June 2024 – 10 Shirley Road

Shirley ‘What?’

https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-map/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/christchurch-city-libraries-by-community-board/

https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-reserve-proposed-facility/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-centre-decision-making/

1. Option A: Leave The Space
2. Option B: Recreation Space
3. Option C: Community ‘Hub’
4. Option D: Proposed Facility
5. Option E: ‘Shirley Centre’

1. Option A: Leave The Space
The site at 10 Shirley Road is not called ‘Shirley Park’.
It is called ‘Shirley Community Reserve’ for a reason.

“The land at 10 Shirley Rd is classified as reserve, vested in the Council by the Crown to be held “in trust for local purpose (site for a community centre)”.

That means the land could not be used for any other purpose than a community centre.

It also appears the land could not simply sit “vacant”, as that would also be inconsistent with the reserve purpose.”

‘Option A’ goes against the Reserve status requiring a building & would not support the current or future needs/wants of these communities around Shirley Road.

2. Option B: Recreation Space
‘Option B’ also goes against the Reserve status highlighted above.
In the 2023 consultation, this ‘Option B’ received 87 votes/comments of 205 (adjusted as ‘Option A’ votes invalid) = 42.44%

There is already a total of sixty seven recreation spaces (does not include our 7 community gardens) within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.

– There are 32 recreational facilities located within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
– There are 17 playgrounds located within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
– There are 18 parks located within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve, not including the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor.

3. Option C: Community ‘Hub’
‘Option C’ is for a building, a Citizen ‘Hub’, define in the 2023 Feasibility Study as:
“Co-locating multiple services the Council provides across the community in a common location, enabling the customer and community experience to be an integrated one…Shirley Library and Service Centre is an example.”

In the 2023 consultation, this ‘Option C’ received 118 votes/comments of 205 (adjusted as ‘Option A’ votes invalid) = 57.56%

The Board are aware of the different factions within the areas around Shirley Road, as highlighted in both the 2020 & 2023 Consultation votes/comments.
Reading the comments, you can see why some residents who voted for a ‘recreational space’, did so as they were against a ‘community hub’/new building.

Many residents are protective of their community centre in their suburb & purposely voted for any option that opposes a new ‘traditional’ community centre being built.

In the 2020 consultation, this is the information that was provided to residents:
“Due to Council’s financial situation it is not expected in the short term that funding will be available, however the Board would like to see the site being used by the community.”

This messaging led residents to believe that this consultation was about ‘short term’ activation ideas for the site, not whether in the ‘long term’ residents wanted a building back on site.

“We received 29 submissions supporting the replacement of the Community Centre at this location. A number of these submissions also asked that a library be included in the building.”
– For Centre: 36 submissions of 58 = 62.07%
– Against Centre*: 10 submissions of 58 = 17.24%
No Comment re Centre: 12 submissions of 58 = 20.69%
* Organisation & [Other Connections] information included in my Excel document.

4. Option D: Proposed Facility
‘Option D’ is suppose to be a combination of ‘Option B’: Recreation Space & ‘Option C’: Community ‘Hub’, is based on incorrect consultation feedback data analysis.

In the 2023 consultation, based on votes/comments received 24 votes/comments of 205 (adjusted as ‘Option A’ votes invalid) = 10.91% (suggesting they would be happy with both options)

‘Option B’: Recreation Space – Option C: Community ‘Hub’, received 28 votes/comments of 205 (adjusted as ‘Option A’ votes invalid) = 12.73% (against ‘Hub’ see Comment for their reason).

The ‘Proposed Facility’ is not ‘Option C’: Community ‘Hub’.

Build a 400m2 ‘traditional’ community centre.
“A small community building would include a meeting space and kitchenette with toilets that are accessed externally.”

The proposed building size is only 36.36% of the original building/former Shirley Community Centre.

The ’36 Marshland Road facility’ Shirley Library & Service Centre building is 1,100m2, similar in size to the original building/former Shirley Community Centre.
(Figure 1. 36 Marshland Road facility superimposed on Shirley Community Reserve, 2023 Feasibility Study)

This is not what the community have been asking for the last 12 years…
They have been asking for either a ‘replacement’ community centre or a citizen hub: library, service centre, learning spaces, meeting rooms & playground.

This ‘proposed community facility’ would not restore the Christchurch City Council community facilities levels to pre Christchurch Earthquakes & would not provide for the current/future population growth.

The Staff Report & 2023 Feasibility Study haven’t take into consideration:
– number of existing community centres & recreation spaces in the suburbs around Shirley Road.
– local knowledge of community issues within the areas around Shirley Road.
– local knowledge of the known factions within the different areas/community groups.
– governance of proposed community facility being ‘built & operated’ by one community group.
This goes against the 2019 Feasibility Study: “Unfavourable treatment of one Trust over others, Not one Trust that spans these neighbourhoods, That trust would not necessarily hold the vision for the whole area”.
– lack of fairness & equity with ‘new’ community group being given a new $4 million dollar facility, while existing community groups in Richmond were ‘gifted’ a ‘Red Zone building’ & Shirley were ‘gifted’ a ‘prefab building’.
– existing community groups having to compete with another ‘new’ community group for contestable funding available through the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board.

“An on budget community building – the recommended option”, in my opinion is based on incorrect consultation feedback data analysis (ignores reserve status, different percentages, data skewed by questions/factions) &
– doesn’t align with Libraries Network Plan 2015, CCC Citizen Hub Strategy, CCC Equity and Inclusion Policy, CCC Integrated Planning Guide or Intergenerational Design.
– ignores my research, 6 years from 2018 to today.
– ignores the concerns highlighted in the 2019 Feasibility Study.
– ignores the ‘Shirley Road Central’ Group & ‘Where is our Community Centre?’ Petition (incorrect petition numbers quoted, only included the online petition, didn’t include the paper petition = approx 1,200 signatures).
– ignores the Letters of Support from Local Christchurch MPs.
– ignores the ‘Richmond Residents & Business Association/We are Richmond’ (previously both Hayley Guglietta & David Duffy supported the idea of relocating the Shirley Library).
– ignores the ‘Shirley Village Project’ Youth Friendly Spaces Audit of Shirley Library & 10 Shirley Road.
– The 2023 Feasibility Study has incorrect information & is incomplete, yet has data & information that supports relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road.

5. Option E: ‘Shirley Centre’
‘Option E’ is a Citizen ‘Hub’, define in the 2023 Feasibility Study as “Co-locating multiple services the Council provides across the community in a common location, enabling the customer and community experience to be an integrated one…Shirley Library and Service Centre is an example.” plus Learning Spaces, Meeting Rooms, Inclusive Accessible Playground & Recreation Space, with the existing Shirley Playcentre.

In the 2020 consultation, “We received 29 submissions supporting the replacement of the Community Centre at this location. A number of these submissions also asked that a library be included in the building.”
For Centre: 36 submissions of 58 = 62.07%

In the 2023 consultation, this ‘Option C’ received 118 votes/comments of 205 (adjusted as ‘Option A’ votes invalid) = 57.56%

“A ‘Community Focal Point’ (CFP) is a means of enhancing community life by providing a ‘heart’ in each neighbourhood.
The entire space is designed to enable and encourage community connections, in a relaxed, inclusive and welcoming environment that is enjoyable to be in.”
(Figure 1. Neighbourhood Focal Point Approach to Community Facility Provision, 2019 Feasibility Study)

– There are already 8 community centres located within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
– “Community Provision (Non-Council): There seems a gap (or at least less provision) of non-Church community space across the Community Board, especially as we see the current range of facilities available is split between ‘Community’ and ‘Church-based’ Trusts.” (6.4.2, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “There is no direct provision of Council facilities within the defined facility catchment area (Shirley, Richmond, Edgeware and Mairehau) and much of what is provided is Church based, with the area being home to a number of strong Church based Trusts.” (Location of Provision, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “Council Owned Community Facilities: This suggests current provision is lower than the city-wide average in terms of community facilities.” (6.4.1, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “Governance Option ‘All comers’ Approach’: Perceived as fair & Council is not partisan.” (Table 9, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “There does appear to be a gap in the area identified on the boundary of Shirley and Richmond.” (Location of Provision, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “Here we see Richmond South, Edgeware and Shirley have higher levels of deprivation (6 and above) as a percentage of total population, much higher than the Christchurch Average. These factors need to be considered in any analysis of the cost of access to community facilities.” (Table 4, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “Lack of low cost, creative and fun activities for after-school and school holidays.” (7.3 Community Needs Analysis for Richmond, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “Mental health needs: adults through to children identified as a gap.” (7.3 Community Needs Analysis for Richmond, 2019 Feasibility Study)

“Although there are some who would want permanent activities locked onto the site; given its proximity to transport and its high visibility it would be a shame for it to be locked into one type of use when it has opportunity to be a flexible and changing community space for the whole community and different interest groups at different times…Its high visibility is particularly attractive to young people.” (9. Fit with Christchurch City Council Network Plan, 2019 Feasibility Study)

The current Shirley Library doesn’t align with ‘Location Preferences’:
“malls and aquatic facilities not seen as highly desirable areas for co-location or as adjacent locations; co-location with a Council service centre favoured…
Therefore, library facilities are best located either close to a major destination within the city, such as a mall and/or a major transport junction, or at sites sufficiently attractive to draw visitors to them as standalone ‘destination locations’.” (Libraries Network Plan 2015)

– There are zero suburban libraries in the Innes/Central Ward.
The 10 Shirley Road site/Shirley Community Reserve is on the border of both Wards.
– Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board have 5 suburban libraries, including the Shirley Library.
– Shirley Library is the busiest suburban library in the Christchurch Libraries network. (2023 Feasibility Study)
– The current Shirley Library is the only location in our communities that is free, has WIFI access & you don’t have to make a purchase or participate in an activity/event in order to just be in this space.
– Shirley Library is hidden in The Palms carpark (vehicle access only through The Palms carpark, no dedicated car parking for library/service centre users), not easily visible from Marshland Road & has limited bus services at this location.
– “Outdoor environment important – need natural features and to be welcoming; clear signposting within and outside the building.” (Building Requirements, Libraries Network Plan 2015)
– The current Shirley Library does not align with the new CCC Equity and Inclusion Policy. “Accessible buildings and facilities for people with disabilities.” (Building Requirements, Libraries Network Plan 2015)
– This location at 10 Shirley Road is accessible by public transport (7, 44, 100 & Orbiter) for residents in:
Shirley, Dallington, Richmond, Edgeware, St Albans & Mairehau
Plus: Citywide (Orbiter), Merivale, Parklands, Burwood & Avonside.
– The population density for the current Shirley Library (located next to The Palms commercial area & Christchurch Golf Club) is less than the current/future population density around 10 Shirley Road, due to infill/social housing increases as part of the Christchurch District Plan.
– The current Shirley Library has a limited book selection/no room for more book shelves, no boardroom, meeting rooms or learning centre (flexible spaces) & didn’t rate well in the ‘Shirley Village’ Youth Audit.
– The current Shirley Library has a lack of “Spaciousness: room for quiet spaces away from the children’s area; generous space between book stack aisles to enable easy browsing by less nimble and multiple users at one time; plenty of chairs/ beanbags and desks at which to work/relax.” (Building Requirements, Libraries Network Plan 2015)
– The current Shirley Library has a lack of: “Whanau-friendly facilities, e.g. children’s areas, baby feeding/changing facilities.” There are no toilets available in the Library area. Toilets for the building are located in the corridor off the Main Entrance to the building. (Building Requirements, Libraries Network Plan 2015)
– “Use of PCs at Shirley Library is one of the highest rates in the network at 41.9%” (2023 Feasibility Study). Many residents are on low fixed incomes, internet at home and/or unlimited mobile data plans are seen as luxuries that they can’t afford.
– ‘Wā Pēpi: Babytimes’ has the highest attendance (2023 Feasibility Study). Yet there are no toilets in the Library area & no outdoor space or playgound at the current Shirley Library. Whereas relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road, would help to form connections with the existing Shirley Playcentre already onsite, destination nature space with trees & Dudley Creek to explore, plus an upgraded fenced inclusive accessible playground so attendees can extend their stay & have the opportunity to form friendships naturally.
– “Providing access to places where children can access play independently is important for their physical and emotional development.” (Outdoor Recreation Space, 2023 Feasibility Study). This is unavailable for safety reasons at the current Shirley Library, situated in The Palms carpark.
– “Need for improved playground facilities across Richmond targeting pre-schoolers and small children.” (7.3 Community Needs Analysis for Richmond, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– “The current play provisions in this area are older and in need of refurbishment, namely the play space next to the Shirley Playcentre.” (Outdoor Recreation Space, 2023 Feasibility Study)
– “There is an opportunity to provide for inclusive play as the [Shirley] Community Reserve is already currently fenced, which is rare in Christchurch, particularly in the area north of Bealey Avenue. With the addition of a couple of gates, this would enable the space to be a fenced playground, which is something the Disability community is advocating for more of, in particular the Autism community in Christchurch.” (Outdoor Recreation Space, 2023 Feasibility Study)
– There are 11 support providers located within a 3km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
– There are 14 schools, kindergartens & playcentres located within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
– There are 7 community gardens located within a 2km radius of the 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
– With an aging population, it is important to also consider what has been lost that would be of value to older adults. (8. Need and Gap Assessment, 2019 Feasibility Study)
– Secular Bumping space (for casual interactions and cross-over between activities and areas) for adults like that provided in libraries. (8. Need and Gap Assessment, 2019 Feasibility Study)

“With the provision of the correct infrastructure this site could be reborn as a new interpretation of a contemporary community centre…the site could act as an extension location for other community bases spreading activity across the community…The location of 10 Shirley Road is perfect for this as there is no other Trust close by and yet the location is important to Shirley, Edgeware, Mairehau and Richmond.”
(Potential Activity for the 10 Shirley Road Site, 2019 Feasibility Study)

I still believe that Option E: ‘Shirley Centre’, is the best option for all residents in the communities around Shirley Road is to have this ‘proposed community facility’ at 10 Shirley Road be a Christchurch City Council owned/operated facility, so that the facility is truly inclusive & accessible to all residents & not controlled by one community group.

Isn’t now the time during the current Christchurch City Council LTP 2024-34 decision-making process, for the Board to advocate for all their residents in the Innes/Central areas, for Council to approve an appropriate new budget to build a new ‘Shirley Centre’/relocate Shirley Library & Service Centre, in the Central Ward at 10 Shirley Road, Richmond?

Shirley Community Reserve Proposed Facility

1. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board, Thursday 13 June 2024
2. Staff Report: 9. Shirley Community Reserve: Proposed Community Facility
3. Re: 6. Legal Considerations
4. Re: 6. Strategy and Policy Considerations
5. Options Considered, but ruled out
6. Options Descriptions
7. Community Consultations
8. Proposed Community Facility
9. Re: 3. Request Staff to: ‘initiate the Design Process’
10. Re: 4. Request Staff to: ‘identify an appropriate Community Partner’
11. Re: 5. Requests that staff provide an update to the Board on a quarterly basis
12. Attachment B: Shirley Community Centre Feasibility Study 2023
13. Attachment C: Shirley Community Centre Supplementary Information 19 February 2024

1. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board, Thursday 13 June 2024
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Meeting
Thursday 13 June 2024, 4 pm
Function Room, Level 1, Multicultural Recreation and Community Centre, 455 Hagley Avenue, Christchurch
9. Shirley Community Reserve: Proposed Community Facility
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2024/06/PCBCC_20240613_AGN_9127_AT.htm#PDF2_ReportName_44759
The .pdf link below is Item 9. of the Agenda, Pages 29-140
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/WaipapaCBAgenda13June2024SCRProposedFacility.pdf *
* I’ll also refer to this .pdf, as it is easier to quote Page Numbers & has the ability to use the ‘Ctrl-F’ feature, if you would like to search the document.

2. Staff Report: 9. Shirley Community Reserve: Proposed Community Facility
Staff Report: Pages 29-39 of the Agenda & Pages 1-11 of the .pdf
1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo
1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide staff with clarity and direction to progress the proposed development of a community facility at Shirley Community Reserve.
1.2 The report is the outcome of a a Council resolution requesting an updated feasibility study for the proposed development of a community facility at Shirley Community Reserve. The feasibility study was to look at “…other options, including incorporating the current Shirley library” on the site.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu
That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:
1. Receives the information in the Shirley Community Reserve: Proposed Community Facility Report.
2. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
3. Request that staff initiate the process to design an ‘on budget community building’ on Shirley Community Reserve that will enable a mixed use of the Reserve and support recreation, play and social connections. This is subject to Council bringing back the budget for the facility to financial years 2024/25, 2025/26 and 2026/27 in the 2024/34 LTP.
4. Requests that staff identify an appropriate community partner/ operator to progress the development of the community facility at Shirley Community Reserve and report this back to the Board.
5. Requests that staff provide an update to the Board on a quarterly basis.

3. Re: 6. Legal Considerations
Staff Report:
6.4.1 There is no legal context, issue, or implication relevant to this decision.

Incorrect. The site at 10 Shirley Road is not called ‘Shirley Park’.
It is called ‘Shirley Community Reserve’ for a reason:
“Legal Implications (Page 27)
9.9. The land at 10 Shirley Rd is classified as reserve, vested in the Council by the Crown to be held “in trust for local purpose (site for a community centre)”.
That means the land could not be used for any other purpose than a community centre.
It also appears the land could not simply sit “vacant”, as that would also be inconsistent with the reserve purpose.”
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2015/08/SPCB_19082015_AGN.PDF

4. Re: 6. Strategy and Policy Considerations
Staff Report:
6.5.5 Are consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.
The ‘proposed community facility’ does not align with:
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-equity-and-inclusion-policy/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/location-location-location/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/christchurch-city-libraries-by-community-board/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/christchurch-city-council-libraries-2025-facilities-plan/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-citizen-hub-strategy/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-integrated-planning-guide/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/intergenerational-design/

5. Options Considered, but ruled out
Staff Report:
– 1. Do nothing
There has been community support for a community facility on Shirley Reserve for a number of years, this support is evidenced in submissions to Council’s Long Term Plan and Annual Plan’s over many years.
4.26.1 Option Description: Close the project, propose the existing LTP budget as a saving.
4.26.3 There is expectation and anticipation in the local community for a community facility at Shirley Community Reserve.
6.4.1 There is no legal context, issue, or implication relevant to this decision.

– 3. Investigate the relocation of Shirley Library
Libraries Network Plan 2015
Any relocation of Shirley Library would need to align with the Libraries Network Plan 2015, location preferences would include:
a. Near local shops/supermarket/mall/bank/medical centre/schools/playgrounds/toy libraries.
b. On bus route/near transport hubs/handy walking distance from home/easily
accessed/free, plentiful carparking adjacent to library.
c. Attractive street visibility.

– 4. Investigate the relocation of the Council facility at 36 Marshland Road
a. No plans or intentions currently exist to relocate any of the three services from thislocation.
b. Should relocation of Shirley Library be decided, the Waitai Governance Team would require office space within their Board area.
c. The Head of Customer Services highlighted the Council’s NZ Post franchise provides a key service for The Palms.
d. Furthermore, a facility of the size of 36 Marshlands Road (1100m2), with associated amenities, placed on Shirley Reserve would significantly impact the available space for recreation and play space on the Reserve.
e. Additional operational costs would be incurred from separating the existing Council services located at the 36 Marshland Road facility including location of suitable office space for the Waitai Governance Team.

6. Options Descriptions
4.26.1 Option Description: Close the project, propose the existing LTP budget as a saving.
4.27.1 Option Description: An on budget community building – the recommended option.

The Board narrowed the options to two, ignoring 6 years of research & ideas that I have provided for a new ‘Shirley Centre’/relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve.

– 4.26.1 goes against the Reserve status requiring a building & would not support the current or future needs/wants of these communities around Shirley Road.

– 4.27.1 is based on incorrect consultation feedback data analysis (ignores reserve status, different percentages, data skewed by questions/factions), ignores the concerns highlighted in the 2019 feasibility study, the recent 2023 feasibility study has incorrect information & is incomplete, yet has data & information that supports relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road.

https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/community-hub-support/ includes:
– ‘Shirley Road Central’ Group & ‘Where is our Community Centre?’ Petition* (incorrect petition numbers quoted, only included the online petition, didn’t include the paper petition = approx 1,200 signatures)
– Letters of Support from Local Christchurch MPs
– Richmond Residents & Business Association/We are Richmond (previously both Hayley Guglietta & David Duffy supported the idea of relocating the Shirley Library)
– Shirley Village Project (Youth Friendly Spaces Audit of Shirley Library & 10 Shirley Road)

7. Community Consultations
Staff Report:
4.4 In 2020, the Waipapa Papanui-Innes Community Board led a community consultation on the future use of the Shirley Community Reserve.
Thematic analysis of the 58 submissions identified an equal split between replacing the community centre and developing outdoor community opportunities.
6.5.4 Staff acknowledge the high level of local community interest.

In the previous ‘How would you like to use 10 Shirley Road? Consultation 2020’
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/your-ideas-wanted-for-10-shirley-road/

“We have asked and talked to you about this before, and we acknowledge the work that has been done. We are asking again because we want to get this right, and we recognise the community landscape has changed considerably, especially over the last 2-3 years.”

“Due to Council’s financial situation it is not expected in the short term that funding will be available, however the Board would like to see the site being used by the community.”

This messaging led residents to believe that this consultation was about ‘short term’ ideas for the site, not whether in the ‘long term’ residents wanted a building back on site.

“We received 29 submissions supporting the replacement of the Community Centre at this location. A number of these submissions also asked that a library be included in the building.”

I’ve gone through the ‘Feedback Received Table’ & recalculated based on comments:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Your-Ideas-Wanted-for-10-Shirley-Road-Consultation-Feedback-2020.xlsx

Total Submissions: 58
– For Centre: 36 submissions, 62.07%
– Against Centre*: 10 submissions, 17.24%
– No Comment re Centre: 12 submissions, 20.69%
* Organisation & [Other Connections] information included

I’ve gone through the ‘Appendix B: 2023 public consultation written feedback’ & recalculated based on preference/comments:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Shirley-Community-Reserve-Consultation-Feedback-2023.xlsx
Total Votes/Comments = 220
HUB only Option: 118 = 53.64%
PLAY only Option: 87 = 39.55%
KEEP only Option: 15 = 6.82%*

*KEEP votes are invalid.
Shirley Community Reserve is for a Community Centre (building).
See ‘3. Re: 6. Legal Considerations’ above.
Subtracted KEEP votes from TOTAL Votes/Comments = 205
Adjusted HUB only Option: 118 = 57.56%
Adjusted PLAY only Option: 87 = 42.44%

HUB & PLAY Option (Highlighted Yellow): 24 = 10.91%*
* based on vote & comment suggesting they would be happy with both options.
This ‘HUB & Play’ Option is the ‘proposed community facility’, which only has 10.91% support for this option.

PLAY – HUB (Highlighted Blue): 28 = 12.73%*
* against HUB (see Comment for their reason).

The Board are aware of the different factions within the areas around Shirley Road, as highlighted in the ‘Shirley Community Reserve Consultation 2023’ votes/comments.
Reading the comments, you can see why some residents who voted for a ‘recreational space’, did so as they were against a ‘community hub’.
Many residents are protective of their community centre, in their suburb.

I attended the stakeholders meeting prior to the ‘Shirley Community Reserve Consultation’ going live in 2023.
“The options that we’ve developed take into consideration feedback received by the Shirley community in 2020, as well as what we’ve seen works well around Ōtautahi Christchurch.
– Option 1. Leaving the space as it is. [No building]
– Option 2. A recreation space with a full basketball court, renewed playground, planting, a picnic and BBQ area, a community garden and a walkway. [No building]
– Option 3. Creating a community hub* that’s open to partnerships with local organisations.”
https://letstalk.ccc.govt.nz/SCR

* The definition of a ‘hub’ is outlined in the 2023 feasibility study ’15. Glossary’:
“Co-locating multiple services the Council provides across the community in a common location, enabling the customer and community experience to be an integrated one. Initially this includes libraries, and service desks.
Shirley Library and Service Centre is an example.”

At the meeting I asked staff if the questions could be aligned to the 4 options being researched & I was told “no the questions have already been decided by the Board”:
“4.3 A feasibility study is currently underway to estimate the construction costs for four potential options for a new community facility.
– 1. Mixed use hub incorporating a library, service centre, and community operated community space,
– 2. Community operated large community facilities building,
– 3. Community operated small community facilities building,
– 4. Outdoor options similar to Dallington landing.” [No building]
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-reserve-memo/

My ‘Shirley Community Reserve Consultation’ feedback:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-reserve-feedback/

While my comments were included from the online form, my uploaded ‘Supporting Information’ .pdf was not.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ShirleyCommunityReserveConsultation2023JoannaGould.pdf

Did the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board elected members see the research & information provided in this .pdf?

Did the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board elected members see my written submission to the Christchurch City Council LTP 2024-34?
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-long-term-plan-2024-submission/

8. Proposed Community Facility
Staff Report:
4.27.1 Option Description: An on budget community building – the recommended option.
5.3 Council is proposing to set aside $40,000 p.a. from 2028 to contribute to the operating costs of the facility not recovered through user charges.

See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-feasibility-study/
9. Discussion, Fit with Christchurch City Council Network Plan
Providing hubs and focal points are important network plan outcomes.
9. Discussion, Breaking out of the box
– Although there are some who would want permanent activities locked onto the site; given its proximity to transport and its high visibility it would be a shame for it to be locked into one type of use when it has opportunity to be a flexible and changing community space for the whole community and different interest groups at different times.

When are residents in our communities going to find out that after waiting for over 12 years, the ‘Proposed Community Facility’ at 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve is to:
Build a 400m2 ‘traditional’ community centre.
The proposed building size is only 36.36% of the original building/former Shirley Community Centre.*

The ’36 Marshland Road facility’ Shirley Library & Service Centre building is 1,100m2, similar in size to the original building/former Shirley Community Centre.*
* See Figure 1. 36 Marshland Road facility superimposed on Shirley Community Reserve, Page 138 of the Agenda & Page 110 of the .pdf.

“A small community building would include a meeting space and kitchenette with toilets that are accessed externally.”???
Cost Estimate: $3,654,700 plus Geotech and foundation for a 400m2 building???

This ‘proposed community facility’ would not restore the Christchurch City Council community facilities levels to pre Christchurch Earthquakes & would not provide for the current/future population growth.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-feasibility-study/ (2019)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/community-facilities-network-plan-email/ (2019)

This is not what the community have been asking for the last 12 years…
They have been asking for either a ‘replacement’ community centre or a citizen hub: library, service centre, learning spaces, meeting rooms & playground.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/where-is-our-community-centre-petition/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-road-central-group/

9. Re: 3. Request Staff to: ‘initiate the Design Process’
The Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board have yet to make a decision on the ‘Officer Recommendations’.
This decision process is suppose to be ‘open & transparent’ with discussions & decisions made in public, at the upcoming 13th June 2024 meeting.

Yet this process has already started.
Is this another predetermined decision by the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board?
Like the ‘Crossway Church’ proposal?
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/crossway-church-proposal/
& the ‘temporary’ (installed in May 2020) Pump Track proposal?
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/papanui-innes-skate-facilities/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/proposed-pump-track-for-shirley/

I was unaware until the ‘22.05.24 – Council – Long Term Plan 2024-34 Workshop’ that meetings had already been held…
“Staff are through the Board Chair [Emma Norrish] currently negotiating with a ‘prospective Community Partner’ and a ‘sympathetic Building Company’ to develop this facility in a Community Partnership through the Build and the Operation.
So yes that’s what the [Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community] Board has in mind.
We have a report going to the Waipapa Community Board in early June reflecting that, that’s on the cards and that’s how we’d like to proceed at this point in time.”
John Filsell, Head of Community Support & Partnerships, Christchurch City Council
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-draft-ltp-2024-34-workshops/

10. Re: 4. Request Staff to: ‘identify an appropriate Community Partner’
Staff Report:
– 3.5 Requirements, of the Community Facilities Network Plan, for a new Council opportunity include: “…a willing and able community partner that should be in a position to lead and drive the project end to end unless there is a clear reason why Council must lead.”

See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-feasibility-study/
6.4.1 Asset data Across Council Owned Community Facilities
This suggests current provision is lower than the city-wide average in terms of community facilities.
8. Need and Gap Assessment, Summary of Need
– With an aging population, it is important to also consider what has been lost that would be of value to older adults.
– Secular Bumping space (for casual interactions and cross-over between activities and areas) for adults like that provided in libraries.
Table 9. Governance options toward increased activation of 10 Shirley Road
Option ‘Support an existing Trust’, Negatives of approach:
– Unfavourable treatment of one Trust over others
– Not one Trust that spans these two neighbourhoods
– That trust would not necessarily hold the vision (Community Plan) for the whole area
Option ‘All comers’ Approach’, Positives of approach:
– Perceived as fair
– Council is not partisan
(Shirley Community Facility Feasibility Study, Page 33)

‘Prospective Community Partner’
After my LGOIMA request to Christchurch City Council, I received a phone call from John Filsell.
I was told “it’s you, ‘Shirley Road Central'”, the ‘prospective Community Partner’.

I hadn’t been informed that meetings that had been held with:
a few members of the former ‘Shirley Road Central’ group*, a townhouse property developer, an elected member & staff
to develop a proposal for a ‘traditional’ community centre to be built at 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve, Richmond.
* See: 2. Constitution & 4. Current Status
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-road-central-group/

A few members of the former ‘Shirley Road Central’ group to ‘develop this facility in a Community Partnership through the Build and the Operation.’???

The Board have focused on funding different community groups/organisations to ‘activate’ the 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve, which has caused further division:
‘Why are the Board providing funding for another activity/event hosted by a community group/organisation that isn’t located in Richmond?’
‘Why are they having an activity/event at 10 Shirley Road, when they have their own parks in their own areas?’
– ‘We are Richmond’ wayfinding signage installed.
– ‘Shirley Road Central’ Skip Day & Car Boot Sale events.
– ‘Shirley Village’ Youth Audit of 10 Shirley Road & Shirley Library.
– ‘Eastern Community Sport and Recreation’ Shirley Play Pop-up preschooler events.
– ‘St Albans Residents Association’ Nau mai Fiesta event.
– ‘Youth & Cultural Development (YCD)’ House of Hoopz FRESH event.

I helped to create the former ‘Shirley Road Central’ group.
I’ve engaged with ‘We are Richmond’, ‘Shirley Village’ & ‘St Albans Residents Association’ members.
Previously I also advocated for the Dallington Residents Association ‘Dallington/Burwood/Avondale Community Centre’ proposal.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/community-needs-community-centres/ (2018)

I still believe the best option for all residents in the communities around Shirley Road is to have this ‘proposed community facility’ at 10 Shirley Road be a Christchurch City Council owned/operated facility, so that the facility is truly inclusive & accessible to all residents & not controlled by one community group.

This 10 Shirley Road site has historically brought these communities together.
Yet these attempts to ‘activate’ 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve & the governance/operating expenses/contestable funding of the ‘proposed community facility’ have & will further divide these communities.

‘Sympathetic Building Company‘
A residential ‘Townhouse Property Developer’???
Many residents have vocally opposed the ‘townhouse property developers’, especially in the suburbs around Shirley Road due to the Christchurch District Plan changes.

The reputation of our local ‘Townhouse Property Developers’ is:
they are ‘buying up land/demolishing family homes/removing all the trees’,
before building infill housing/townhouses that are taking over in their communities.

Does the Board want this ‘proposed community facility’ to succeed & be accepted by residents, when the ‘draft concept plans’ are put out for public consultation?

Why are the Board considering a ‘Community Partnership’ with this ‘sympathetic Building Company’/residential townhouse property developer?

Why are the Board not putting this ‘proposed community facility’ out for tender & engaging with an architecture firm/construction company that has previous experience building commercial/civic buildings & working with the Christchurch City Council?

Working with the Council: Proposal, tender and contract information for doing business with Christchurch City Council.
– https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/tenders-and-contracts/
– https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/plans-strategies-policies-and-bylaws/policies/sustainability-policies/procurement-policy/
– https://ccc.govt.nz/assets/Documents/The-Council/Plans-Strategies-Policies-Bylaws/Policies/Council-org/Christchurch-City-Council-Unsolicited-Proposals.pdf

11. Re: 5. Requests that staff provide an update to the Board on a quarterly basis
The Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board was given the ‘Delegated Authority for the rebuild of the Shirley Community Centre’* by the Christchurch City Council, after the failed ‘Crossway Church’ proposal.
* See: 1. Delegated Authority for the rebuild of the Shirley Community Centre (2016)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-centre-decision-making/
4. History of Shirley Community Centre Decision-making (2012 to 2024)

After researching & writing the above blog post with 46 items, I’m left wondering:
Q. What actual progress has the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board made from 2016 to 2024?

Q. Is the current ‘sympathetic Building Company’ proposal only going to end up like the ‘Crossway Church’ proposal (2013 to 2016) before it was voted against by elected members, with residents no closer to having a new building at 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve after 12 years waiting?

Q. Is it time for the Board to pass the delegated authority for this project back to the Council so that it can:
– distance itself from having to deal with the factions in these communities over this project’s design/build
– make faster progress on the design/build & the Board would not be held responsible by our communities for any delays
– be co-designed with partnerships & specialists in their fields
See: ‘Partnerships’ (Pages 3-4) & ‘Planning’ (Pages 5-6)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CCCDraftAnnualPlan2023SubmissionJoannaGould.pdf

At the recent Christchurch City Council – Long Term Plan 2024-34 Workshops on the 22nd, 24th & 28th May, this ‘Proposed Community Facility’ at 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve has been discussed.
The current Staff Advice & Direction Given for the Mayor’s Recommendations:
– $75,346 in FY25, $800,000 in FY26, $2,830,000 in FY27
– Bring forward construction from 2031 to 2026-2027
See: 44., 45. & 46. Christchurch City Council – Long Term Plan 2024-34 Workshop
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-centre-decision-making/

“The LTP budget for Shirley Community Centre would be insufficient to include the relocation of Shirley Library and a significant level of additional capital funding would be required.”
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-funding/

Isn’t now the time during the current Christchurch City Council LTP 2024-34 decision-making process, for the Board to advocate for all their residents in the Innes/Central areas, for Council to approve an appropriate new budget to build a new ‘Shirley Centre’/relocate Shirley Library & Service Centre, in the Central Ward at 10 Shirley Road, Richmond?

12. Attachment B: Shirley Community Centre Feasibility Study 2023
Feasibility Study: Pages 42-135 of the Agenda & Pages 14-107 of the .pdf

Re: d. Shirley Road Central (Page 28 of the Study, Page 69 of the Report)
Shirley Road Central (SRC) was not ‘previously known as the 10 Shirley Road Group’.
They are two separate entities.
’10 Shirley Road’ website, Facebook Page & Group is my personal ideas/research as ‘Shirley Centre 10 Shirley Road’.
I setup a separate ‘Shirley Road Central’ website, Facebook Page & Group to distinguish between the SRC group & my personal views.

This Feasibility Study does provide information to support relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road.
– population density for the current Shirley Library is less than the current/future population density around 10 Shirley Road, due to infill/social housing increases as part of the Christchurch District Plan.

– busiest suburban library in the Christchurch Libraries network, with no learning spaces/meeting rooms/toilets in the our current Library area.

– “explained by shared space with the Council Service Centre and NZ Post, but it is also due to proximity to the Palms Mall.”
It is the only location in our communities that is free, has WIFI access & you don’t have to make a purchase or participate in an activity/event in order to just be in this space.

– difference in total issues, due to the lack of books available, no room for more book shelves.

– “Use of PCs at Shirley Library is one of the highest rates in the network at 41.9%”, many residents are on low fixed incomes, internet at home and/or unlimited mobile data plans are seen as luxuries that they can’t afford.

– The ‘ReVision/Shirley Village’ Youth Friendly Spaces Audit highlights the problems with the current Shirley Village from our youth perspective: “would not recommend to others”.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-youth-audits/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-transport/
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-feasibility-study/
– Its high visibility is particularly attractive to young people.
(Shirley Community Facility Feasibility Study, Page 26)

– ‘Wā Pēpi: Babytimes’ has the highest attendance, yet there are no toilets in the Library area & no outdoor space or playgound at the current Shirley Library.
Whereas relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road, would help to form connections with the existing Shirley Playcentre already onsite, destination nature space with trees & Dudley Creek to explore, plus an upgraded fenced inclusive accessible playground so attendees can extend their stay & have the opportunity to form friendships naturally.
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/landscape-ideas/

Re: Outdoor Recreation Space (Page 36 of the Study, Page 77 of the Report)
– “Providing access to places where children can access play independently is important for their physical and emotional development.”
This is unavailable for safety reasons at the current Shirley Library, situated in The Palms carpark.

– “The current play provisions in this area are older and in need of refurbishment, namely the play space next to the Shirley Playcentre.”
“7.3 Community Needs Analysis for Richmond
Need for improved playground facilities across Richmond targeting pre-schoolers and small children.”
(Shirley Community Facility Feasibility Study, Page 22)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-feasibility-study/

– “There is an opportunity to provide for inclusive play as the Community Reserve is already currently fenced, which is rare in Christchurch, particularly in the area north of Bealey Avenue. With the addition of a couple of gates, this would enable the space to be a fenced playground, which is something the Disability community is advocating for more of, in particular the Autism community in Christchurch.”
This is why I have been promoting my original ideas from 2018:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-centre-ideas/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/playground-ideas/
See: ‘Support Providers’ & ‘Playgrounds’
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-map/

13. Attachment C: Shirley Community Centre Supplementary Information 19 February 2024
Supplementary Info: Pages 136-140 of the Agenda & Pages 108-112 of the .pdf
1. Summary of information on the physical capacity of local facilities
2. Community support for both community and recreation play spaces
3. Future plans for the Council facility at 36 Marshlands Road
4. Considerations for relocation of Shirley Library
5. Understanding the existing Council facility
6. Consideration for a large Council facility at Shirley Community Reserve
7. Cost estimates for capex and opex
8. Potential coastal retreat implications

2. Community support for both community and recreation play spaces
See: ‘6. Community Consultations’ above

3. Future plans for the Council facility at 36 Marshlands Road
a. Currently there are no plans or intention to relocate any of the three services from this location.
b. Should relocation of Shirley Library be decided, the Waitai Governance Team would require office space within their Board area.
c. The Head of Customer Services highlighted the Council’s NZ Post franchise provides a key service for The Palms.

Re: 3a. Relocate Shirley Library Plans
– Shirley Library 2008
Current Facility: Built 1996.
Future need for more service capability.
Space required to develop service for learning services to support need in the community.
Growth retail: The Palms Shopping Centre. Need: Community.
Recommended Actions: Participate in ongoing Council/Ecan planning with mall owners with the view to possible relocation and upgrade of library facility as suburban library.
Priority Driver: Growth/need. Retail development impacted by growth.
Opportunity for service improvement.
– Land Use Recovery Plan | December 2013
Halswell, Belfast, New Brighton and Shirley suburbs are identified a key activity centres for business and community which aligns with the planning for new and retention of libraries in these areas.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/christchurch-city-council-libraries-2025-facilities-plan/

– 13.1 Appendix 1. Key Informant Interviews:
David Cosgrove. Divisional Development Manager for AMP Capital, NZ
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-feasibility-study/
The Palms Shopping Complex is owned by AMP Capital (Sydney) [has been sold again, since this report was written].
a. There was an attempt with the past owners to purchase land and to start a process that might have led to the re-positioning of the Council owned facilities (Library, Service Centre and Committee/Meeting and Staff Office Space).
This work happened around 2005-6.
b. For us development to the north is complicated because Council own three blocks of pensioner flats which would also need to be relocated as well.
c. In the previous master planning there was a relocation of community facilities, bus exchange and pensioner housing, but as indicated nothing was actually achieved and the ownership of the Palms changed hands.
(Shirley Community Facility Feasibility Study, Page 36-37)

Re: 3b. Relocate Waitai Governance Team
– Option 1: to New Brighton (to help support the investment/redevelopment projects now happening in New Brighton), co-locate with the current Waitai Community Board meeting room at The Boardroom, Corner Beresford and Union Street, New Brighton?
– Option 2: to a new ‘Dallington/Burwood/Avondale Community Centre’?
“at 255 New Brighton Road close to All Saints Church, includes [Waitai] Coastal-Burwood[-Linwood] Governance Unit more central to their residents [new boardroom for Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board meetings?]”
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-funding/
4. Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board

Re: 3c. Relocate NZ Post
Relocate NZ Post back into The Palms, co-located by their Service Desk (wheelchair & shopping carts available), in between the food court & the playground area.
Similar to the NZ Post Kiosk that use to be located in the South City food court.
More space to parcel up purchases to post & seating opportunities while waiting at busy times of the day/holidays.
Increase foot traffic into a quieter area of the mall & make it easier for residents & courier drivers to find a park close by.

4. Considerations for relocation of Shirley Library
a. Any relocation of Shirley Library would need to align with the Libraries Network Plan 2015, location preferences would include:
– Near local shops/supermarket/mall/bank/medical centre/schools/playgrounds/toy libraries.*
– On bus route/near transport hubs/handy walking distance from home/easily
accessed/free, plentiful carparking adjacent to library.
– Attractive street visibility.
b. Not all buses that stop at The Palms travel past Shirley Community Reserve. Routes 60 and 135 closest stop will be on North Parade with approximately a 10 minute walk to the new location.
Route 44 stops further along Shirley Road near Stapletons Road and Quinns Road.
c. The LTP budget for Shirley Community Centre would be insufficient to include the relocation of Shirley Library and a significant level of additional capital funding would be required.

Re: 4a. Libraries Network Plan 2015
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/christchurch-city-council-libraries-2025-facilities-plan/

Location Preferences:
* This is the text missing from the above sentence:
“malls and aquatic facilities not seen as highly desirable areas for co-location or as adjacent locations; co-location with a Council service centre favoured.”
“Library facilities need to be ‘where the people go’. Many users, particularly casual leisure users, are attracted to libraries in a similar way to retail and entertainment activities. Therefore, library facilities are best located either close to a major destination within the city, such as a mall and/or a major transport junction, or at sites sufficiently attractive to draw visitors to them as standalone ‘destination locations’.”

Building Requirements:
– Spaciousness: room for quiet spaces away from the children’s area; generous space between book stack aisles to enable easy browsing by less nimble and multiple users at one time; plenty of chairs/ beanbags and desks at which to work/relax.
– Whanau-friendly facilities, e.g. children’s areas, baby feeding/changing facilities.
– Outdoor environment important – need natural features and to be welcoming; clear signposting within and outside the building.
– Accessible buildings and facilities for people with disabilities.
– Good infrastructure and building design (air conditioning, etc).
– Library buildings will foster a sense of civic pride.

From Papanui Road (Papanui Library/Papanui Ward) to Marshland Road (Shirley Library/Burwood Ward), children/residents/visitors are without access to a local suburban sized library in the Innes Ward.

The current Shirley Library is located in the carpark of The Palms (Burwood Ward).
There is no outdoor area/playground or dedicated car parking available for library users.

The current Shirley Library* has a limited book selection, no boardroom, meeting rooms or learning centre (flexible spaces) & didn’t rate well in the Youth Audit.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/youth-audit-shirley-library/

* There are no toilets available in the Library area.
Toilets for the building are located in the corridor off the Main Entrance to the building.
– you have to leave unissued books in the library, due to security gates as you leave the Library area or take issued books into the Toilets.
– you can’t see the Toilets from the Library area:
a. Young children left unsupervised, could leave via the Main Entrance doors by the carpark.
b. If you have more than one child you can’t see them in the library, while attending to another child wanting to go to the toilet.
c. These toilets don’t align with the new ‘CCC Equity and Inclusion Policy’
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-equity-and-inclusion-policy/

Re: 4b. Bus Routes/Stops
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-transport/
3. Public Transport: Buses
This location at 10 Shirley Road is accessible by public transport for residents in:
Shirley, Dallington, Richmond, Edgeware, St Albans & Mairehau
Plus: Citywide (Orbiter), Merivale, Parklands, Burwood & Avonside.
https://go.metroinfo.co.nz/mtbp/en-gb/arrivals/content/routes
No. 60 & 135 Bus Users have access to New Brighton Library.
No. 60 Bus Users from Richmond can use the Orbiter to get to 10 Shirley Road.
Parklands*/New Brighton residents can use the No. 7: Halswell/Queenspark to get to 10 Shirley Road.
* Only a small area of Parklands residents can use the No. 80: Lincoln/Parklands to get to the Parklands Library by bus.

Re: 4c. Insufficient budget to relocate the Shirley Library
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-funding/
Isn’t now the time during the current Christchurch City Council LTP 2024-34 decision-making process, for the Board to advocate for all their residents in the Innes/Central areas, for Council to approve an appropriate new budget to build a new ‘Shirley Centre’/relocate Shirley Library & Service Centre, in the Central Ward at 10 Shirley Road, Richmond?

5. Understanding the existing Council facility
The combined Shirley Library/Service/Governance facility has a footprint of approximately 1100m2.
Superimposing the existing Council facility on Shirley Community Reserve can be represented by the image in figure 1.
This size of facility and associated amenities would significantly impact on the available space for recreation and play space on the reserve.

Re: Size of Facility
If you look at ‘Figure 2 Aerial map of ground conditions at Shirley Community Reserve (source GHD Geotechnical Investigation Report, 2013)’
Attachment B, Page 49 of the Report & Page 8 of the Study
You will see that the original building is similar in size to the existing Council facility.
Previously the original building covered the current ‘grass area’.
See: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/local-green-spaces/ &
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-map/ which includes:
Community Gardens, Recreational Facilities, Playgrounds & Parks in our areas.

6. Consideration for a large Council facility at Shirley Community Reserve
– Similar to the proposed Ōmōkihi South Library project, approximately 50 car parks including a minimum of three accessible spaces are recommended. There is a no requirement for car parks in the District Plan.
– Design criteria should follow CPTED principles and allow for cycle parking and accessible pathways to the facility.

Re: Car/Cycle Parking & Accessible Pathways
See: 2. Driving: Off Street & Street Parking, 4. Bikes & Scooters & 5. Walking
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-transport/

7. Cost estimates for capex and opex
– a. Capital budget
Scenario 2. Rebuild 36 Marshlands Rd facility (1,100m2) plus 200m2 community space [at 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve, Richmond in the Central Ward]
Cost Estimate: $15,489,952 plus Geotech and foundation
Based on scenario 2 above the shortfall would be $12,489,952 plus geotechnical investigations and suitable foundation.
– b. Operational budget
Additional operational costs would be incurred from separating the existing Council services located at the 36 Marshland Road facility including location of suitable office space for the Waitai Governance Team.

Re: 7a. Capital budget
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-funding/
Re: 7b. Operational budget
Relocating the Shirley Library to 10 Shirley Road means that it is Council operated & the budget already exists. This would just move it from the Burwood Ward to the Central Ward.
Being Council owned/funded, this facility wouldn’t be competing with the already existing community facilities in our areas, vying for the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board contestable funding.

My recommendation is:
Scenario 2. Rebuild 36 Marshlands Rd facility (1,100m2) plus 200m2 community space at 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve, Richmond in the Central Ward.

This would be the ‘Shirley Centre’ on Shirley Road…the final piece in our community facilities puzzle, the missing link that would help to connect all our residents in the areas around Shirley Road, to the existing schools/facilities/green spaces/organisations/support services in our local communities.

– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-map/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/location-location-location/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-concept-image/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/you-are-here-a-place-to-be/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/placemaking/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/third-place/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/bumping-spaces/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/building-ideas/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/landscape-ideas/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/playground-ideas/