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:
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.”