposal presented to the Fendalton Service Centre Resource Management Officer Committee, it was deemed that the adverse effects of noise and traffic would be more than minor, and that the application should be publicly notified. At this point in time, Southern JetSprint Promotions have not lodged a formal application with the Committee. The implication of requiring a notified application is that it will now take four months from the time of lodging the formal application for a decision to be made. This would adversely affect the planning of this event, as the New Zealand Jetsprint Association needs confirmation of a bid document by early November 1997. The likely outcome of this decision is that the North Island will now host this event in 1998 with a resultant loss of economic benefit to Christchurch of $1.65 million dollars.
The Committee decided:
| 11. | UPDATE ON FACILITIES ASSET MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL PROJECTS | RR 6473 |
The Leisure and Community Services Manager's report updated the Committee on progress being made with asset maintenance and capital projects that were budgeted for in this financial year.
The Committee decided that the maintenance projects for stadia, swimming pools, camping grounds and golf courses be addressed during the Committee's forthcoming tour of facilities.
12. JULIO IGLESIAS AT QEII PARK RR 6519
The purpose of this report was to advise Councillors of the Julio Iglesias concert booked for QEII Park on Thursday 12 February. Although not officially a "Festival of Romance" event, the concert is timed to coincide with the Festival and takes place just two days prior to Valentine's Day.
The Manager of QEII Park was asked to report back on the results of the concert.
The Committee decided that the Leisure and Community Services Manager in conjunction with the Parks and Recreation Committee, continue to actively pursue new outdoor concerts for QEII Park.
13. REPORTS RECEIVED
| 13.1 | Proposed Land Purchase Wakefield Avenue, Sumner | RR 5503 |
This report updated the Committee on the latest developments in respect of the proposed acquisition of part of the Church Property Trustees' property in Wakefield Avenue, Sumner.
The Parks Manager has been requested to prepare, in conjunction with the ward Councillors, options for the recreational use of the land for community comment, with the results of the consultation to be reported to the February meeting of the Committee.
| 13.2 | Summertimes Sponsorship/Revenue Update | RR 6515 |
The purpose of this report was to update Councillors further with progress on sponsorship and revenue generation for the 1998 SummerTimes festival.
| 13.3 | Performance Indicator Review CERM | RR 6327 |
This report outlined the main findings of the annual review of the Rawhiti Golf Course. The review indicated that the operation of the Rawhiti Golf Course is meeting customer expectations in all but three areas. These were:
Items (ii) and (iii) can be addressed with the operator following resolution of the licence. The provision of a practice fairway is a matter that requires further investigation. There is little surplus land available in close proximity to the course that could be developed for this purpose, but opportunities are being investigated.
PART C - REPORT ON DELEGATED DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE
14. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC
The Committee resolved:
CONSIDERED THIS 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 1997
MAYOR