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.”