UDSIC 10 July 2015

COMMITTEE AGENDA

10 July 2015 9am Wynn Williams House, Level 5, 47 Hereford Street

10 JULY 2015

UDS Independent Chair Bill Wasley

Christchurch City Council Mayor Lianne Dalziel, Councillors Paul Lonsdale and Phil Clearwater

Environment Canterbury Commissioners Dame Margaret Bazley, Peter Skelton and Rex Williams

Selwyn District Council Mayor Kelvin Coe, Councillors Malcolm Lyall and Mark Alexander

Waimakariri District Council Mayor David Ayers, Councillors Jim Gerard and Neville Atkinson

Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu Sir Mark Solomon and Elizabeth Cunningham

New Zealand Transport Agency (observer) Jim Harland

Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (observer) John Ombler

Canterbury District Health Board (observer) David Meates

UDS Implementation Manager Keith Tallentire ph 9418590

Committee Adviser Barbara Strang ph 9415216

10 JULY 2015

Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee (UDSIC) Terms of Reference (2015)

1. Purpose The UDSIC is a joint committee within the meaning of the Local Government Act 2002. In 2015 it absorbed additional functions from the former Recovery Strategy Advisory Committee established by the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority in 2012. Local authority members are Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council, Selwyn District Council and Canterbury Regional Council. The joint committee has additional public body representation from tangata whenua and other agencies. It has been established to oversee implementation of the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy (UDS), provide advice to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and ensure integration between earthquake recovery activity and longer term urban development activity, including: Providing clear and united leadership in delivering the UDS vision and principles; Promoting integration with the Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch, associated recovery plans and programmes including the implementation of the Land Use Recovery Plan (LURP) and Natural Environment Recovery Programme (NERP); and, Supporting the delivery of aligned tangata whenua objectives as outlined in Ng i Tahu 2025 and the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan 2013. The Committee is a formal joint committee pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002, (Schedule 7, Section 30). The Local Authorities have resolved that the Committee is not discharged at the point of the next election period (in line with clause 30 (7) of schedule 7).

2. Membership The local authorities and Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu shall each appoint up to three representatives, including their respective Mayors, Chair and Kaiwhakahaere. The Chief Executives of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) and Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB), and the Regional Director of the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) attend as observers and have speaking rights but in a non‐voting capacity. There shall be an Independent Chair (non‐elected member), appointed by the Committee, who has speaking rights and voting capacity. The standing voting membership is limited to 16 members (including the Independent Chair), but with the power to co‐opt up to a maximum of two additional non‐voting members where required to ensure effective implementation. The Committee shall also appoint a Deputy Chair, who shall be elected at the commencement of each triennium, and who shall be a member of the Committee. In accordance with Section 30A of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002, the quorum at a meeting of the Committee shall be eight voting members. Other representatives of voting and non‐voting organisations are permitted to attend meetings of the Committee; however attendance at any public excluded session shall only be permitted with the prior approval of the Chair. Likewise, speaking rights of other representatives at Committee meetings (whether in public session or not) shall only be granted with the prior approval of the Chair. 10 JULY 2015

Monthly, or as necessary and determined by the Independent Chair. Notification of meetings and the publication of agendas and reports shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Part 7 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

4. Committee Delegations The UDS Implementation Committee is delegated the following functions in support of its overall purpose: General Overseeing implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP, NERP and associated documents, such as the Greater Christchurch Transport Statement Advising the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority on the development and implementation of the Recovery Strategy and any associated matters, including programmes, plans, projects, systems, processes and resources led by CERA or any other central government agency for the purposes of the recovery of greater Christchurch (as defined in the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011) Ensuring the integration between the UDS and any of the foregoing matters Ensuring organisational systems and resources support implementation Monitoring and reporting progress against actions and milestones Managing any risks identified in implementation Identifying and resolving any implementation inconsistencies arising from partner consultation processes Facilitating consultation and establishing forums as necessary to support implementation and review Periodically reviewing and recommending any adjustments to the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP.

Specific Selecting and appointing an Independent Chair and Deputy Chair Taking responsibility for implementing any actions specifically allocated to the Committee Implementing a Memorandum of Understanding, as adopted by the Committee for each triennial period, to provide and maintain partnership relationships and provide for the resolution of any conflict Advocate for statements of intent of council owned companies to be aligned to implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP where appropriate. Champion integration and implementation through partner strategies, programmes, plans and policy instruments (including the Regional Policy Statement, Regional and District Plans, Long Term Plans (LTPs), Annual Plans, transport programmes and triennial agreements) and through partnerships with other sectors such as health, education and business. Establish protocols to ensure that implementation, where necessary, is consistent, collaborative and/or coordinated to achieve optimal outcomes. Making submissions, as appropriate, on Government proposals and other initiatives relevant to the implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP.

10 JULY 2015

2. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

3.1 ONE VOICE TE REO KOTAHI (OVTRK)

I meeting on 12 June 2015.

We are pleased to submit that One Voice Te Reo Kotahi (OVTRK) may be able to assist the UDSIC.

First of all, our background. OVTRK has established a Register on which those organisations that have not been formed by government or commercial interests and which are committed to the OVTRK kaupapa can list themselves (we use the term NGO as shorthand for such organisations). This list is available, along with the history of OVTRK, on . It is constantly update because it is cross referenced to CINCH, as described on our blogspot. People involved with NGOs on the Register can serve on the Organising Group. In addition to setting up the blogspot and Register we have organised approximately bimonthly Fora of interest to the broad sector (sometimes referred to as the Third Sector). The purpose is to give those interested a no-cost opportunity to work together more closely and to profile their interest in a Treaty-based future for Greater Christchurch. The contribution by NGOs in this city is considerable. The potential of them to work together is even greater. The scale of their work is evident from data collected from a recent Johns Hopkins University study of our sector. That identified 97,000 NGOs in this country, 90% of whom have no paid staff. Given that 10% of the population lives in Greater Christchurch we can infer that there are approximately 10,000 NGOs here. An update of the data is to be done this year by Statistics NZ. We submit that at this time of Transition strategy and policy needs to be developed to recognise this contribution to the city. The current Wards-based approach can connect practice and policy for place-based NGOs to their relevant TLA but complementary strategy and policy is needed to include identity-based and interest-based NGOs - these NGOs serve the whole geographic area of Greater Christchurch. This connection of practice and policy is necessary so that all parts of the "heart" of the organisational strength of the sector can be brought together and seen as a whole. This complementary strategy and policy should enable collaboration amongst NGOs. A recent survey of NGOs highlighted the need for shared space for collaboration and emphasised the value placed on sharing resources. While most NGOs cannot afford the time and funds to attend many of the "training" opportunities that are available, many (though not all) of the few bigger NGOs who can afford to do so are very generous in their sharing of resources. Specifically we want to allow NGO voices to -be heard - be informed -be enabled to work together - contribute the work done on Frameworks for Treaty-based, multicultural development where the indigenous status of tangata whenua and the role of tangata Tiriti (everyone else) are understood. We submit that OVTRK may be able to assist. Recognition for the NGO collaborative "heart" is missing. These organisations are not limited to commercial and statutory imperatives and have potential to enhance responses from citizens and their organisations. In this way this Third Sector will better serve Greater Christchurch, alongside the important, complemetary role of the commercial and statutory sectors.

1 July 2015

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE (UDSIC)

Held at Wynn Williams House, Level 5, 47 Hereford Street, Christchurch on 12 June at 9am

PRESENT: Urban Development Strategy (UDS) Bill Wasley (Independent Chair) Christchurch City Council Mayor Lianne Dalziel, Councillor Phil Clearwater Environment Canterbury Commissioners Dame Margaret Bazley, Rex Williams and Peter Skelton Selwyn District Council Mayor Kelvin Coe and Councillor Mark Alexander ATTACH Waimakariri District Council Councillors Jim Gerard and Neville Atkinson Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu Elizabeth Cunningham New Zealand Transport Agency (observer) Jim Harland

The meeting was adjourned from 9.02am until 9.20am.

1. APOLOGIES:

Apologies for absence were received and accepted from Mayor David Ayers (Waimakariri District Council) Paul Lonsdale (Christchurch City Council) Sir Mark Solomon (Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu), John Ombler (Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Authority), David Meates (Canterbury District Health Board) and from Mayor Lianne Dalziel for early departure (10.25am).

2. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

No declarations were made.

3. DEPUTATIONS BY APPOINTMENT

Nil.

4. CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

The Committee received the minutes of the previous meeting of 21 April 2015.

5. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH FREIGHT STUDY: MANAGEMENT DIRECTIONS STATEMENT AND FREIGHT ACTION PLAN

The Committee considered a report seeking their endorsement of the Freight Management Directions Statement and the Greater Christchurch Freight Action Plan. The report was a follow‐up to the report to the Committee on 10 October 2014.

* UDS partners in respect of this matter are the Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, Waimakariri District Council, Environment Canterbury, Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu and New Zealand Transport Agency. 5. Cont'd

The Committee agreed to:

5.1 Note the finalisation of the Greater Christchurch Freight Study and the Greater Christchurch Freight Management Directions Statement;

5.2 Endorse the use of the Greater Christchurch Freight Management Direction Statement as an informing document for the development of the Canterbury Regional Land Transport Plan and earthquake Recovery Plans;

5.3 Endorse the Greater Christchurch Freight Action Plan;

5.4 .Support the Greater Christchurch Freight Action Plan for inclusion in the UDS Transport Group work programme for the ongoing collaborative work of the GCTS partners who will apply their best endeavours to give effect to the Greater Christchurch Freight Action Plan;

5.5 The public release of the Greater Christchurch Freight Management Direction Statement and the Greater Christchurch Freight Action Plan and to send a copy to the Canterbury and West Coast Regional Transport Committee’s for their information.

Moved: Rex Williams Seconded: Mark Alexander

6. REBUILD AND RECOVERY ISSUES AND THE MIGRANT WORKFORCE

The Committee received a presentation from Rex Gibson and Henry Jaiswal of the Christchurch Migrant Centre on re‐build issues and the changing Christchurch multi‐cultural landscape.

Information provided to the Committee on some issues for new migrants included:

social dislocation and barriers reportedly Government websites and call centres present difficulties for migrants access to and costs associated with interpretation services resettlement challenges including accommodation, cultural understanding and social acceptance employment maintaining family links

The Committee agreed to:

6.1 Receive the presentation;

6.2 Request a report from Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and Ministry of Social Development in relation to issues for new migrants and also the new migrant workforce connected to the rebuild and greater Christchurch region.

Moved: Dame Margaret Bazley Seconded: Neville Atkinson

7. ARTS AND CULTURE RECOVERY PROGRAMME UPDATE

The Committee received a presentation in relation to the Arts and Culture Recovery Programme by Maree Brown (Manager, Arts Policy, Manat Taonga ‐ Ministry for Culture and Heritage) and colleagues from the Joint Agency Group responsible for coordinating and implementing the Arts and Culture Recovery Programme.

The information provided the viewpoint of the importance of arts and culture to the social and economic recovery and revitalisation of greater Christchurch, and included the following: an outline of the main elements of the Arts and Cultural Recovery Programme examples of progress to date future plans and opportunities to ensure arts and culture is embedded into the rebuild and recovery efforts

The Committee agreed to:

7.1. Receive the presentation;

7.2. Request that the presentation be circulated to members of the Committee.

Moved: Rex Williams Seconded: Mark Alexander

8. LINCOLN UNIVERSITY RECOVERY UPDATE

The Committee received a presentation from Jeremy Baker, Deputy Vice Chancellor of Lincoln University outlining issues and challenges faced by the University and the initiatives and programmes being implemented to respond to these.

Highlights of the presentation included: enrolment growth of 9% domestic (including 46% international) in 2015 programmes offered by Lincoln University linking to their focus of 'Feed the World, Protect the Future and Live Well' a unique approach of industry relevant qualifications and inclusion of practical components

The Committee agreed to:

8.1 Receive the presentation.

Moved: Mark Alexander Seconded: Mayor Kelvin Coe

9. LINCOLN HUB UPDATE

The Committee received a presentation on the Lincoln Hub initiative from Andrew West (Vice Chancellor of Lincoln University) and Bella Sutherland (Establishment Director, Lincoln Hub). Highlights of the presentation included:

9. Cont'd

why 'clusters' work and why the Lincoln location is, in their opinion, working well ways the Lincoln Hub enhances the student experience and contributes to the wider community

The Committee agreed to:

9.1 Receive the presentation.

Moved: Neville Atkinson Seconded: Mark Alexander

10. LAND USE RECOVERY PLAN REVIEW UPDATE

The Committee received an update from Keith Tallentire (UDS Implementation Manager) on the Review of the Land Use Recovery Plan (LURP).

Information circulated included a brief summary of the initial consultation process and the feedback received and a timeline from June 2015 to September 2015, ending with the LURP review report and recommendations being submitted to Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery by 30 September 2015.

The Committee agreed to:

10.1. Receive the update and circulated information.

Moved: Peter Skelton Seconded: Mayor Kelvin Coe

11. UPDATE FROM COMMITTEE SECRETARIAT

The Committee received a report seeking their feedback on the operational efficiency and effectiveness on the new arrangements for future Committee meetings of the UDSIC.

The Committee expressed general satisfaction with the new arrangements including the venue and agenda items and format. The Chairperson outlined the intended structure for future meetings which included the following points:

briefings to the Committee which are for information only will be held at 8.30am for 30 minutes the open agenda of the meeting will include Recovery Programme updates if necessary the meeting will include a public excluded section as appropriate as some matters will still be in confidence

The Committee agreed to:

11.1. Receive the report;

11.2 Note the points on the intended structure for future meetings raised by the Chairperson

Moved: Neville Atkinson Seconded: Elizabeth Cunningham

The meeting closed at 12.02pm. * UDS partners in respect of this matter are the Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, Waimakariri District Council, Environment Canterbury, Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu and New Zealand Transport Agency. 10 JULY 2015

5. PROGRESS REPORT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT RECOVERY PROGRAMME

Author: Chrissie Williams, NERP Programme Leader Contact: 027 702 7457

Purpose

This report updates the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee on the implementation of the Natural Environment Recovery Programme for the second quarter of 2015.

Report

1. The Natural Environment Recovery Programme (NERP) Technical Advisory Group is meeting two‐ monthly, providing guidance to the programme, input to progress reporting of the NERP projects, and, where appropriate, advice for specific projects.

2. Reporting on the 17 NERP projects is by quarterly progress reports to the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee (UDSIC). The draft report for the second quarter 2015 is attached. Following this presentation to UDSIC the progress report is presented to the councils by the relevant Technical Advisory Group member.

3. On 3 June a workshop for Christchurch City Councillors and Environment Canterbury Commissioners was organised with CCC staff on coastal and flooding issues for Christchurch. As the issues overlap the roles and responsibilities of CCC and Environment Canterbury there was agreement to share information and work together on these issues.

4. Other presentations on the NERP have been requested and made to a number of groups including university classes.

5. Integration with other plans and programmes continues:

Future use of residential red zone land – contributing to the technical panel for Waimakariri area being led by CERA. Technical input from a NERP perspective will be provided for the Christchurch residential red zone land when that is requested.

Linking with Zone Committees and zone implementation programmes (ZIPs) for Christchurch West Melton, Banks Peninsula and Waimakariri zones.

Participating as an observer on the Project Steering Group for anchor projects Te Papa karo/Avon River Precinct and North and East frames.

Resourcing for the Programme: 6. CEAG agreed in March that the NERP programme leader position continue to May 2016 but at a reduced level of two days per week. The programme is being managed within that time allocation.

Legal compliance 7. The NERP aligns with the purposes of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 Part 1 s3 and the Recovery Strategy. 10 JULY 2015

8. The programme does not commit to specific projects, with those decisions being with lead agencies that have these included in their programmes of work and LTPs.

Consultation 9. NERP engagement with partner organisations is through the technical advisory group (TAG) and public fora.

Publicity / Communication 10. The NERP is available on the Environment Canterbury (www.ecan.govt.nz/nerp) and CERA websites. 11. Media includes articles in Living Here, in the Future Christchurch publication, and through information sheets for some of the projects.

Attachment NERP Draft Progress Report for second quarter of 2015 ‐ (3 pages best printed in colour on A3)

Recommendation

That the Committee receives the report, and provides feedback on the Natural Environment Recovery Programme progress report. Natural Environment Recovery Programme Progress Report second quarter 2015 April 2015 - June 2015

Lead agency/ Project title agencies (bold) April 2015 - June 2015 Milestone Date

Project and partners Investigate and plan for natural ECan ECan Report to Dec hazards CERA, NHRP, ECan planning to work with CDEM, TAs and others to develop a regional approach to natural hazards risk. By December 2015, a report will go to the regional policy forum on regional policy 2015 Hazards investigations; land use GNS, UC, CCC, regional approach, with a draft framework and action plan. forum on planning WDC, SDC, Active fault inve regional Reassess the risks and TRONT Regional source tsunami modelling underway. First draft of report being reviewed hazards susceptibilities of natural hazards. Geophysical survey/study of faulting in the Oxford area underway with UC and Southern Geophysical Ltd. approach. Report and map the results to inform CCC land use planning and development. July 1 Natural hazard risk in existing urban areas has been assessed and reflected in land planning documents, including in Christchurch Replacement District Plan. The coastal hazard provisions will be notified in July 2015 application of 2015 CCC proposes to develop a Natural Hazards Strategy in partnership with ECan. fault reports in CERA planning Management of the Canterbury Geotechnical Database (CGD) has transferred to MBIE from the 1 June 2015. MBIE recognises the importance of the CGD in the recovery of released Canterbury and in partnership with EQC has committed to ensuring a long-term future for this valuable resource. With the support of users and their clients this database has materially assisted in the rebuild and has resulted in the CGD being recognised both nationally and internationally as a database of huge importance to science. Regional July Source 2015 EQC groundwater monitoring will end later in a year. Discussions ongoing between ECan, CCC, WDC, SDC, GNS, NIWA, LINZ, EQC and universities on value of the network Tsunami Report and future home/funding for the work. EQC is now working towards instrumenting 200 wells and set up a steward for the network once claims have been settled. Investigate and monitor coasts ECan, NIWA ECan CCC 25 and estuaries UC, CCC, WDC, Coastal water quality monitoring continues within Avon Heathcote Estuary/Ihutai and on the coast replacement July Te Tai o Mahaanui/ Canterbury SDC, TRONT Continue to survey coastal cross sections along the coast of Christchurch and Waimakariri and topographic surveys of the South Brighton and Brooklands spits. district plan 2015 coastal investigations; estuary CCC stage 3 2 investigations; Investigate and Christchurch Replacement District Plan Stage 3 - Coastal Chapter is to be publically notified in July 2015. notification monitor earthquake changes in coastal and estuary processes and physical parameters. Build in sea level rise and climate variability. Reduce flood risks and restore CCC, SCIRT, WDC, CCC drainage capacity of waterways SDC, ECan The Flood Management Steering Group (CCC, CERA, ECan, MBIE and DPMC) are assessing options, particularly for Flockton and lower Heathcote. Report on options to Flood mitigation; stopbanks and other CERA, developers, improve drainage in Dudley Creek catchment will go to Council in Aug 2015. works; resilient sustainable TRONT Land drainage recovery programme investigations on all waterways being conducted and physical works will begin in second half of 2015. infrastructure in rebuild. Includes CCC Working with CERA on future use of residential red zone in lower Avon catchment on location of stopbanks, flood zones, pumping stations and horizontal infrastructure land drainage recovery programme. Pre-feasibility report for a tidal barrier at the mouth of the Estuary due in July 2015 3 WDC Waimakariri District Flood Team continues to respond to flood issues from June 2014 flooding event. Need to investigate longer term solutions to drainage issues in and around Kaiapoi and review the LIDAR results to identify areas where ground levels have shifted and affected the drainage network ECan/CCC On 3 June, a workshop for CCC Councillors and Environment Canterbury Commissioners on coastal and flooding issues for Christchurch was held. As the roles and responsibilities of CCC and Environment Canterbury overlap there was agreement to share information and work together on these issues. Plan for stormwater management CCC, WDC, SDC ECan by preparing Stormwater ECan, CERA Have a regional stormwater forum with staff from TAs and ECan to identify common issues for collaborative work improve knowledge and achieve better consistency with Management Plans (SMPs) stormwater management planning and consenting. Develop an SMP for each catchment CCC CCC June to fulfil the requirement for catchment- Comprehensive stormwater discharge consent to cover Christchurch and Banks Peninsula settlements, which will replace current consents for the South-West and Styx River Comprehensive 2015 wide stormwater discharge consent. catchments, is being prepared. Stormwater Important for planning for the RRZ Discharge 4 Heathcote Surface Water Management Plan (SMP) underway and to be completed Dec 2016. and CCDU anchor projects including Working with Mahaanui Kurataiao to ensure cultural matters are addressed as part of the stormwater management programme. Consent lodged WDC River Precinct. District wide stormwater quality monitoring methodology prepared and being implemented within Rangiora, to support the distri City SMPs Dec quality and sediment monitoring trial is also now scheduled for East Woodend (a liquefaction prone area draining into the downstream Waimakariri River). completed 2018 SDC Darfield, Kirwee and West Melton SMPs in development.

Act on opportunities for CCC, WDC, SDC, CCC/ECan stormwater treatment and SCIRT Stormwater issues management group (SWiM) meeting regularly improving the water quality and ECan, CERA, Joint agency Stormwater Action Team (SWAT continues to meet regularly and make useful gains by working collaboratively on ecosystem health of waterways CCDU, TRONT, erosion and sediment control, particularly during the rebuild and reduction of sediment discharges from bulk earthworks associated with subdivision development; Stormwater treatment systems; CDHB, developers, reduction of contaminants discharged to the reticulated stormwater network from industrial and commercial sites and pollution response procedures required for the CCC stream and river restoration; riparian UC, LU, NIWA, reticulated stormwater system zones; establishment of constructed Landcare Research, building materials (e.g. copper roofing) and wetlands ESR, NGOs, vehicle washing on commercial/industrial sites 5 Use LID /stormwater treatment consultants, zone Community meeting 20 June agreed that a group for coordination along the length of the river be formed, and a whole-of-river vision be developed systems/wetlands to attenuate committees Collaborative project in Steamwharf Stream - Liquefaction and bank movement destroyed an inanga spawning area. CCC and stormwater flows, reduce sediment, ECan are developing an Immediate Steps proposal to assist with planting and fencing the banks. and improve quality of stormwater into University of Canterbury waterways. Consider changing the ECan liaising regularly with UC Natural Resources Engineering HydroEco group about their work on stormwater modelling and monitoring form of waterways to enhance stream Student projects on ecology. Plant river banks to provide modelling and optimisation of different treatment trains for the campus catchment food sources, habitat and shade. monitoring green roof modules on the engineering building 11 10 9 8 7 6 Project spawning sites. sanctuary. Rehabilitate inanga mahinga kai.Investigate an eco- biodiversity corridors, reserves and ecosystems. Investigate sites for Assess, monitor highest-value biodiversity Assess, retain and enhance areas. andpests to earthquake affected programmes for controlling weeds Extendexisting strategies and have impact health on and safety potential to affect biodiversity, or Control weeds and peststhat have daylighting streams. retentionnatural ofsprings and unconfined aquifer.Encourage over controls use land Ensure Protect groundwater and springs waterways; minimise their effect. weather sewage overflows directly to infrastructurereduce/avoid to wet rebuild,During improve wastewater sewage overflows and their effects Act on opportunitiesto reduce existing wetlands Mapping, inventory, rehabilitation of changed by the earthquakes Rehabilitate andenhance wetlands controls and tributaries; erosion and sediment sediment removal in rivers adviceremoval on ofsediments; Investigations, assessment and Manage sedimentfromliquefaction Project title title Project committees, consultants, zone Research, NGOs, Landcare TRONT, UC, CERA, ECan, SDC DOC, CCC, WDC, NGOs TRONT, CERA/ LINZ ECan, DOC SDC, CCC, WDC, committees TRONT, Papatipu CERA, MBIE, CCDU SDC, SCIRT, CCC, ECan, WDC, TRONT, SCIRT, ECan, CDHB , SDC CCC, WDC, committees NIWA, zone TRONT, SDC, UC, CCC, WDC, ECan UC, TRONT consultants, NIWA, ECan SDC, CCC, WDC, agencies (bold) Lead agency/ Lead agency/ and partners partners and zone zone

CERA CERA CCC ECan ECan CCC CCC CCC/WDC/ECan WDC/ECan WDC CCC Community ESR Collaborative and community projects CCC Community Submissions made to the CCC LTP by Working with ECan, CCC and to CPH update knowledgeon faecal contamination (indicator bact A long-term aim is to develop a stormwater research, teaching,testing and demonstration park on UC campus Inter-Agency risk workshop held to explore cross-agency approaches for managing health and safety, biosecurity, and protecting and biosecurity, and safety, health managing for approaches to cross-agency workshop explore held risk Inter-Agency Maintenance work andweed control continuing on CCC reserves ECan will releasediscussion a document in 2015 seeking feedback on the current strategy and on future management options for The CanterburyRegional Pest Management 2011 Strategy Policies and rules in theproposed Land and RegionalWater Plan control activities over confined, unconfined and semi-confined Continue to monitorand report on groundwater quantity and quality ingreater Christchurch from a set of state of the environm a have ECan CCCand Much ofthe pre-earthquake wastewater capital programme was toprovide for growthto reduce overflow and frequency and volume. The wastewater network model has been updated to include the SCIRTrebuild work.This will whenbe calibrated SCIRT's work is Compliance Strategy in agreedplace and Consent an is sewageoverflows, consent a wetdischarge withfor CCChas ECan weather Land drainage recoveryinvestigations programme- waterways on all associated and wetlands continuing Developin Adraft conceptdesign report has beenprepared thefor joint Kaiapoi River Rehabilitation WorkingParty fo recommending sites Cam River Enhancement Fund Subcommittee established. Initial projects approved by subcommittee have beenimplemented, includin Land drainage recovery programme investigations continuing and physical works will begin in second halfof 2015. Working group continuin Lower Heathcote ecological investigations have been completed and will be used to inform the Surface ManagementWater Plan for Community observations are that in theRRZ thereare increasingpopulations ofriparian weedsexotic invasive seedlings management plan to address risksandissues identified intheworkshop. RRZ. Agreement to collaborate,share information across agencies, and align weed and pest management strategies where appropria programmes. A proposedCanterbury RPMPwill bedeveloped throughout 2015/16 to become operational in July 2017. time to understand the requirements of theNPD (when it is released), make sure a proposedRPMP is consistent with it, and get group or community supply protection zones and the Christchurch frequencies and volumes. Currently flows through Christchurch Wastewater Treatment Plant than are higher pre-earthquake. reduce the frequency and volume of overflows. There is a risk that the wastewater network rebuild will not be sufficient to ach with thepre-earthquake model to assess the change in network performance.Initial resultsindicate that consent compliance may investigationsrequired are downstream infuture topromote tr natural two stage low flow floodand channel within the upper Kaiapoi and lower Cam Rivers.The designs include concepts to ass riffle formation. Further sediment traps and channel stabilisation works are now being considered. since the last study in2012, and awaiting more rainfallevents to complete wet weather sampling. broom bathymetric,tidal flowand salinityanalysis andhydrodynamic modellingof Lake Kate Sheppard system in preparationfor poten stormwater modelling frameworkto quantify pollutant from loadsdifferent urban surfaces quantifying atmospheric deposition in different catchments in Christchurch developing remote logging of water quality in the Okeover Stream and Avon Ri

inanga spawning habitat The 'Water Greening the Red Zone Vision Eastern Avon- g pro g rammeremoval for askedfor support forthe preparation of an integrated plan forthe east of Christchurch, including the RRZ; working with the j Eden NZ) Trus ointinitiative to develop lona askedfor waterways restoredto be and nurtured,andfor improved stormwater floodwatersystems andmanagement. has a vision for a forest park in the AvonRRZ, River which would offer social, physical andenvironmental benefits for the ci t submitted that CCCtake a lead in role this project that becould established in the RRZ. g -term action plan reduceto sewera 15 was due to expire in June ECan2015. has resolved to extend the RPMS expiry to date 30 June 2016 to allow eatment and flushing of sediment throughthe river channel. ritical asset forChristchurch; maintenance ofthe river to restore its amenity and recreational values Groundwater Protection Zone. Although still p under appeal, the April 2015 - June 2015 2015 June - 2015 April -exclusion fence Heathcote River g e overflows thataffect water qualit Travis Wetland and RRZ area south ofTravis

eg. yellow flag iris,Canada Geese,sycamore, y ieveequal or better thanoverflow pre-earthquake ent wells. . r linear channel replanting and forminga aquiferswith additional restrictionswithin biodiversity on Crown owned land in the best value from the NPD guidance material be unachievable unachievable be

ist trap and treatsediment. Further key pests and pest management lan iseffectivefrom 18January 2014. complete, and a comparison will be made tial re-profiling, replanting and restoring the catchment Currentand future capital work will also until March 2017. te. CERAis reviewingte. interimits land g threesediment raking trapsandbed community on solutions for for solutions on community ty. completion programme recovery Land drainage Milestone Milestone

2016 Date Date

17 16 15 14 13 12 Project plantings. customary use;promote the principle resourcesand sites andtraditions of Restore and enhance mahinga kai enhance mahinga kai Act on opportunitiesto restore and (NES) requirements. Standard Environmental National 2016tomeetPlan targets and quality.If necessary amend Air of different heating appliances and air Continue monitoring changes in use emissionsair andquality Track earthquake effects on NES. with the to comply requirement the identification. Inform andeducate on Undertake a programme of HAILsite Manage contaminated sites disasters. management plans for future enforcement. Prepare waste compliance monitoring and illegal dumpingincreasingby recyclingorat nearsource. Reduce and disposalsites. Maximise aftercaremanage storage, of sorting earthquake waste; enforce and Improve monitoring and tracking of Manage earthquake waste sports areas beside the Avon Consider establishment of water access for people withdisabilities. and communitywellbeing.Provide passive recreation, visual amenity other recreation facilities provide for cycling and mountain bike tracks and develop anetworkwalkingof paths, available facilities;maintain and Promote and advertise currently recreation opportunities for outdoor Provide access to and production on availableland. gardens, orchards, and local food development of more community Support Christchurch. greater in community27 gardens already exist forestry food production and urban Support communitylocal gardens, Project title title Project . DOC DOC SDC, WDC, ECan, Papatipu ECan TRONT SDC, CCC, WDC, ECan CDEM MfE, CERA, CanCERN, waste industry, SDC, CCC, WDC, (WEMT) ECan NGOs committees, NZTA, zone DOC, CCDU, TRONT, ECan, SDC, CCC, WDC, Leadership Group Earthquake Recreation Sport and EnviroSchools SCION, TRONT, LU, SDC, ECan, CCC, WDC, NGOs, Branch Assn Canterbury Soil and Health agencies (bold) Lead agency/ Lead agency/ and partners partners and

ECan ECan CCC ECan/CCC/SDC ECan Waste Environmental ManagementTeam (WEMT) Combined Health and Environmental Hazards Programme ControlGroup PCG (CHER ) Community WDC CCC Sport and Recreation Earthquake Leadership Group Soiland Health Association Canterbury Branch Decision made to not lease Porritt Park until future use of RRZ decisions Coastal Pathwaywork progressing to plan. Beachville Road section is phasethe next being planned for development. Sport and Recreation Recovery Programme; Spaces, Places People:and A recovery programme for sportand C recreation ingreater Schools Gardening Hui Cultivate project funded by Vodafone Foundation ($100k/pa for 3years) Orchards inSchools programme setfor 2nd year Website being developed by members ofthe Christchurch Food Forest Collective Plan and Action Policy Resilience CCCFood Part-time coordinator employed for Food Resilience Network; focus on developing central food hub AGM held 20 2015.June Agreed to continue in leadership role for this project The 2014 Winter Air Campaign underwayis to (June August) with Information on thewww.letscleartheair.co.nz has been updated to provide better instructions toolsand other for wood burning Three ultra-low emissions burners (ULEBs) have been authorised. Two ofthese have resource consentgranted, enabling installat ECan continuing to work with land managers to raise awareness better of dustmanagement practices. This issue requiresa coord The proposed plan was notified 28 February and submissions closed 1May 2015. The plan will help achieve health based airqual Investigations undertaken within Christchurch have identified thatemission reductions are still required to achieve complianc Christchurch Replacement DistrictPlan includes contaminated land and hazardous substances waste provisions.and HAILIdentification project inSelwyn district underway. Shared services model for technical support on NES consentapplications is underway. SDC and CCC initially, and will then ext Draft guidelines on disaster waste management have been prepared with the aim of facilitating a higher level of preparedness ( Long-term aimis to produce nationally applicable guidelines for managing waste effectively ina disaster scenario The Hazmat funding obtained through the MinimisationWaste Fund (MfE) hasbeen extended for a further year to allow for the fu Developing a new website for informing public andindustry of what options are available when encountering and working with co updated An MOU has been signed between parties in the CHER PCG group. Worksafe NZ and CDHB have now joined the group and signe CHER PCGworks across agencies on earthquake waste, hazardous material, and contaminated land issues thatrequire a coordinate Submissions made to the CCC LTP by Christchurch Earthquake Appeal Trust funded repair/ relocation of damaged recreation facilities along Kaiapoi River and coast There is alsoprogress occurring on the adoption ofMahinga Kaias the designprinciple element in theRRZ. A planting day was in held in Aprilto coincide with the ceremony to celebrate the restoration theof ANZAC Memorial at the co Christchurch Adventure Park requirementsburnin around otherwise would not be able to install alow-emission burner managers and the community. where needed tovulnerable and low income households over winter. programmestoreduce emissions wood from burnerth households transition to new cleaner technology and better managingburning; odour,dust and smoke emissions better thatso they caused by home heating, outdoor burning, industrial discharges, dustand odour. Key measuresenabling include: people tocontin relation to council and CDEM wastefunctions. red zones. New procedures have been put in place to make this process as efficient and transparent as possible. management and treatment, contacts,and whatregulations apply.The website is intended to be similar to the asbestos awareweb MOU isto encourage collaboration, increase across agency awareness and clarify each agency's responsibilities. disposal, impact on the waste stream strategy Ambassador. Another planting day planned for July 2015. ofPoppies). This day was attending by representat to determine whattype ofManagement is plan best suited for the project.

Community Connection Nga Ngaru Trust East Christchurch Water Sports Trust continues to provideadvice for residential land owners on contaminated soil disposal, as part of the landproject repair network of schools with gardens developing g (Port Hills) by Select Evolution NZ Ltd progressing smoke free for flata water sports lake in eastChristchurch. asked for funding inLTP the for 900ma beach promenadeon the sand dunes between Waimairi and North Beach Surf Clubs. 3 sites identified,funding dueto start in July

a focus on no visible smoke. Lettersfocus a on novisiblearebeing smoke.to sent wood bur rough behaviourwithpartnersand CDHB the change, working such as April 2015 - June 2015 2015 June - 2015 April developing urban agriculture with young people

taking lead a role; local primaryschools involved e withthe NES targets rner of Anzac Driveand Travis Road (Structure households to help them burn smoke free

and subsequent response in and recovery) end to other TAs as required. ntaminants in soils rther removalof materials from Port the Hills ning households to advise them of the new ion into new homes and situations that ue to burn wood through supporting a ity standards throughity reducingstandards pollution inated effort betweenECan, industry, land site recently created. hristchurch- available as a web based d response- including work placesafety,

to provide help and assistance d the MOU. The purpose ofthe including disposal, eveloping Selwyn in limited HAIL ID Undertake properties Port Hills waste on RRZ hazardous household Clearance of hub centralfood city Creation of a Milestone Milestone 2 Nov 015 2015 June 2016 Mar Date Date

GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

Author: Milly Woods, UDS Project Assistant Contact: 03 941 6555

1. Purpose

This report provides an update on the progress of the Productivity Commission Inquiry 'Using land for Housing', and seeks delegation for the Independent Chair to approve a submission on the Productivity Commission's draft report, to be prepared on behalf of the UDS partnership. The deadline for submissions is August 4 2015. Ratification of the submission would be sought at the meeting of the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee on 14 August 2015.

2. Background

2.1. The Productivity Commission commenced an inquiry looking at 'Using Land for Housing' in September 2014. The Productivity Commission released an Issues Paper on 5 November 2014, on which the UDS partnership and individual partners made a submission.

2.2. The Productivity Commission released a draft report on 'Using land for Housing' on 17 June 2015 outlining a number of findings and draft recommendations. The deadline for submissions on the draft report is 4 August 2015, with the final report due to Government by 30 September 2015.

2.3. The Productivity Commission have produced a brief summary of the draft report "Cut to the Chase ‐ Using land for Housing" (refer Attachment 1).

3. Draft Report 'Using Land For Housing'

Integrated planning systems and processes 3.1. The Productivity Commission supports the use of spatial plans in order to achieve integrated planning outcomes around supply of land for housing, infrastructure and transport. The Commission discusses examples of spatial plans being used by a number of local authorities, and notes the benefits of intra‐regional coordination, and the ability to better respond to disasters.

3.2. The Productivity Commission recommends a new legislative avenue to enable larger cities to translate spatial plans into land use regulations. The proposed legislative avenue would be voluntary, tightly focussed on key issues around functioning of cities and demand for land, and developed with Central Government agencies. The Commission recommends that spatial plans are approved by both the relevant local authority and Cabinet. The Commission also recommend robust testing and development of regulations, and within the report it is stated that this could also be the responsibility of Central Government.

Supply and release of land 3.3. The Productivity Commission recommends that local authorities experiencing high levels of growth set targets for supply of zoned and serviced land, with publicly available reporting GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

on performance in meeting targets and dwelling completion numbers. Other recommendations which aim to increase the supply of land are to: Create an inventory of Crown owned land that could be used for residential purposes Set local policies on consultation around plan changes prior to notification Evaluate the use of independent commissioners in planning decision making.

Regulations and approvals 3.4. A number of regulations with costs which might outweigh the potential benefits are identified within the report. The Productivity Commission recommends that regulations around private open space and minimum parking requirements for apartments are removed from District Plans. The Commission also recommends that building height limits are subject to robust cost benefit analysis.

3.5. The Productivity Commission received a high number of comments during the submission period on the weighting currently given to urban growth and housing within the Resource Management Act. The Productivity Commission recommends that the Government introduce amendments to the Resource Management Act to give greater priority to cities and housing within the Act. Other potential regulatory improvements discussed within the report include : Greater standardisation and liberalisation of the planning system Introduction of planning processes and tools to improve internal council coordination Increased use of incentive based inclusionary housing policies.

Infrastructure 3.6. The cost of provision of infrastructure to councils is discussed within the report, and is described as a potential constraint on the supply of land for housing. A number of possible revenue raising mechanisms for infrastructure were outlined within the report, including targeted rates and user charges such as volumetric water pricing, road tolls and congestion charges. The Productivity Commission recommends that councils identify where existing infrastructure has capacity, and ensure that intensification is not prevented in these areas.

Shaping local behaviour and planning for the future 3.7. The Productivity Commission states that existing homeowners have a disproportionate influence in local government elections and consultation processes, and that homeowners tend to be risk‐averse to developments that may impact on the amenity and value of their home. The Productivity Commission believe that this has led to the promotion of regulations which reduce the supply of housing, and disadvantages those who do not own a home. Tools are suggested that may be used to ensure that planning engagement is not skewed towards existing homeowners.

3.8. Land banking is identified as a symptom of land supply constraints. The Productivity Commission suggests that a rating system based on land value rather than capital value may encourage a more efficient use of land. The Commission recommends that that the possibility of rates being levied on Crown owned land is investigated by the Treasury.

3.9. The Productivity Commission are seeking further comment on the potential of an Urban Development Authority. The Commission recommend that one or more Urban Development Authorities are established to coordinate residential development throughout New Zealand. The report contains discussions around the potential of an Urban Development Authority to overcome barriers to growth by: GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

Aggregating multiple sites Preparing master plans Working in partnership with the private sector to deliver housing.

4. UDS Submission

4.1. It is anticipated that the UDS submission will include comment on the following:

Integrated Planning

a) The draft report recommends that a new legislative avenue is established to enable faster growing cities to prepare integrated spatial plans. Although the partnership are likely to support this recommendation, there may be issues raised around the recommendation that central Government are to approve spatial plans. While there is a place for greater involvement of Government departments during the development of spatial plans, the extent to which central government endorses or approves spatial plans may need to be addressed through the submission.

b) The submission may reiterate the need for spatial plans to take a holistic view and to 'consider the inter‐relationships between issues around land‐use, transport and infrastructure and also to incorporate social, health, cultural, economic and environmental values', as stated in the UDS Partnership submission on the Commission's issues paper.

Planning and delivering infrastructure

c) It is anticipated that the submission would support the recommendation around clarity of the readiness of land for housing (e.g. un‐zoned but planned‐for future zoning; zoned; zoned and serviced; zoned, serviced and consented). There may be opportunities for data capture through existing processes, for example information that is currently provided to Statistics NZ or the Ministry for the Environment in relation to consenting.

Paying for infrastructure

d) The report found that local authorities incurring debt to pay for infrastructure helps spread the cost of such infrastructure over the life of the asset. The Commission is of the view that there are not currently concerns over the levels of debt local authorities across NZ are using to pay for infrastructure. While in principal debt financing of infrastructure by councils is supported the submission could state that the situation in greater Christchurch means that using this approach for any further transformative infrastructure investment is unlikely given the current debt levels required to effect infrastructure repair and recovery.

Shaping local behaviour

e) The draft report does not have a focus on the role of the private sector in provision of land and housing, although there is acknowledgement of land banking occurring. The draft report notes that full range of housing typologies is desirable (p. 17), but there is a lack of discussion and recommendations to address the capacity, capability and willingness of the private sector to deliver this. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

f) The submission would support some form of statutory control of covenants, and how these might contribute to supply of land, development capacity and affordability.

Planning and funding our future

g) The submission would support the recommendation for the establishment of multiple Urban Development Authorities throughout New Zealand. Rather than a single Urban Development Authority for New Zealand, it would be recommended that such bodies are more appropriately established at a 'city' scale.

h) The submission could include comment on the risks of significant reductions in house prices in short timeframes. It would be preferable to have the price of housing reduce in increments, to reduce the risks to existing home owners.

4.2. As the deadline for submissions is 4 August, it is recommended that a submission is authorised through delegation to the Independent Chair. Ratification of the submission would be sought at the meeting of the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee on 14 August 2015.

5. Recommendations That the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee: a. Agree the preparation of a UDS Partnership submission on the Productivity Commission's draft report for its 'Using land for housing' inquiry. b. Agree that the issues raised in the UDS submission reflect the matters outlined in section 4 of this report. c. Delegate approval of the submission to the Independent Chair, subject to final ratification at the meeting of the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee on 14 August 2015

Attachment 1. Cut to the Chase ‐ Using land for Housing

10 JULY 2015

7. LYTTELTON PORT RECOVERY PLAN UPDATE

Author: Keith Tallentire, UDS Implementation Manager Contact: 03 941 8590

Purpose

To receive an update presentation from Ingrid Gunby (Environment Canterbury) regarding the development of the draft Lyttelton Port Recovery Plan, including the recommendations of the Hearing Panel on this matter.

Recommendation

That the Committee receive the presentation.

10 JULY 2015

8. RECOVERY PROGRAMMES UPDATE

Author: Sheridan Smith, Director, Ministerial and Executive Services (CERA) Contact: 03 354 2770

Purpose

To update the Committee on implementation in relation to the range of recovery programmes in support of the Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch Mahere Haumanutanga o Waitaha as outlined in Attachment 1.

Recommendation

That the Committee receive the report.

Future Use of the Residential Red Zone Standing UDSIC (FURZ): agenda item

The Minister notified the Draft

Residential Red Zone Offer Recovery Plan (RRZ ORP) on 25 June 2015.

Following public feedback on the Preliminary Draft RRZ ORP, the Acting Chief Executive of CERA (CE) has identified five key criteria for determining new Crown offers. The CE has balanced these criteria to put forward his preliminary views for how the offers should be structured. The five key criteria are: Health and wellbeing. Insurance status and precedents. Fairness and consistency. Timely recovery and a simple process. Costs to the Crown.

preliminary views on the quantum of the new Crown offers are as follows: For all vacant red zone land: a new Crown offer at 100% of the 2007/08 rateable land value. For all insured commercial red zone properties: a new Crown offer at 100% of the 2007/08 rateable land value and 100% of the 2007/08 rateable improvements value for the insured improvements, if the insurance benefits are transferred to the Crown, or the owners may choose not to accept any payment for the improvements and keep the benefits of their insurance claims. For all uninsured improved red zone properties: a new Crown offer at 80% of the 2007/08 rateable land value. This takes into account the need to balance health and wellbeing needs and a timely recovery process with insurance status and precedents, costs to the Crown and fairness and consistency. No payment should be made for uninsured improvements. The owners could choose to relocate, salvage or sell any uninsured improvements, or they could elect for the Crown to demolish the improvements. The Crown would meet the demolition costs.

Future Use of the Residential Red Zone (FURZ): Update as at 1 July: Following the Supreme Court Quake Outcasts judgment, CERA advised the Minister that one or more Recovery Plans would most likely be required to guide decisions on the future use of the Christchurch and Waimakariri red zones. CERA officials have recently held informal discussions with the Strategic Partners about the potential use of Recovery Plans to guide future use decisions, and the design issues that would need to be worked through. The Minister has indicated to CERA that he wished to proceed as soon as practicable with the initiation of a Waimakariri Future Use Recovery Plan. CERA will be working closely with the Strategic Partners on design issues and will aim to give the Minister advice on a direction for a Waimakariri Future Use Recovery Plan by mid- August. On a possible Christchurch Future Use Recovery Plan, the Minister has asked for advice on some issues before deciding on whether to direct the preparation of a Christchurch Future Use Recovery Plan. For now, the Minister would like officials, in consultation with the Strategic Partners, to proceed with any necessary preliminary technical work to support a Christchurch Future Use Recovery Plan.

Supporting the Recovery Workforce:

Community and Public Facilities: A user test site for the updated Planning and Community Toolset (PaCT) has been sent to a number of agencies for feedback. As at 25 June 2015, PaCT has been updated.

CERA presented on demolitions and operations to RSAC in August 2012

. UPDATE FROM COMMITTEE SECRETARIAT

Author: Keith Tallentire, Urban Development Strategy Implementation Manager Contact: 03 941 8590

Purpose

To update the Committee on operational matters.

Greater Christchurch Bus Tour

The requested bus tour is scheduled for Tuesday 28th July 2015. Further details will be provided at the meeting.

Provisional agenda for next UDSIC meeting

A theme‐based forward agenda for the remaining meetings in 2015 is being developed. Further details will be provided at the meeting.

Provisional items for the next meeting of this Committee on Friday 14th August 2015 include: UDS submission to Productivity Commission 'Using land for housing' draft report UDS 'refresh' update: draft brief and project plan (tbc) Recovery Programmes update UDS secretariat update

Provisional items for the September meeting: Migrants, rebuild and recovery: follow up from June presentation

All scheduled future meeting dates are: Friday 14th August Friday 11th September Friday 09th October Friday 06th November Friday 11th December

An additional meeting to consider transition matters may be required, ahead of the 30 July 2015 deadline for comment on the draft Transition Recovery Plan. This matter will be raised at the meeting.

The October meeting date now clashes with a LGNZ Zone 5/6 meeting and so may require rescheduling to either Friday 2nd October or Friday 16th October.

Recommendation

That the Committee receive the report.

10. UDSIC MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

Author: Keith Tallentire: Implementation Manager Contact: (03) 941 8590

Purpose

1. To provide recommendations in respect of a draft Memorandum of Agreement for the Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee (UDSIC), as required by the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2014. This is a process related matter to achieve compliance with legislation.

Background

2. The UDSIC is now operating under revised Terms of Reference following the transfer of responsibilities of the Recovery Strategy Advisory Committee (RSAC). 3. The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2014 (LGAAA) inserted a new Schedule 1AA into the principal Act. Section 5 of Schedule 1AA requires all joint committees established under clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 before the date of commencement of clause 30A of Schedule 7 to enter into an agreement under that clause with every other local authority or public body that has appointed members to that joint committee. 4. Clauses 30A (2) and (3) outline what this agreement must specify, namely: the number of members each local authority or public body may appoint to the committee; how the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the committee are to be appointed; the terms of reference of the committee; what responsibilities (if any) are to be delegated to the committee by each local authority or public body; how the agreement may be varied; and any other matter relating to the appointment, operation, or responsibilities of the committee that the parties agree. 5. If an agreement under clause 30A of Schedule 7 is not entered into within twelve months from the date of assent of the Act, then the joint committee is deemed to be discharged. The deadline for finalising such an agreement is therefore 7th August 2015.

Comment

6. The UDS Appendix (iv) outlines the existing Memorandum of Agreement in relation to the UDS. To be compliant with the requirements of the LGAAA it is necessary that it be reviewed and a new agreement entered into, as the current agreement predates the legislative amendment which occurred last year (see para 3 above). 7. A draft revised UDSIC MoA is attached as Attachment 1, which also includes the previously agreed ‘Terms of Reference’ and other relevant documents, as appendices. 8. CEAG have considered this matter and recommend confirmation of what is essentially a process related matter to achieve legislative compliance. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

9. The delegations of the UDSIC as included in the revised TOR include the following clause (underline added), suggesting the Committee can perform this task without recourse to individual partner governance for ratification: "Implementing a Memorandum of Understanding, as adopted by the Committee for each triennial period, to provide and maintain partnership relationships and provide for the resolution of any conflict".

Recommendations

That the Committee: Endorses the Memorandum of Agreement including appendices1‐3, and that the Independent Chair finalise the document and arrange signing That the members of the UDSIC (except observers) sign the Memorandum of Agreement That a review of the Memorandum of Agreement be undertaken following the finalisation of any future “transition” arrangements. Advise all UDS parties of the Memorandum of Agreement GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

ATTACHMENT 1

Proposed Revised MoA for UDSIC endorsement (clean version)

Memorandum of Agreement – Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee ('the Committee')

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT Establishing principles and approach to the implementation of the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy ('the Strategy') and its integration with earthquake recovery between Environment Canterbury, Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, Waimakariri District Council and Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu.

Section 1 Objective The objective of this Agreement is to: Establish the principles and approach to implementation, monitoring and review between the Parties to this agreement in order to facilitate co‐operation, collaboration and co‐ordination of strategic planning responsibilities in the Greater Christchurch area ('the area' or 'sub‐region').

Section 2 General Principles The parties to this Agreement: 2.1 SUPPORT the aim of the Strategy to provide a comprehensive sub‐regional framework for strategic planning to address a wide range of key sub‐regional issues relative to economic, social, health, cultural, and environmental objectives for the area. 2.2 RECOGNISE AND SUPPORT the established voluntary, co‐operative and co‐ordinated approach to strategic planning in the area and that such an approach between regional and local government, other agencies and relevant community sector groups be continued and fostered. 2.3 ENDORSE the use the Strategy as the primary long‐term sustainable Strategy for the area to be used by regional and local government and community sectors to co‐operatively undertake strategic planning in the area. The Strategy is also to be promoted to central government and relevant agencies as the basis for engagement and action in respect of the area. 2.4 RECOGNISE that the Strategy provides a policy and planning framework which will guide strategic planning in the area over the next 25 years but within the context of a 50‐year period. 2.5 COMMIT to the implementation of sub‐regional approaches to the funding of growth related infrastructure that will utilise a number of funding mechanisms together with appropriate area and local funding mechanisms.

The parties to the Agreement also acknowledge: 2.6 The bene ts of strategic planning and the need to share responsibility for such planning between the parties in consultation with key sector groups and in consultation with the community. 2.7 The Strategy Implementation Committee has been established to ensure that the approved recommendations and associated actions are taken up by each party both on an individual and collective basis as de ned by the Strategy. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

2.8 The Strategy and associated implementation plans provide for more effective strategic planning on a regional and sub‐regional basis and will facilitate co‐ordination between the parties in terms of infrastructure and service provision, public works, policy development, environmental management and general planning activities. 2.9 The objective and principles within this agreement may be appropriately included in the Triennial agreements over the period covered by the Strategy.

Section 3 Urban Development Strategy Approach 3.1 The parties to this Agreement will continue to support the implementation, monitoring and review of the Strategy. 3.2 All parties have a responsibility both collectively and individually to: • Acknowledge the agreed outcomes of the Strategy process in the development and application of policy and programmes as they affect Greater Christchurch and commit to the implementation of outcomes as appropriate through statutory planning instruments and policy processes as well as capital works and service delivery programmes. • Have regard to the objectives and principles contained in the Strategy in undertaking programmes and activities. • Undertake co‐operative and co‐ordinated delivery of programmes. • Adopt a “no surprises approach” to implementing the Strategy. • Act in accordance with the collaborative spirit and approach of the Committee and contribute to the implementation of agreed Strategy outcomes. • Abide by the agreed Operational Protocol for the Committee, including the mechanism outlined in that protocol to resolve any conflicting points of view that may arise amongst the parties • Promote a co‐ordinated approach to strategic planning consistent with the agreed outcomes of the Strategy. • Integrate social, health, economic, cultural and environmental management of their areas within a sub‐regional context. • Develop a sub‐regional decision‐making process amongst the parties to deal with matters of sub‐ regional signi cance which affect local communities.

Section 4 Implementation, Monitoring and Review The parties to this agreement have: • Endorsed the Strategy as the primary strategic planning Strategy for Greater Christchurch and to which each agency will have regard to in its planning, budgetary and programme activities, and infrastructure provision. • Endorsed the Strategy as the basis for collaborative strategic planning in the area by all local government in the area, tangata whenua, relevant community sector groups, government departments and relevant other agencies. • Committed to participate in the implementation, monitoring and review of the Strategy in accordance with the arrangements outlined in the approved Strategy. • Initiated action to enable the implementation of the agreed principles and priority actions contained in the Strategy and associated implementation plans. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

• Committed to not adopting policies or actions which are inconsistent with the outcomes sought by the Strategy, without them being rst negotiated with the other partners.

The parties agree to act in good faith in respect of implementing this agreement. This agreement will run until the next review of the Strategy. The parties are Environment Canterbury, Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council, Waimakariri District Council and Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu. This agreement takes effect on the date it is signed by all parties.

Section 5 Interpretation > Strategic planning means the wide range of long term, sustainable, sub‐regional matters necessary to be considered to support agreed economic, social, health, cultural, and environmental outcomes. It includes all relevant matters to ensure efficient and effective earthquake recovery and a transition of appropriate responsibilities back to local government and local agencies. > Local government means the Canterbury Regional Council (Environment Canterbury), Christchurch City Council, Selwyn District Council and Waimakariri District Council. > Greater Christchurch (or 'the area' or the 'sub‐region') means that part of the administrative areas of the city and the districts (shown in Figure 1 in the Strategy) and includes that part of the administrative area of the Canterbury Regional Council as it relates to the city and districts. It includes the eastern parts of Waimakariri and Selwyn District Councils and the urban and some rural areas of Christchurch City Council, including the Lyttelton Harbour basin. Any questions of interpretation of this agreement are to be raised with the parties to the agreement and collectively resolved. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

APPENDIX 1

Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee (UDSIC) Terms of Reference (2015)

2. Membership The local authorities and Te R nanga o Ng i Tahu shall each appoint up to three representatives, including their respective Mayors, Chair and Kaiwhakahaere. The Chief Executives of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) and Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB), and the Regional Director of the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) attend as observers and have speaking rights but in a non‐voting capacity. There shall be an Independent Chair (non‐elected member), appointed by the Committee, who has speaking rights and voting capacity. The standing voting membership is limited to 16 members (including the Independent Chair), but with the power to co‐opt up to a maximum of two additional non‐voting members where required to ensure effective implementation. The Committee shall also appoint a Deputy Chair, who shall be elected at the commencement of each triennium, and who shall be a member of the Committee. In accordance with Section 30A of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002, the quorum at a meeting of the Committee shall be eight voting members. Other representatives of voting and non‐voting organisations are permitted to attend meetings of the Committee; however attendance at any public excluded session shall only be permitted GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

with the prior approval of the Chair. Likewise, speaking rights of other representatives at Committee meetings (whether in public session or not) shall only be granted with the prior approval of the Chair.

3. Meeting Frequency

Long Term Plans (LTPs), Annual Plans, transport programmes and triennial agreements) and through partnerships with other sectors such as health, education and business. Establish protocols to ensure that implementation, where necessary, is consistent, collaborative and/or coordinated to achieve optimal outcomes. Making submissions, as appropriate, on Government proposals and other initiatives relevant to the implementation of the UDS and recovery documents, including the LURP and NERP. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

APPENDIX 2

Resolution of Conflicting Views

The parties acknowledge the need for a mechanism to resolve conflicting points of view that may arise during the initial three year implementation period and a mechanism by which any member(s) of the UDS Implementation Committee may request its use to ensure that any matter or issue is given fair and reasonable consideration prior to formal consideration by the Committee.

For the purpose of conflict resolution the following procedures should apply:

Any member(s) of the UDSIC may feel that further discussion, evaluation or consideration is required prior to moving forward on a particular matter. It is proposed that in such situations, any member(s) may request the referral of such matters for further review. It is noted that this mechanism is not for the purposes of creating any delay but solely to ensure matters have been given adequate consideration. If any matter is referred for review, the review is to be undertaken by the UDS Implementation Manager in conjunction with the Independent Chair and two UDSIC members. The review group is to include the member or at least one of the members, who requested that a matter be reviewed. The Chair shall select the two members of the UDSIC who will participate in the review group having regard to the nature of the matter being reviewed. After consideration of the matter, the review group will report back to the UDSIC on the outcome. Requests for reviews shall be made at any meeting of the UDSIC. The Chair shall be the final arbiter of what matters are to be referred for review. Review requests must be accompanied by reasons. Review requests are to be made without other committee members criticising the request. The ability to make such a request in a non‐threatening environment is part of “this is the way we do our business” approach. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

APPENDIX 3

UDSIC Public Deputations Guidelines

The Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Implementation Committee (UDSIC) is a joint committee of the UDS Partner Councils and welcomes speakers at its meetings. The right to speak at meetings must however be specifically requested and the following guidelines set out the process which must be followed.

Requests to speak

1. Any person requesting to speak at a meeting of UDSIC must make such a request in writing to the Independent Chair at least six clear working days before the date of the meeting concerned. 2. Such a request must detail who would be speaking, which organisation (if any) they would be representing and the topic of the presentation sought to be covered. 3. Presentation topics must relate to matters covered in the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy (2007).Presentation topics do not need to relate to any specific agenda items for the meeting concerned. Confirmation of requests

4. The Independent Chair will consider any request to speak and confirm his/her decision at least two working days before the date of the meeting concerned. 5. The Independent Chair may refuse requests which are repetitious, vexatious or offensive. Urgent requests

6. Notwithstanding point 1 above, where in the opinion of the Independent Chair a request made outside the above timeframes is considered urgent or of major public interest, such a request may be granted. Presentations

7. It would be of assistance to UDSIC representatives and associated staff if a written summary of the speaker's topic is submitted to the Independent Chair prior to the meeting concerned. 8. If a written submission is presented prior to the meeting concerned it will not be necessary for the speaker to read it verbatim, but merely to outline the general content. 9. Unless given specific prior permission by the Independent Chair, speakers should present for no more than ten minutes. 10. The Chairperson may terminate a presentation in progress which is disrespectful or offensive, or where the Chairperson has reason to believe that statements have been made with malice. 11. If the presentation relates to an agenda item to be subsequently debated UDSIC representatives may ask questions of clarification but will not enter into debate. Responses to deputations

12. An initial response to deputations will be provided at the end of the UDSIC meeting concerned. UDSIC (or staff on behalf of UDSIC) will then provide a written response to any points raised by speakers, as considered appropriate by the Independent Chair, within two working days of the meeting concerned.

Note: Presentations to UDSIC may be made in English, Maori or any other language, including New Zealand sign language. Prior arrangement with the Independent Chair should be sought at least two working days before the meeting if the address is not in English. The Independent Chair may order that any speech or document presented be translated and/or printed in another language. GREATER CHRISTCHURCH URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 10 JULY 2015

If the other language is an official language of New Zealand (e.g. English, Maori or New Zealand sign language), the translation and printing costs will be met by the UDSIC.

Public Excluded Section

10 JULY 2015

URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Section 48, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

I move that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely item 12.

Reason for passing this resolution: good reason to withhold exists under section 7. Specific grounds under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution: Section 48(1)(a)

This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as follows: ITEM GENERAL SUBJECT SUBCLAUSE & REASON UNDER ACT SECTION PLAIN ENGLISH REASON WHEN REPORT CAN NO. OF EACH MATTER BE RELEASED TO BE CONSIDERED

12 UDS 'refresh' and Draft To protect information which is subject to an 7 (2) (c)(i) Information contained in the After the matter has Transition Recovery Plan obligation of confidence or which any person has report has not yet been been considered by been or could be compelled to provide under the considered by respective respective partner authority of any enactment, where the making partner governance meetings. governance meetings. available of the information— (i) would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied 10 JULY 2015

Chairperson’s Recommendation: That the foregoing motion be adopted.

Note

Section 48(4) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 provides as follows:

“(4) Every resolution to exclude the public shall be put at a time when the meeting is open to the public, and the text of that resolution (or copies thereof):

(a) Shall be available to any member of the public who is present; and (b) Shall form part of the minutes of the local authority.”