News – 10 Shirley Road

Inequitable Equity

“‘Inequitable Equity’ occurs when policies or systems designed to level the playing field inadvertently reinforce unfairness.
It happens when ‘fairness’ is applied uniformly without adjusting for pre-existing disadvantages, or when targeted resource distribution creates unintended secondary gaps.” AI Overview

“‘Inequitable means unfair, unjust, or failing to treat everyone equally.
It describes situations, decisions, or systems characterized by a lack of balance, impartiality, or justice, that fail to provide a just distribution of resources and opportunities.” AI Overview

‘Equity’ Definition from the Christchurch City Council Equity & Inclusion Policy:
https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/plans-strategies-policies-and-bylaws/policies/strengthening-communities-policies/equity-and-inclusion-policy
“Equality means each individual or group of people is given the same resources or opportunities.
Equity recognises that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.
People should have equity, regardless of age, gender, disability, ethnicity, culture, faiths, geographical location, sexual orientation, neurodiversity or socio-economic status.”

“‘Council Core Services’ refer to the essential, primary functions local authorities prioritize and fund through local rates.
In New Zealand, Local Councils provide essential infrastructure, public services, and regulatory functions.
Under the Local Government Act, Councils are legally required to prioritize the cost-effective provision of these fundamental services to their communities:
– Network Infrastructure: Roading, transport networks, and water infrastructure (drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater).
– Public Transport Services: Management and facilitation of local public transit.
– Waste Management: Solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal.
– Civil Defence Emergency Management: Hazard mitigation, emergency preparedness, and disaster response coordination.
– Community Facilities: Libraries, museums, parks, reserves, and recreational amenities.” AI Overview

Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill: A new focus on Core Functions
https://www.al.nz/local-government-system-improvements-amendment-bill-a-new-focus-on-core-functions/
“A pivotal aspect of the Bill is the proposed amendment to the statutory purpose of local government in the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).
Critically, it aims to remove all references to the “four well-beings” – social, economic, environmental, and cultural – which themselves were reinstated in the legislation in 2019.
The Government’s policy is that these broader well-beings have contributed to councils undertaking activities perceived as beyond their fundamental remit, thereby adding to rates.
In their place, the Bill proposes a purpose statement focused explicitly on the cost-effective provision of good-quality local infrastructure and public services.
Councils will be legally obliged to consider these core services when fulfilling their responsibilities and formulating their financial management strategies.
This is designed to ensure that resources are predominantly allocated to essential services that directly benefit the local community.”

“Inequitable Council Funding refers to the disproportionate distribution of local government resources, where certain wards, demographic groups, or community initiatives receive less financial support than others.
This often results in unequal access to essential infrastructure, recreational facilities, and social services across a region.
In Christchurch, funding distribution has become a central point of debate, with ongoing tensions regarding the allocation of ratepayer funds.
Inequitable Council Funding often emerges when Councils rely heavily on property rates to fund community services.
This model disproportionately benefits wealthier property owners and central commercial hubs, leaving disadvantaged or fast-growing suburban and regional areas underfunded.
Older, well-established areas often require expensive maintenance of existing infrastructure, whereas newly expanding suburbs demand new amenities, creating tension over where limited ratepayer funds are distributed.” AI Overview

“The Canterbury Earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 caused severe land damage and liquefaction across Christchurch’s north-eastern and eastern flat land suburbs, resulting in the demolition of thousands of residential properties, commercial hubs, and beloved community heritage sites.
The most notable landmarks and institutional buildings lost in these suburbs around Shirley Road include:
– Local Schools: Major disruptions led to the structural condemnation, closures, or eventual relocations of several educational facilities in the broader catchment area, including Shirley Boys’ High School, Marian College, and Banks Avenue School.
– Shirley Community Centre (10 Shirley Road): A centerpiece of the neighborhood originally built in 1915 as Shirley School. The historic Category 2 building was heavily compromised by the shaking and demolished in 2012.” AI Overview

Since 2012, residents have been asking Council to reinstate their Community Centre at 10 Shirley Road.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-centre-decision-making/

‘Christchurch suburb overlooked since the earthquakes, community leaders say’ (30th April 2018)
https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/103484014/christchurch-suburb-overlooked-since-the-earthquakes-community-leaders-say
“Our ward has been forgotten in many ways, particularly the Shirley area – an area that is in the east but not in the east we hear so much about. No big pool complex or hot pools here,” [Former] Papanui Innes Community Board chairwoman Ali Jones said referring to facilities being built in neighbouring wards.
“The community is close to breaking point. They need a place to meet, to gather, to mend.”
When asked by a councillor how the council would pay for more facilities in the area, Jones said maybe other wards could cut back on some of the facilities they were asking for.
[Former] Christchurch Mayor Lianne Dalziel said reinstating a community centre in Shirley would have to be weighed up against all the other challenges facing the city.
“You do need to take a city view when you sit around this table. You can’t take a ward by ward view. We have to work out ways of making sure we have enough money on budget to do what is absolutely core critical across the city.”
Coastal-Burwood Community Board members also made a plea to the council for greater investment in the area to give it equity with the rest of the city.
The Shirley Community Centre, once a busy focal point providing a home to many different groups, was demolished following the 2010/11 earthquakes and has yet to be rebuilt. No money has been allocated in the LTP to build a replacement facility.
Shirley resident Joanna Gould said the community had become displaced since the demolition of the community centre.
“There is no one place to go to ask for help.”
Gould has created a website to push for a new joint library, learning centre, service centre, playground and playcentre at the site.”

Since 2018, I have been researching & advocating for my ‘Shirley Centre’ vision, to benefit the residents living in the communities around Shirley Road:
Shirley, Dallington, Richmond, Edgeware, St Albans & Mairehau.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/joanna-gould-submissions/

During this year’s Christchurch City Council 2026 Draft Annual Plan hearings, I appealed to Council & Councillors to ‘Cancel the Plan’ & reallocate the funding on budget into the 2027 LTP for the ‘Shirley Centre’.

Following my verbal submission, I created the below Blog Post series:
– Blog Post #1: CCC Draft Annual Plan 2026-2027
– Blog Post #2: Facility Decision-making
– Blog Post #3: Equity and Inclusion
– Blog Post #4: ‘Gateway to the East’
– Blog Post #5: ‘Cancel’ Plan or ‘Rip Up’ Policy?

In May 2026, I wrote the following Blog Post: ‘The Big Picture’:
“‘The Big Picture’ planning & development of the 10 Shirley Road site: Shirley Community Reserve, should focus on these 3 questions & 2 answers:
1. Q.1. Land?
– What can & can not be done with the Land?
2. Q.2. Council?
– What are the relevant Council plans, policies & strategies?
3. Q.3. Community?
– What does the Community want & need?
4. A.1. = Options
– What are the different scenarios currently available?
5. A.2. = Funding
– What are the different funding options available?”

I had hoped that after reading all my research over the years & understanding our communities needs, Councillors wouldn’t think ‘not my people, not my problem’…
But would act on our communities behalf, to ‘Cancel the Plan’ during their Workshops to finalise the Christchurch City Council Annual Plan for 2026 & rethink the plans for 10 Shirley Road.

Unfortunately this week I was notified by a Chancellor Street resident that a Christchurch City Council ‘Works Notice’ had been delivered to their letterbox:
‘Shirley Community Reserve – facility construction’
https://ccc.govt.nz/transport/works-3/show/2056
– What: Christchurch City Council is building a community facility [no longer called the ‘Shirley Community Centre’] at Shirley Community Reserve.
– Why: To deliver a community facility available for hire by local groups, along with public restrooms and an improved car park for park visitors.
[Existing car park reduced from 29 spaces to 16 spaces: 14 with 2 Mobility Car Parks.
This will have a negative impact on Shirley Playcentre & Shirley Primary School car park users.]
– Where: 10 Shirley Road, Shirley [Richmond].
– When: Early July 2026 to late December 2026. Monday to Friday, 7am to 6pm (weather/site condition dependent).

I am beyond disappointed. This is not the outcome I had hoped for our communities most valuable (history, heritage, reserve, accessible) site/land.

Residents in our communities surrounding Shirley Road, have been waiting patiently for their turn, to have their well used Community Centre rebuilt…
Paying their rates while watching other communities in Christchurch get their new (not all earthquake rebuilds) community facilities built & opened for their residents to enjoy.

The ‘Shirley Community Centre’ (1,500m2, Category 2 historic place) is the last remaining community facility, that was part of the Christchurch City Council’s original ‘Community Facilities Rebuild Programme’ to be rebuilt after the earthquakes.

‘Shirley Community Facility’ Written Submission by Joanna Gould (Sept 2025)
.pdf: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/WaipapaPICItem8ShirleyCommunityFacilitySept2025JoannaGould.pdf

‘Shirley Community Facility’ Written Submission by Joanna Gould (Dec 2025)
.pdf: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/WaipapaPICItem9ShirleyCommunityFacilityDec2025JoannaGould.pdf

At their 11th December 2025 meeting, the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board approved plans for the ‘Shirley Community Facility’.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-community-facility-plan-v2/

The new Shirley Community Reserve ‘Community Facility’:
– 280m2 building
– For Hire only: function room, a kitchen, office space, two meeting rooms & four internal toilets.
– Free Access: two external public toilets.

So after researching, advocating, filling in surveys/consultations, making deputations/submissions, ‘activation’ of the site, organising/presenting a petition & waiting since 2012 for a new building to ‘replace’ our former Centre…

The Waipapa Papanui Innes Central Community Board & Christchurch City Council have come to the conclusion, that what our communities really need at the most visible & accessible location on Shirley Road, is free access to two external public toilets?

Where is the equity?
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/equity-and-inclusion/
How does this new ‘Community Facility’ include residents in our communities, who are socially isolated due to financial constraints?

Our current residents & future generations living in these communities around Shirley Road, have been let down by:
– our Innes (Pauline Cotter) & Central (Jake McLellan) Ward Councillors (10 Shirley Road site was originally in the Innes Ward, now in the Central Ward),
– the Waipapa Papanui Innes Central Community Board for approving this plan &
– our current Christchurch City Councillors who could have chosen to ‘Cancel the Plan’ & advocate for a new design to be created, for a fit-for-purpose building that aligns with the ‘Equity and Inclusion Policy’, to meet our communities needs.

Christchurch City Council, please rip up your ‘Equity and Inclusion Policy’, as this new ‘Community Facility’ at 10 Shirley Road does not align with your policy definitions.

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.”

CCC Draft Annual Plan 2025-2026

1. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Written Submission by Joanna Gould
2. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould
3. Email/Letter to the Waipapa P-I-C Community Board (12th April 2025)
4. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Written Submission by Waipapa P-I-C Community Board
5. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Verbal Submission by Waipapa P-I-C Community Board

1. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Written Submission by Joanna Gould

2025-2026 Draft Annual Plan | Topics
– T.1. Shirley Community Reserve | Feasibility Study
– T.2. Shirley Centre | Business Case
– T.3. Emmett Street | Trees Removal

Topic 1: Shirley Community Reserve | Feasibility Study
In response to the ‘2023 Feasibility Study’ included in the Agenda for the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board’s meeting on the 13th June 2024, I have researched & written my own Feasibility Study, available here:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-report/

Topic 2: Shirley Centre | Business Case
I do not agreed with the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board’s decision on the 13th June 2024, for ‘Item 9. Shirley Community Reserve: Proposed Community Facility’:
“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.”
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2024/06/PCBCC_20240613_MIN_9127_AT.PDF Page 5-6
I have researched & written my own ‘Shirley Centre’ Business Case for the Shirley Community Reserve, available here:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-report/

Topic 3: Emmett Street | Trees Removal
3.1. ‘Shirley Centre 10 Shirley Road’ Facebook Post:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1AP2bFNwGY/
“I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.”
The Lorax by Dr. Seuss

To tell the ‘Emmett Street Trees’ story, I did some research to find out when they were planted, by whom & why their story is an important part of our local history, landscape architecture in NZ, Christchurch the ‘Garden City’ & Shirley’s identity.

Below are four parts to the ‘Emmett Street Trees’ story:
1. ‘Emmett Street Trees’ (How did we get here?)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/emmett-street-trees/
2. ‘George Brington Malcolm‘ (Who was G.B. Malcolm?)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/george-brington-malcolm/
3. ‘Significant Trees‘ (They were, but now they’re not?)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/significant-trees/
4. ‘Emmett Character Area‘ (Plenty of character, but not an Area?)
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/emmett-character-area/

“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better it’s not.”
The Lorax by Dr. Seuss
UNLESS someone…cares:
George Brington Malcolm cared & we have benefited from his vision in the Emmett Street Oak Trees & MacFarlane Park.
Christchurch City Council please care…
‘Save our Trees’…’Save our Character Area’…’Save our History’…

3.2 ‘CCC Works Notice: Emmett Street and Riselaw Street – tree removals and road closures’
https://ccc.govt.nz/transport/works-3/show/1677
What: We’re removing 22 trees in the area, due to non-compliance with the NZ Electricity (Hazards from trees) Regulations and other safety concerns. Some road closures on Emmett Street will be necessary.
Why: These trees are within the prescribed clearance distances of overhead powerlines. While various solutions allow many non-compliant trees to be retained, there are no viable solutions for these trees.
Where: Emmett Street and Riselaw Street, Shirley.
When: 7 April 2025 to 24 April 2025. Monday to Friday, 7am to 5.30pm. (weather/site condition dependent).

3.3. Emmett Street Flooding Remediation
– Has the CCC considered the ramifications of removing “19 trees on Emmett Street”?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/129394267/residents-on-floodstricken-christchurch-street-feel-forgotten–it-looked-like-lake-emmett

3.4. Emmett Street Replacement Trees
– Does the CCC consider the ‘2 for 1’ replacement tree deal enough compensation for these established significant trees?
https://ccc.govt.nz/environment/trees-and-vegetation/urbanforest

2025-2026 Draft Annual Plan | Questions
– Q. 1. When will our Rates & Development Contributions be invested back into the communities around Shirley Road?
– Q. 2. When will the CCC Equity & Inclusion Policy be applied to the communities around Shirley Road?
– Q. 3. When will Elected Members vote in favor of Capital Projects to benefit the communities around Shirley Road?

While researching I found this article from ‘The Press’ on the 5th May 1980, nearly 45 years later it is still relevant today:
“‘Funds for libraries’: The Christchurch City Council has yet to adopt the recommendation of its cultural committee to go ahead with the new Shirley library…Part of this expense is for the new central library.
It should not be forgotten that Christchurch people have been getting a central library service on the cheap because they have not had to pay for an adequate central library building for a long time past. Because the cost of books and of everything to do with presenting books to the public is going up at a staggering rate, it must be a temptation for those in charge of public money to restrict expenditure.
The central government has, after all, shown in the past that cultural expenses can be an early casualty in difficult times.
All times are difficult to some degree, and a case could always be made for standing still.
It is not the way of the Christchurch City Council to fail to consider a worth-while project just because the funds for it are hard to find.
The Shirley library comes into this class.
If the council were concerned only to shelter its ratepayers, some notable facilities would be wanting in the city today.
Vital as the new central library may be, the local suburban services must be given a high rating.
They are an essential extension of the central library’s service to readers of all kinds and it is to be hoped that the council will endorse the committee’s recommendation in the interests of a fuller service.”
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19800505.2.108

2. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Verbal Submission by Joanna Gould

11.04.25 – Item 3 – Draft Annual Plan 2025/26 – Joanna Gould:
https://youtu.be/1hFy9hVBkUI
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/CCCDraftAnnualPlan2025JoannaGouldPresentation.pdf
The Shirley Community Centre was demolished in 2012 after the earthquakes.
Last year the Waipapa Community Board, after receiving the long awaited Feasibility Study, made the decision to create a ‘mixed use’ reserve & are currently designing a small building.
Since this decision, I’ve been researching & writing my own Feasibility Study & Business Case, for a new fit for purpose building that includes relocating the Shirley Library to Shirley Road.
Our communities have lost a lot since the earthquakes: our schools, our Shirley Community Centre & now our Emmett Street Trees.
My submission is simple:
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” The Lorax by Dr Seuss
“What you do makes a difference, and you have to decide what kind of difference you want to make.” Jane Goodall
Your support can make a difference in the lives of those living in the communities around Shirley Road.

Question from Cashmere Ward Councillor Tim Scandrett
– Q. Sorry I thought the [Shirley] library based at the [Palms] mall was doing very well, was very successful?
– A. It is doing very well, but it’s very small. It’s only about a third of the space [36 Marshland Road building].
The rest of the space is used for office spaces for the library staff, the governance team for the other community board and it’s not adequate.
It doesn’t have a boardroom, doesn’t have meeting rooms, doesn’t have learning spaces. We’re limited in what we can actually provide for our residents there, and my feasibility study shows that it’s not what we actually need for our communities.

Question from Mayor Phil Mauger
– Q. The area [Shirley Community Reserve, 10 Shirley Road] that you’re looking to take it [Shirley Library] to, is large enough to put all that in?
– A. Yes, the Community Board have already done the site [selection] process and they’ve said that it’s got plenty of meterage to be able to provide all that.
The community centre was 1,500m2, and the building that they’re currently looking at replacing it with is 400m2, so it’s a significant decrease in size of what we had previously.

2016 Shirley Community Centre Site Selection
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2016/12/PICB_20161209_AGN_1197_AT.PDF Pages 72-73
The site at 10 Shirley Road met the following criteria including:
1. Sufficient space (9042m2) for both the community centre and necessary off-street parking plus other community activities.
2. Good access with road frontages to Chancellor Street, Slater Street and Shirley Road.
3. Appropriate zoning designation for the purpose of community facilities already in place.
4. Ownership is with the Council and is held in trust for a local purpose.
5. Community awareness of site as this was the site of the previous community centre.

Question from Deputy Mayor/Innes Ward Councillor Pauline Cotter
– Q. The reason for that is, I’m just wonder if you know that when the Board went out for consultation about what to do with that site, it was 50% of people wanted to retain it as just green space and 50% of people wanted a new centre, so what they’ve done is both…
– A. I’ve come back and done my own feasibility study and recalculated the feedback, and that data is incorrect. If you look at the information that I provided in Excel spreadsheets, the numbers are not right.
The second consultation includes information and votes from an event that was on the 6th of July, and the [consultation] submissions didn’t open until I think the 12th [17th] of July, so they shouldn’t have been included in my opinion.
– Q. You probably need to, because the community board has now embarked on the process, set up a working group and everything, to follow that decision they made to do 50% green space 50% centre, which means the centre will be smaller than the old one, you probably need to take that back through to the community board if you’re disputing the data.”
– A. Yes, I can do that.

3. Email/Letter to the Waipapa P-I-C Community Board (12th April 2025)

To: Emma Pavey, Mark Saunders & Elected Board Members
Subject: Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Update 2025 | Joanna Gould
Yesterday during my verbal submission for the CCC Draft Annual Plan, Councillor Pauline Cotter requested I provide an update to the Board, regarding my comments that the feedback data analysis for the Shirley Community Reserve consultations was incorrect.
Attached is a .pdf for the Board to review.
The first page is my written submission for the CCC Draft Annual Plan.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/WaipapaPICcbUpdateApril2025JoannaGould.pdf
I’m currently researching & writing my ‘Shirley Community Reserve Feasibility Study’ & ‘Shirley Centre Business Case’, available here:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-report/

– I have not received any acknowledgement or response from the Board re my email/letter.
– My email/letter was not included in the Board’s meeting agenda for the 15th May 2025 under Item 7. Correspondence, as an attachment.
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/05/PCBCC_20250515_AGN_9137_AT.PDF

4. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Written Submission by Waipapa P-I-C Community Board

3.1. Draft Annual Plan 2025/26
A – Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board: Presentation, Page 9
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2025/04/CAPL_20250403_MAT_10570.PDF
“Making community friendly spaces.
– Retain the current funding for: Shirley Community Reserve.
– Libraries are also vital as in high density environments.”

5. CCC Draft AP 2025 | Verbal Submission by Waipapa P-I-C Community Board

03.04.25 – Item 3 – Draft Annual Plan 2025/26
Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CILQG3LE9JA&t=395s
– “It also is to be noted that our Council and Community facilities serve an important role in creating and fostering a sense of community.
– Libraries are key places for people to engage with the Council’s work, as well as to access the services that libraries offer.
– These facilities are increasingly important as high density housing continues to develop around key activity centres.”

– Q. 1. If this is the case, why has the Board not advocated for a new local suburban library for residents in the Innes/Central Ward, who do not have access to one?

– Q. 2. Why didn’t the Board support & advocate for the 1,200+ residents who signed the ‘Where is our Community Centre?’ petition?

– Q. 3. When residents from the suburbs around Shirley Road created the ‘Shirley Road Central Inc’ group, advocating for a new fit for purpose library at the Shirley Community Reserve, why did the Board not engage with & support this group?

– Q. 4. When the opportunity to ‘incorporate the Shirley Library’ into the proposed facility for the Shirley Community Reserve, why did the Board not advocate for this?

Dear St Albans News Editor

I recently read the below article in your latest March/April 2025 edition:
“Design work begins for Shirley Centre”
Council staff have started the process to design a mixed-use community building for the Shirley Community Reserve at 10 Shirley Road.
Emma Norrish, Jake McLellan and Emma Twaddell will join the Working Party for the project to represent the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board. Initial surveying works have already started on the site and Geotech consultants been busy.
The Shirley Community Centre (Christchurch’s first community run centre) ran in the former intermediate school building at 10 Shirley Road until the building suffered a similar fate to the St Albans Community Centre in the earthquakes.
Some residents there have been pushing for a replacement but have faced opposition from other groups in Shirley and Richmond also serving the community.
The St Albans Residents Association is helping support the Shirley Centre plan.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yFY1xiHqwLrJAXlWzyhAOEU-ThiFahu7/ Page 8

I wonder St Albans residents, how you would feel if:
– a ‘Residents Association’ from another area,
– engaged with a ‘building company’,
– had meetings to create a ‘new proposal’,
– endorsed by a Councillor from another area,
– for land in your community classified as reserve, vested in the Council by the Crown to be held “in trust for local purpose (site for a community centre)”?

Is this what ‘community led development’ looks like in the communities around Shirley Road?

Is this how we ‘support’ another communities ‘idea’ by creating an opposing ‘new proposal’?

Let’s imagine & rewrite the ‘story’ so far…
To tell this ‘story’, details will be swapped regarding the communities from West/East of Hills Road:
– a local ‘Residents Association’: We are Richmond
– a local Ward ‘Councillor’: Jake McLellan, Councillor for Central Ward
– a local long awaited, many years advocated for ‘Community Facility’: Edgeware Pool
– a local historic section of land, that has been part of this communities identity & memories for many many years: 43A Edgeware Rd, St Albans.

Sidenote: This is a ‘story’ for demonstration purposes only.
Many years ago I randomly ended up at the Annual General Meeting for the St Albans Pavilion and Pool Inc.
I listened to their plans, made some suggestions & have supported their project as a ‘neighbour’.
Many times we have ending up in the public gallery together, as we both presented our verbal submissions to the Christchurch City Council Long Term & Annual Plans.

The ‘story’ starts on the 22nd May 2024, while watching online the Christchurch City Council – Long Term Plan 2024-34 Information Session/Workshop
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/ccc-draft-ltp-2024-34-workshops/
In this ‘story’, ‘Edgeware Pool’ was being discussed.
Staff advice was to “bring back the existing budget for the ‘Edgeware Pool’ in the Long Term Plan.
“Staff are through the Board Chair 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…
but it needs community board decision making to ratify that and that’s scheduled for early June.”

What?!? Who?!? Why?!?
So I sent an LGOIMA request to the Christchurch City Council asking for answers.
– What happened to the long awaited ‘Feasibility Study’?
– Where was the feedback report from the last ‘Consultation’ in 2023?
– Why has the Waipapa Community Board made a predetermined decision based on an unsolicited proposal?

In this ‘story’, I messaged the ‘St Albans Pavilion and Pool Inc’ members to let them know & was told:
“Cancel your LGOIMA request, it was us. Sorry we forgot to tell you.”
They (residents from the east of Hills Road, in this ‘story’ a few ‘We are Richmond’ members are also members of ‘St Albans Pavilion and Pool Inc’) were the ‘prospective Community Partner’.
They had approached the ‘sympathetic Building Company’ & involved a Councillor from another Ward, in this ‘story’: Jake McLellan, Councillor for Central Ward.
Their ‘proposal’ for the land at 43A Edgeware Rd, St Albans would be a ‘Community Facility’ that is the opposite of ‘St Albans Pavilion and Pool Inc’ constitution…

‘Shirley Road Central’ Constitution: To support the development of a community hub including a modern library, and meeting rooms on the site at 10 Shirley Road for the use of the surrounding communities.
This group was created to bring together residents in the suburbs around Shirley Road to be a combined voice advocating for a new building at Shirley Community Reserve, that would benefit all the residents in these suburbs.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-road-central-group/

The ‘story’ continues on the 13th June 2024 at the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board Meeting
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2024/06/PCBCC_20240613_MIN_9127_AT.PDF
There were four deputations regarding Item 9 in this ‘story’, ‘Edgeware Pool’: Proposed Community Facility.
My deputation was the only one that did not support the Staff Recommendations, aka the ‘prospective Community Partner’ and a ‘sympathetic Building Company’ new proposal.
If you were unaware of this ‘proposal’, you wouldn’t have realised that the Board had already made a decision on the ‘Proposed Community Facility’, before this meeting.

The Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board resolved:
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.

Pages 29-39, CCC Staff Report
Pages 40-41, CCC Staff Memo
Pages 42-81, Shirley Community Reserve Feasibility Study 2023
Pages 82-102 Shirley Road Central, ‘Where is our Community Centre’ Petition* May 2021
(over 1,200 signatures in total, *paper petition with 600+ signatures not included)
Page 103, Letter of Support from Dr Duncan Webb, MP for Christchurch Central
Page 104, Letter of Support from Hon Poto Williams, MP for Christchurch East
Pages 105-135, 2023 Consultation Feedback
Pages 136-140, Shirley Community Reserve Feasibility Study 2023 Supplementary Info
https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2024/06/PCBCC_20240613_AGN_9127_AT.PDF

So now you know the history behind this ‘story’, back to the St Albans News article:
“Some residents there have been pushing for a replacement but have faced opposition from other groups in Shirley and Richmond also serving the community.”
As I said in my deputation, this ‘proposal’ is insensitive and insulting to the existing community centres & facilities already established in Shirley and Richmond.
“Other groups in Shirley and Richmond” haven’t supported a replacement ‘traditional’ community centre, as funding is already stretched to support all the existing community centres & facilities around Shirley Road.
– North of Shirley Road, we have the MacFarlane Park Centres, Rhombus & MacFarlane Park Community Garden
– South of Shirley Road, we have North Avon Community Centre, Delta, Richmond Cottage, Avebury House, Richmond Community Gardens & Riverlution Eco Hub
– West of Shirley Road, we have St Albans Community Centre & Community Garden, plus The Whānau Centre
– East of Shirley Road, we have Avon Hub & opening soon: All Saints Church & Community Centre
https://www.allsaintsburwood.nz/community-facility-fit-out
There is no need for another ‘traditional’ community centre at Shirley Community Reserve.
But there is support for a ‘contemporary’ community centre, Citizen Hub:
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/community-hub-support/

“The St Albans Residents Association is helping support the Shirley Centre plan.”
“…helping support”? No.
“…the Shirley Centre”? No.
The ‘Shirley Centre’ idea is not the community facility that has been proposed by the ‘prospective Community Partner’ and a ‘sympathetic Building Company’.
Since 2018, the ‘Shirley Centre’ idea has been to:
– relocate the Shirley Library to Shirley Road,
– add learning spaces &
– meeting rooms,
– with a new inclusive accessible playground,
located at 10 Shirley Road, Shirley Community Reserve.
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-what/
https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-overview/

So my question to St Albans residents after reading this…
How would you feel?
– if your ‘Edgeware Pool’ project was our ‘Shirley Centre’ idea?
Residents & Councillor from another suburb/ward telling you what you should put on the land in your area?
– if you were told that your replacement “on budget” facility would be 400m2, instead of 1500m2, only 26.67% of the original facility?
– if you were told the Board supported a new proposal (that is the opposite of your group’s constitution), presented by their preferred ‘prospective Community Partner’ (members of your group that was set up to bring residents in the different suburbs together)?

The Christchurch City Council Draft Annual Plan for 2025/26 is now out for consultation from the 26th February – 28th March 2025.
https://letstalk.ccc.govt.nz/annualplan

My submission is simple:
I do not support the Waipapa Papanui-Innes-Central Community Board’s decision to design/build: an ‘on budget community building’ with their ‘prospective Community Partner’, on Shirley Community Reserve that will enable a mixed use of the Reserve and support recreation, play and social connections.
This land is classified as reserve, vested in the Council by the Crown to be held “in trust for local purpose (site for a community centre)”.

I would appreciate your support.
Thanks,
Joanna Gould
Shirley/Richmond resident since 2008

P.S. I am currently writing my own Feasibility Study & Business Case for a new ‘Shirley Centre’ facility at Shirley Community Reserve.
These will be presented to the Christchurch City Council as part of my submission for the 2025 Annual Plan & uploaded to this page soon: https://www.10shirleyroad.org.nz/shirley-centre-report/