March 2026 – 10 Shirley Road

CCC Draft Annual Plan 2026-2027

1. Written Submission (.pdf) by Joanna Gould
2. AI Summary of Written Submission (.pdf)
3. Blog Post Links (included in the .pdf)
4. LGOIMA Info Links (included in the .pdf)
5. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (YouTube video)
6. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (Presentation)
7. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (Transcript)
8. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (Councillors Questions)
– Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt (Riccarton Ward)
– Councillor Pauline Cotter (Innes Ward)
Includes background info on the following:
– ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Working Party
– ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Plans from Co-Studio Architects
– Lack of Community Input (Re: Deputations & No Consultation)
9. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Budget Allocated & Budget Spent

1. Written Submission (.pdf) by Joanna Gould
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/CCCDraftAnnualPlanMarch2026JoannaGould.pdf

Written Submission (.pdf) includes the following:
1. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Plan v1
2. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Plan v2
3. Shirley Community Reserve Landscape Plans
4. Community Changes
5. Community Needs
6. Community Developments
7. Christchurch City Council
8. Christchurch City Libraries
9. Shirley Library
10. ‘Shirley Centre’ Community Overview Map
11. ‘Shirley Centre’ Vision
12. ‘Gateway to the East’

2. AI Summary of Written Submission (.pdf)
Project No. 20053 – Shirley Community Facility
“The document outlines a submission to the Christchurch City Council’s Draft Annual Plan 2026-2027, focusing on the proposed Shirley Community Facility at 10 Shirley Road. Below are the key points:

1. Advocacy for the ‘Shirley Centre’
Proposal to establish a new Shirley Library and Information Centre at 10 Shirley Road.
The facility aims to serve as a community hub, connecting surrounding suburbs (Shirley, Dallington, Richmond, Edgeware, St Albans, and Mairehau).
The vision includes creating an inclusive, accessible space for community education, support services, learning spaces, meeting rooms, and recreational activities.

2. Reallocation of Funding
Suggestion to cancel the 2025 Board-approved plans for a 280m² building and reallocate the 2026 funding to the Long-Term Plan (LTP) 2027.
Proposal to increase the budget to replace the original 1,500m² building.
Concerns raised by elected board members about the current design, including security issues, lack of community input, and unclear management plans.

3. Collaboration
Recommendation to involve both the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board and the Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board in decision-making.
Suggestion to include stakeholders like Christchurch City Libraries, Shirley Playcentre, Shirley Primary School, and community advocates in discussions.
Proposal to remove the delegated authority from the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board for decisions regarding the facility.

4. Community Needs
Highlights socio-economic deprivation in the surrounding wards (Innes, Central, and Burwood).
Emphasizes the need for community facilities to address the lack of accessible spaces for education, recreation, and social services.
Notes the impact of housing intensification and NZ Post location closures on the area.

5. Shirley Library
Criticism of the current Shirley Library’s location in a commercial zone with no outdoor space and inadequate facilities.
Proposal to create a “Learning Library” with dedicated learning spaces, meeting rooms, and community-focused amenities.

6. Shirley Community Reserve
The site of the former Shirley Community Centre has been underutilized since its demolition in 2012.
Proposal to transform the reserve into a vibrant community hub with inclusive facilities, recreational spaces, and educational resources.

7. ‘Gateway to the East’ Vision
Positioning 10 Shirley Road as a key entry point to the eastern suburbs and the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor.
Plans to integrate the facility with local history, green spaces, recreational areas, and transport routes.
Emphasis on creating a welcoming and informative space for both residents and visitors.

8. Community Feedback and Concerns
Mixed reactions from residents about the current proposed design, with some calling it “not fit for purpose.”
Concerns about the size, functionality, and management of the proposed building.
Lack of community consultation and exclusion of certain advocates from the decision-making process.

9. Proposed Features for the Shirley Centre
Inclusive accessible building with learning spaces, meeting rooms, and community education services.
Outdoor spaces including a sensory garden, playground, basketball court, and recreational areas.
Integration with local history, green spaces, and the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor.

10. Call to Action
The submission urges the Council to reconsider the current plans, reallocate funding, and involve more stakeholders in the decision-making process to ensure the facility meets community needs.

The document emphasizes the importance of creating a community-focused, inclusive, and functional space at 10 Shirley Road to serve as a hub for the surrounding neighborhoods and visitors.”

3. Blog Post Links (included in the .pdf)
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-community-overview-map/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-plan-v1/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-plan-v2/
– https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-post-earthquakes-map/

4. LGOIMA Info Links (included in the .pdf)
– LGOIMA Request | Ticket 1467939
Re: Landscape Plans for Shirley Community Reserve
– LGOIMA Request | Ticket 1522533
Re: Lancaster Park Community Centre and Changing Rooms
– LGOIMA Request | Ticket 1523989
Re: Community Facilities Built Post Earthquakes
– LGOIMA Request | Ticket 1568772
Re: South Library Build Cost
– LGOIMA Request | Ticket 1574763
Re: Christchurch City Libraries Visitor & Issues Stats
– LGOIMA Request | Ticket 1574538
Re: 20053 Shirley Community Centre/Facility Rebuild

5. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (YouTube video)

Christchurch City Council | Draft Annual Plan 2026/27
Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould | YouTube video | 7th April 2026

6. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (Presentation)

Christchurch City Council | Draft Annual Plan 2026/27
Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould | Presentation | 7th April 2026

The above image was on screen during my verbal submission:
1. Shirley ‘Community’ Reserve (left image)
– Former building located on the Reserve site
– Map of Christchurch highlighting the most earthquake damaged Wards in Red.
2. ‘Shirley Centre’ Post Earthquakes Map (middle image)
– Community Facilities built post earthquakes, highlighting the gap between St Albans and Aranui.
No community facilities have been built in the most earthquake damaged areas.
3. ‘The Press’ article from 15th September 2025 (right image)
– ‘Crappy room with a couple of toilets’ – residents divided over community centre.

7. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (Transcript)

“Good afternoon
Everyone knows following the earthquakes, the Wards most affected by damage, were located in the North East of Christchurch, as highlighted in red area on the first map on screen.

But does everyone know what community facilities have been built since 2012 & where they are located?

I didn’t. So the second map on screen, is based on my Official Information request, regarding the Community Facilities Built post earthquakes.

I created this map using Google My Maps, where you can search for an address, it zooms in to this location & you have the option to add a marker.

When I zoomed out to see the whole of Christchurch, I was shocked to see that from St Albans to Aranui, there had been no community facilities built, in the most damaged areas in the North East.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-post-earthquakes-map/

The Equity and Inclusion Policy was adopted by Council in 2024.
I made a submission & attended the Hearing Panel meetings.
The Policy details include:
– We will use an equity, access and inclusion lens to inform decision-making to avoid discrimination, promote inclusion and increase fairness in the city, wherever possible.
– As an organisation with resource, influence, and authority, using this lens means that our decisions do not create or perpetuate further inequities.

The last remaining project in the original Rebuild Programme is the Shirley Community Centre.

Since 2018, I have been advocating for a new Shirley Centre, to relocate Shirley Library to Shirley Road, in the Shirley Community Reserve.

According to Council staff:
what I proposed was not considered a viable option.

As the options presented to the Board:
– aligned with what was budgeted for in the LTP
– no request has been made by the Board or by a Councillor to increase the LTP budgeted fund for a future facility.

In 2025, our Board approved plans for an ‘on budget’ 280m2 building to ‘replace’ our former 1,500m2 centre.
As The Press article on screen said: ‘Crappy room with a couple of toilets’.

If the Shirley Community Reserve
– was your Crown owned land, in your ward,
– that was set apart as a Local Purpose reserve,
– with the primary purpose to be a Community Centre,
– knowing the needs of your community,
– seeing your residents repeatedly make submissions &
– present a petition with over 1,200 signatures.
Would you endorse this plan?

When it doesn’t align with:
– the Reserve’s classification,
– the Equity & Inclusion Policy
– Nor the Best Practice Community Facility Design, included in the Community Facilities Network Plan.

Please support my call to:
– Cancel the plan, reallocate & increase the LTP budget for the Shirley Centre.
– Remove the Delegated Authority &
– Start discussions with both Boards & other stakeholders that were excluded from the decision-making process.
– Advocate for the Shirley Centre, library & information centre on Shirley Road, as the Gateway to the East.

Otherwise, if this plan gets built, you as the Council, are literally ripping up the Equity and Inclusion Policy, for the residents in the communities around the Shirley Community Reserve.”

8. Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould (Councillors Questions)

Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt (Riccarton Ward)
– Councillor Harrison-Hunt: I remember you in the hearing…
(Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt was on the Hearings Panel for the Draft Equity and Inclusion Policy:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-equity-and-inclusion-policy/).
Please forgive me if I forgot, but did you have a child that used to go to Tūranga?
– Joanna: Yes.
– Councillor Harrison-Hunt: Just in terms of the facility itself, you’ve talked about the space etc.
I’m more worried about the wider scope within the Equity and Inclusion, things we want to think about.
What within this current plan is sort of inaccessible?
– Joanna: The current plan excludes the majority of the community.
Our community is low income. They’re not going to be able to hire out this space.
The space is basically going to be a venue for hire.
It’s not got a current operator. So it’s basically going to be a swipe card access. That’s not inclusive.
The equity is that we had a 1,500m2 building.
This doesn’t replace what we lost.
– Councillor Harrison-Hunt: I see.
– Joanna: My idea is to bring [relocate] the Shirley Library, because it’s the busiest suburban library.
We don’t have spaces in the library for people to sit. There’s no outdoor space.
There’s no learning spaces. So, anytime there’s an activity like in the school holidays, they have to move bookshelves to put in [setup] spaces. The area is basically out of bounds for anybody who’s not participating in that activity.
– Councillor Harrison-Hunt: I know what you mean. Thank you.

Councillor Pauline Cotter (Innes Ward)
– Councillor Cotter: It’s just the Community Board did approve this design after a lot of backwards and forwards and tweaking it.
So now all the three rooms have got their own access way to make it accessible and reasonable for people to hire.
It’s about to start being built. So there’s a lot of money already gone into this.
What’s your view on the sunk capital that we would lose if we didn’t…
– Joanna: You didn’t include the right people in the decision-making.
As far as I’m concerned, that is your loss, because you had the opportunity to invite the people who should have been in the working party.
You only included people who were involved in the existing community centres.
Of course, they’re going to opt for the lowest possible build.
They’ve got a bias.
– Councillor Cotter: Thanks for coming in. That is your view and I can assure listeners and other Councillors around the table that is not the case. It was a really inclusive project.*

* ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Working Party:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/lgoima-request-ticket-1323259/
Working Party Members:
– Shirley Community Trust (MacFarlane Park Centres)
– Shirley Village Project
– St Albans Residents Association (Kohinga St Albans Community Centre)
– Eastern Community Sport and Recreation Inc (Avon Hub)
– We are Richmond (Avebury House).

The Working Party did not include:
– Shirley Playcentre (located on the Reserve)**
– Shirley Primary School (located opposite the Reserve)**
** The current plan has halved onsite car parking at the Reserve.
– Shirley Recreational Walkers (meet at the Reserve)
– Canterbury Genealogy (formerly NZ Society of Genealogists – Canterbury Branch. Located at 10 Shirley Road from February 1990 until the February 2011 earthquakes. Now located at Parkview Community Lounge, with drop-in sessions at Shirley Library on the first and third Saturdays of each month.)
– Community Advocates or
– Residents from the communities around Shirley Road.

The Working Party met 3 times: April, June & July 2025.

Council said the ‘role of the Working Party’ was to:
– Raise the profile of the project and provide a channel of communication so that the wider community feels confident, informed, and engaged about the project and the progress being made.
– Provide recommendations, and suggestions to the Project Team to ensure that the design meets the needs of the community.
– Act as a conduit between Council and the Community to inform the development of the facility and park space.
In my opinion, this has not been achieved.

‘Shirley Community Facility’ Plans from Co-Studio Architects:
– Concept/Preliminary Design 100%, 28th March 2025
– 100% Developed Design, 9th July 2025
– Issued for Information, 20th August 2025
– 100% Detailed Design, 1st September 2025
– 100% Detailed Design, 10th November 2025

Lack of Community Input (Re: Deputations & No Consultation):
The ‘100% Detailed Design’ plans were not made public, until they were included in the agenda for the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board meeting on the 11th September 2025.
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/09/PCBCC_20250911_AGN_9141_AT_WEB.htm

Deputations were allowed at the 11th September 2025 meeting, but not at the 11th December 2025 meeting, where the Board approved the final design.

At no stage in the process of developing the ‘Shirley Community Facility’, has there been a Consultation on the ‘Concept’, ‘Developed Design’ or ‘Detailed Design’, to allow the whole community to give feedback on their community facility.

9. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Budget Allocated & Budget Spent
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/lgoima-request-ticket-1574538/
Budget Spent – Year, Amount, Item Description
– FY 2025 = $110,000
Planning, Procurement, Investigations, Design.
– FY 2026 = $247,000
Research, Design, Iterations, Construction.
– Current Total Spent = $357,000

LGOIMA [1574538] | 20053 – Shirley Community Centre/Facility Rebuild
Budget Allocated & Budget Spent

In my opinion, both Feasibility Studies & Consultations, plus the Geotechnical reports, were needed to enable the Board to make informed decisions.

Councillor Pauline Cotter referred to ‘sunk capital’, during my verbal submission.
The Board have previously ‘sunk capital’ into the failed ‘Crossway Church’ proposal from 2013 to 2016:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/crossway-church-proposal/

The only ‘sunk capital’ that I see, is the cost of the current ‘Developed’ & ‘Detailed Design’ plans, that led to the procurement costs.

Many residents in the communities around Shirley Road (Shirley, Dallington, Richmond, Edgeware, St Albans & Mairehau) are unaware of the Board’s current plans for 10 Shirley Road/Shirley Community Reserve, as they have not been consulted since 2023…

I’ve been following the Board’s progress for the ‘Shirley Community Centre’ rebuild since 2018.
I read the Board’s agenda for each meeting, to make sure I keep up to date with the Board’s progress regarding this capital project.
I was not included in the ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Working Party, so I had to wait to see the proposed plans.
I voiced my concerns regarding these plans, emailing the Board my .pdf submissions for both the 11th September 2025 & 11th December 2025 Board meetings.
Since the Board approved plans, I’ve been doing more research & preparation in order to provide Council with the information I did, for the current Draft Annual Plan 2026-2027.

The Board could have avoided the current ‘sunk capital’, if the:
– ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Working Party, included all stakeholders &
– ‘Concept/Preliminary Design’ had gone out for Consultation, like they did during the ‘St Albans Community Centre’ rebuild process:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/facility-decision-making/

‘St Albans Community Centre consultation begins’, 25th May 2016
https://www.newsline.ccc.govt.nz/news/story/st-albans-community-centre-consultation-begins
The local community will be able to discuss how they think the new community centre could enhance St Albans, and how they see themselves using the facility, before the final design is approved by the Shirley–Papanui Community Board…
Mike Davidson, chair of the Shirley–Papanui Community Board, says the Board is excited with the development and progress of the new centre and is looking forward to the design going out for public consultation…
“Using information from both pre- and post-earthquake, a design has been created that truly captures the essence of St Albans.
This group has worked with Council staff to create a concept design, which is now ready for feedback from the wider community.” Mr Davidson says.
There will be two drop-in sessions at the transitional St Albans Community Centre, 1049 Colombo Street for the public to come and meet the working party and discuss the project.

New Building Updates:
1. New Building | Background (Prior to 13th June 2024)
2. Working Party | Members, Role & 2023 Consultation Feedback
3. New Building | Timeline (From the 13th June 2024)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/new-building-updates/

‘Shirley Centre’ Post Earthquakes Map

_{Each pin is clickable and has more info/links, + & -, are in the bottom left hand corner, so you can zoom in/out.

Click on the square with arrow, in the top left hand corner, to show/hide map legend/layers}

The ‘Shirley Centre’ Post Earthquakes Map includes info/layers* on:
1. Schools & Adult Community Education (ACE) Closures
2. Community Facilities Built Post Earthquakes (see Tables below)
3. Shirley Centre | Information Centre

* The other info/layers from the ‘Shirley Centre’ Community Overview Map are also included in this map.
The current view has these info/layers turned off.
Click on the ‘Square with Arrow’, in the top left hand corner, to show/hide info/layers.

LGOIMA Request | 1523989 | Christchurch City Council
Community Facilities Built Post Earthquakes | 2012 – 2026

‘Shirley Centre’ Post Earthquakes Map info/layer details:
1. Schools & Adult Community Education (ACE) Closures
– Shirley Community Centre
– Shirley Boys’ High School
– Marian College
– Banks Avenue School
– Avonside Girls’ High School
– Hammersley Park School
– Richmond School
– St Paul’s School
– Floyds Creative Arts Centre
2. Community Facilities Built Post Earthquakes
– Aranui Library
– Graham Condon Recreation and Sport Centre
– Norman Kirk Memorial Pool
– Te Hāpua Halswell Centre
– Aranui Community Centre
– Heathcote Community Centre
– Governors Bay Community Centre
– Ōrauwhata Bishopdale Library & Community Centre
– Redcliffs Village Library
– St Martins Volunteer Library
– Matuku Takotako Sumner Centre
– Taiora QEII Recreation and Sport Centre
– Woolston Community Library
– He Puna Taimoana Hot Pools
– Manuka Cottage
– Opawa Volunteer Library
– Rārākau Riccarton Community Centre
– Kohinga St Albans Community Centre
– Te Pou Toetoe Linwood Pool
– Matatiki Hornby Centre
– Lancaster Park Community Centre
– Ōmōkihi South Library and Customer Service Hub
3. Shirley Centre | Information Centre
– Sutton Heritage House & Garden
– City to Sea Pathway
– Medway Footbridge
– Dallington Bridge
– Snell Place Footbridge
– Avondale Footbridge
– Dallington Landing
– Sector 7 Events
– Avon Park
– Kerrs Reach
– Wainoni Landing
– Climate Action Campus
– Riverlution Eco Hub
– Rehua Marae
– Nga Hau E Wha National Marae

Shirley Community Facility Plan v2

1. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Agenda for 11th December 2025
2. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes for 11th December 2025
3. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes Attachments for 11th September 2025
(No Attachments were included, even though the Board received emails).
4. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
YouTube Video of the 11th December 2025 Board Meeting
(No Deputations were allowed for this Item).
5. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Written Submission by Joanna Gould
(including AI Summary of .pdf)

1. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Agenda for 11th December 2025
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/12/PCBCC_20251211_AGN_10741_AT.PDF
9. Updated Shirley Community Facility Design
– Pages 13-24: Council Staff Report
– Pages 25-31: Co-Studio Architects Developed Design for the Shirley Community Facility v2
– Pages 32-38: Co-Studio Architects Developed Design for the Shirley Community Facility v1.

2. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes for 11th December 2025
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/12/PCBCC_20251211_MIN_10741_AT.PDF
Pages 4-6
9. Updated Shirley Community Facility Design
– Community Board Consideration
The Board accepted the Officer Recommendations, except in respect of it selecting the option of having a raked ceiling for the facility, rather than a flat ceiling.
The Board also added resolution 7 below to enable the two meeting rooms in the updated facility design to be accessed independently of the function space via external doors that it requested the identified windows be replaced with.
The Board’s consideration confirmed that the authority given to staff to amend the updated design included determining whether the added doors be single or double.
Victoria Henstock foreshadowed moving the Officer Recommendations without change, but the addition of a raked ceiling, and external doors for the meeting rooms, was carried before the foreshadowed motion could be put to a vote.
– Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu
That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:
1. Receives the information in the Updated Shirley Community Facility Design 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. Approves the updated developed detail design, including a flat ceiling and associated project costings, incorporating the Board’s September 2025 directions, as shown in Attachment A to this report.
4. Instructs staff to proceed to tender and procurement following approval of the updated design and project costings.
5. Acknowledges the mahi of the Shirley Working Group and thanks them for their contribution to the project.
6. Notes that the total project remains deliverable within the Long-Term Plan budget of $3,705,000.
– Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00074
Part C
That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:
1. Receives the information in the Updated Shirley Community Facility Design 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. Subject to resolution 7, approves the updated developed detail design, including a raked ceiling and associated project costings, incorporating the Board’s September 2025 directions, as shown in Attachment A to the report.
4. Instructs staff to proceed to tender and procurement following approval of the updated design and project costings.
5. Acknowledges the mahi of the Shirley Working Group and thanks them for their contribution to the project.
6. Notes that the total project remains deliverable within the Long-Term Plan budget of $3,705,000.
7. Requests and authorises staff to amend the updated design by replacing:
a. the external window in Meeting Room 04; and
b. the south-western external window in Large Meeting Room 03;
with external glass doors of the same style as the other external doors in the facility, to enable those rooms to be accessed independently of the function space.
– Pauline Cotter/Jake McLellan Carried
9. Updated Shirley Community Facility Design Voting:
– For (6): Pauline Cotter, Jake McLellan, Dr Sunita Gautam, John Miller, Mike Davidson, Simon Britten
– Against (1): Emma Twaddell
– Abstain (2): Ashleigh Feary, Victoria Henstock
TOTAL = 9

3. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes Attachments for 11th September 2025
(No Attachments were included, even though the Board received emails).

4. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
YouTube Video of the 11th December 2025 Board Meeting
(No Deputations were allowed for this Item).
Presentation & Board Discussions for Item 9. Updated Shirley Community Facility Design:
https://www.youtube.com/live/RRceb032Avw?t=5691s

5. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Written Submission by Joanna Gould
.pdf: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/WaipapaPICItem9ShirleyCommunityFacilityDec2025JoannaGould.pdf
Includes information on the following topics:
– Shirley Community Facility | Developed Design | December 2025
– Proposed Shirley Community Facility | Feedback from September 2025
– Dudley Character Area, Richmond | Dudley Design Guide
– 10 Shirley Road & Original Building | Connections
– St Albans Community Centre | Concept Plan & Consultation
– Lancaster Park Community Centre and Changing Rooms
– Department of Conservation Email | Reserve Classification & Uses
– Shirley Community Reserve | Redevelopment Concept for Discussion
– CCC Community Facilities Network Plan | Principles
– CCC Community Facilities Network Plan | Best Practice Community Facility Design
– Christchurch City Council District Plan | Housing Intensification & Property Values
– Kāinga Ora | New Social Housing Developments
– Bookable Spaces & Local Activities Provided
– Shirley Centre | Ideas by Joanna Gould (2021)

AI Summary of .pdf:
“The document outlines concerns, feedback, and suggestions regarding the proposed Shirley Community Facility redevelopment at Shirley Community Reserve, as well as comparisons to other community projects and guidelines. Below are the key points:

Concerns with the Proposed Shirley Community Facility Design (December 2025)
– Building Placement:
Located at the back of the reserve, hidden from Shirley Road, and not aligned with the existing path.
South wall blocks the line of sight from Shirley Road to Dudley Creek, raising CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) concerns.
– Design Issues:
Meeting rooms are fixed spaces, not adjustable.
Access to meeting rooms is through the function space, which may limit usability.
The projector wall removes windows on the east side, blocking visibility to the playground and Shirley Playcentre.
The building lacks windows or doors on the south side, missing the best view of Dudley Creek.
Roof pitch, entrance location, and window styles do not align with the Dudley Design Guide for the area.
– Interior Design:
The new building is a single-room facility, unlike the former multi-room community center.
No clarity on whether items from the former heritage-listed building will be incorporated.
– Car Park and Paths:
Reduced car park spaces may impact Shirley Primary School and Shirley Playcentre.
The new car park is disconnected from existing paths, affecting accessibility.
The building is not connected to Shirley Road, the playground, or Shirley Playcentre.
– Toilets and Kitchen:
Lack of windows in toilets and kitchen increases electricity and ventilation costs.
Concerns about vandalism and maintenance of public toilets.

– Feedback and Advocacy:
The facility was designed without sufficient resident input and is deemed not “fit for purpose.”
Residents prefer a community-focused facility rather than a venue for hire or clubroom.
The facility should honor the area’s history and provide inclusive spaces for current and future residents.

– Reserve Classification and Legal Implications:
The land is classified as a “Local Purpose Reserve” for a community center, which limits its use to this purpose unless the classification is changed.
Mixed-use activities are permissible if compatible with the reserve’s primary purpose.

– Comparisons to Other Community Projects:
The St Albans Community Centre involved extensive public consultation and a community-led design process, which was not followed for the Shirley Community Facility.
Lancaster Park Community Centre has a larger building size and more amenities compared to the proposed Shirley Community Facility.

– Recommendations:
Align the design with the CCC Community Facilities Network Plan principles, emphasizing community-led design, inclusivity, flexibility, and integration with surroundings.
Incorporate local history and retrieved items from the former heritage-listed building.
Improve accessibility and connectivity to surrounding paths, playgrounds, and public transport.
Address concerns about the building’s placement, design, and usability.

– Additional Context:
The Shirley Community Reserve has been underutilized since the original community center was demolished in 2012 due to earthquake damage.
The area is experiencing housing intensification, with new social housing developments expected to bring approximately 198 new residents by May 2026.
The document includes links to resources, community groups, and design guidelines for further reference.

– Conclusion:
The document emphasizes the need for a community-led, inclusive, and functional design for the Shirley Community Facility that aligns with the reserve’s purpose and addresses residents’ needs.
It highlights the importance of integrating the facility with its surroundings and honoring the area’s history while accommodating future growth.”

Shirley Community Facility Plan v1

1. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Agenda for 11th September 2025
2. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes for 11th September 2025
3. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes Attachments for 11th September 2025
4. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
YouTube Video of the 11th September 2025 Board Meeting
(including Deputations by: Jennifer Dalziel, Margaret Stewart, Joanna Gould, Don Gould, Jo Byrne, Murray James from We Are Richmond & Jane Mitchell from Shirley Community Trust).
5. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Written Submission by Joanna Gould
(including AI Summary of .pdf)

1. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Agenda for 11th September 2025:
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/09/PCBCC_20250911_AGN_9141_AT.PDF
Item 8. Shirley Community Facility
– Pages 26 – 35: Council Staff Report
– Pages 36 – 62: Co-Studio Architects Developed Design for the Shirley Community Facility.

2. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes for 11th September 2025:
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/09/PCBCC_20250911_MIN_9141_AT.PDF
Item 8. Shirley Community Facility
– Board Consideration
The Board considered the deputations on this item (refer 5.3 – 5.8 of these minutes) before accepting the Officer Recommendations with a variation on Option Two, increasing the footprint by at least 100 square metres to make the centre large enough to contain three separate or separatable meeting/activity rooms.
The Board also added requests that staff investigate including in the final design the building elements listed in resolution 6, and noted that the rotunda (or another form of shelter) will be investigated by Parks staff as part of their redevelopment proposal for the reserve.
– Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu
That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:
1. Receives the information in the Shirley 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. Acknowledges the mahi of the Shirley Working Group and thanks them for their contribution to the project.
4. Notes the Shirley Working Group’s endorsement of the developed design for the Shirley Community Facility.
5. Approves:
a. option one, the developed design as endorsed by the Shirley Working
Group as shown in Attachment A, for inclusion in the detailed design phase and associated comprehensive project cost report.
Or;
b. option two, the developed design and extension to the building, as shown in Attachment B for inclusion in the detailed design phase and associated comprehensive project cost report.
6. Requests staff incorporate the proposed rotunda, as shown in Attachment C, for inclusion in the detailed design phase and associated comprehensive project cost report.
7. Requests staff to report back to the Board with the detailed design and comprehensive project cost report for approval.
8. Requests staff collaborate with the Parks Unit to ensure this project is integrated with the development of a landscape plan for Shirley Reserve, and to explore opportunities for delivery efficiencies.
– Community Board Resolved PCBCC/2025/00057
Part C
That the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:
1. Receives the information in the Shirley 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. Acknowledges the mahi of the Shirley Working Group and thanks them for their contribution to the project.
4. Notes the Shirley Working Group’s endorsement of the developed design (as outlined in Option One and in Attachment A to this report) for the Shirley Community Facility.
5. Approves the developed design with an increase to the footprint by at least 100 square metres to make the centre large enough to contain three separate or separatable meeting/activity rooms, while remaining within budget, for inclusion in the detailed design phase and associated comprehensive project cost report.
6. Requests that staff investigate:
a. constructing the building with an internal exposed raked ceiling;
b. including solar panels and a battery;
c. including an office space;
d. including and fitting a large screen.
7. Notes that Parks staff will include investigating a shelter/rotunda as part of their redevelopment proposal.
8. Requests staff to report back to the Board with the detailed design and associated project costings for approval.
9. Requests staff collaborate with the Parks Unit to ensure this project is integrated with the development of a landscape plan for Shirley Reserve, and to explore opportunities for delivery efficiencies.
– Pauline Cotter/Sunita Gautam Carried
– Emma Norrish requested that her vote against the resolutions be recorded.

3. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Meeting Minutes Attachments for 11th September 2025:
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/09/PCBCC_20250911_MAT_9141.PDF
– Pages 16-26: 5.5. Deputation by Joanna Gould for the Shirley Community Facility
– Pages 27-30: 5.6. Deputation by Don Gould for the Shirley Community Facility

4. Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board
Youtube Video of the 11th September 2025 Board Meeting
– Deputations for Item 8. Shirley Community Facility:
https://www.youtube.com/live/4cCkAA7KvZg?si=xU09YWM8HoBE6ww4&t=1395s
5.3 Jennifer Dalziel
Jennifer Dalziel spoke regarding Item 8, Shirley Community Facility.
5.4 Margaret Stewart
Margaret Stewart spoke regarding Item 8, Shirley Community Facility.
5.5 Joanna Gould
Joanna Gould spoke regarding Item 8, Shirley Community Facility.
5.6 Don Gould
Don Gould spoke regarding Item 8, Shirley Community Facility.
5.7 Jo Byrne
Jo Byrne spoke regarding Item 8, Shirley Community Facility.
5.8 We Are Richmond and Shirley Community Trust
Murray James and Jane Mitchell spoke on behalf of We Are Richmond and Shirley Community Trust respectively regarding Item 8, Shirley Community Facility.
– Presentation & Board Discussions for Item 8. Shirley Community Facility:
https://www.youtube.com/live/4cCkAA7KvZg?t=6367s

5. ‘Shirley Community Facility’ Written Submission by Joanna Gould
.pdf: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/WaipapaPICItem8ShirleyCommunityFacilitySept2025JoannaGould.pdf
Includes information on the following topics:
Section A: Staff Report
Section B: Developed Design
1. Building Placement
2. Dudley Creek
3. Dudley Design
4. Interior
5. Car Park
6. Paths
7. Toilets & Kitchen
Section C: Additional Information
– Shirley Community Facility | Developed Design
– Dudley Design Guide
– Chancellor Street Heritage Houses (opposite Shirley Community Reserve)
– Heritage New Zealand Site Record & Photos of the former Shirley Community Centre building
– Shirley Community Centre – Landscape Development Proposals – May 1994
– Shirley Community Centre – 10 Shirley Road Retrievals – November 2012
– Shirley Community Centre | Ideas by Joanna Gould (2018)
– Shirley Centre | Design Considerations
– Shirley Centre | Design Inspiration
– Shirley Centre | Ideas by Joanna Gould (2021)

AI Summary of .pdf:
“The document outlines the agenda and concerns surrounding the proposed Shirley Community Facility to be constructed on Shirley Community Reserve at 10 Shirley Road. Below are the key points:

Section A: Staff Report
– Purpose of the Report: Approval of the developed design for the Shirley Community Facility.
– Timing Concerns: The report is presented at the last meeting before elections, raising concerns about fairness to the incoming board and lack of transparency in decision-making.
– Community Advocacy: Residents have been advocating for a replacement building since the original Shirley Community Centre was demolished in 2012. Progress has been slow despite its designation as a priority project.
– Working Group Issues:
The Shirley Working Group was established to advise on the design but lacked representation from key community stakeholders (e.g., Shirley Playcentre, Shirley Recreational Walkers, Shirley Primary School, and residents).
Endorsement of the design was divided, with some members opposing it.
– Budget Concerns:
The project budget is $3.7M, but the developed design is estimated at $1.6M, leaving $2.1M unallocated.
The new building is significantly smaller (236.9m²) than the original (1,500m²), raising concerns about its adequacy.
– Legal and Community Implications:
The land is classified as a “Local Purpose (Community Centre)” reserve, limiting its use.
High community interest in the project has not been adequately addressed, and residents feel excluded from the decision-making process.

Section B: Developed Design
– Building Placement:
The building is located at the back of the reserve, disconnected from Shirley Road and the existing paths.
Concerns about Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) issues due to the building’s placement and lack of visibility.
– Design Concerns:
The building design does not align with the Dudley Design Guide or the architectural style of surrounding residential buildings.
Lack of windows and doors facing Dudley Creek, which is a key feature of the reserve.
The interior design is limited to one room, reducing the facility’s functionality compared to the original multi-room building.
– Car Park and Pathway Issues:
Reduced car park spaces may impact Shirley Primary School and Shirley Playcentre.
The new building is not connected to existing paths or key areas like Shirley Road, the playground, or Shirley Playcentre.
– Toilets and Kitchen:
Lack of windows in the toilets and kitchen raises concerns about ventilation and energy costs.
The inclusion of public toilets is debated due to potential issues with vandalism and maintenance.

Section C: Additional Information
– Historical and Design Context:
The former Shirley Community Centre was a heritage-listed building with significant architectural and historical value.
The Dudley Design Guide emphasizes maintaining the character of the area, which the new design does not fully adhere to.
– Community Concerns:
Residents have expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of consultation and transparency.
There are questions about the allocation of the remaining budget and whether it will benefit other organizations that endorsed the plans.
– Key Issues Raised:
Lack of community involvement and transparency in the decision-making process.
Concerns about the adequacy of the new building’s size and design.
Questions about the allocation of the remaining budget.
Exclusion of key community stakeholders from the Working Group.
Disconnection of the new building from the reserve’s existing paths and features.

The document highlights significant community concerns about the proposed Shirley Community Facility, including its design, placement, budget allocation, and the decision-making process.”

‘Shirley Centre’ Community Overview Map

The new 2026 ‘Shirley Centre’ Community Overview Map includes info/layers on:
– Post Canterbury Earthquakes
– Community Facilities Built Post Earthquakes
– Christchurch City Libraries
– Shirley Centre | Information Centre
– Shirley Centre | Community Centres
– Shirley Centre | Community Gardens
– Shirley Centre | Parks & Playgrounds
– Shirley Centre | Recreational Facilities
– Shirley Centre | Education Providers
– Shirley Centre | Support Providers