Source: https://christchurch.infocouncil.biz/Open/2017/04/BPZC_20170418_AGN_1859_AT.htm
Timestamp: 2019-07-20 22:53:11
Document Index: 541779146

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 2', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 6', 'art 7']

Agenda of Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Joint Committee - 18 April 2017
Elizabeth Cunningham – Councillor, Environment Canterbury
Charlie Zimmerman – Te Runanga o Wairewa
7. Wairewa Lake Health.............................................................................................................. 13
8. Response to Forsyth Community questions......................................................................... 19
9. Wairewa Bank Stabilisation Project...................................................................................... 23
10. Immediate Steps Biodiversity Project Proposal - Ohinetahi Valley Stream...................... 29
11. Review of the Banks Peninsula Zone Implementation Programme................................... 37
12. Facilitator's Update - 18 April 2017....................................................................................... 41
That the minutes of the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Joint Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 14 March 2017 be confirmed (refer page 5).
Iaean Cranwell opened the meeting with a Karakia.
The opening session of the meeting was jointly chaired by Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner and Councillor Elizabeth Cunningham to allow everyone to participate fully.
They welcomed two new members to the Committee and said given the number of changes over the last few months, it was an opportune time to discuss expectations of the Committee and share experiences of council committees - what helps a committee function well and be effective.
The apologies of Charles Zimmerman and Peter Ramsden were accepted. A card is to be sent to Peter Ramsden on behalf of the Committee, wishing him a speedy recovery.
That the minutes of the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Joint Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 21 February 2017 be confirmed, subject to the following amendments:
Ecosystem Health/Biodiversity Monitoring:
Add second bullet point:
· Claire Findlay referred to the matter of an email received identifying eight funding sources relevant to community partnerhip proposal.
Add – Kevin Simcock agreed to progress this to better understand the risk.
· Port Hills Fire
Add – Claire Findlay recommended that the Committee be proactive in the reinstatement of biodiversity on the Port Hills through the following recommendation:
Zone Committee show leadership in seeking to minimise damage to the Zone’s freshwater systems affected by last week’s fires, specifically:
§ ensuring appropriate management methods and tools are in place to protect streams (and their inhabitants) from sediment/ash and other contaminants (including salt water/fire retardants) and especially in advance of main rainfall periods
§ consider diverting some Immediate Steps funding to assist with recovery methods and of riparian margins
§ support specialist community experts and university inputs and initiatives (e.g. envir science, envi engineering etc) to assist with minimising and managing damaging effects of current situation – and in preparation of other such future events
§ ensure fire risk and recovery are included in Outcome 8 Climate Change Milestones and anticipate supporting relevant initiatives that may result from recent event.
Geoff Thompson reported that he visited Okains Bay and noted where willow trees were falling into the river. He would talk further to Ian Lloyd about what could be done.
Claire Findlay noted that over the last eight months biodiversity was not on the agenda enough when it was a priority for the committee in the last eight months the Zone Committee had held four scheduled meetings and two biodiversity focused workshops but that only two of the scheduled meetings had confirmed minutes and inquired if this would be addressed. The Committee was reminded by the Chair to “look forward” rather than “back” and look for solutions.
Immediate Steps – Diamond Harbour Gully proposal
There was discussion about whether a motion had been put to the Committee and numbers for, against and abstentions.
There was a discussion about what consensus decision making, significant majority, collaboration and co-operation looked like in the CWMS and Zone Committee context. This discussion was picked up again as the Committee deliberated the funding proposal for fire recovery of the Ohinetahi Reserve.
7. Role, Purpose and Operation of Zone Committee 2017
The session was opened by the Joint Chairs who set out the expectation of respective councils, the issues faced, where the Water Management Strategy and committees fitted in and how decisions of the committee helped them in their discussions around the Council table.
The meeting was then opened up for individual members to highlight what they felt worked and what was not working so well, expectations for the coming year, including ideas, issues yet to be resolved and the frustrations they had as they tried to progress some matters.
Staff and Committee Recommendation
The Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee receive the information.
8. Election of Chair, Deputy Chair and Regional Representative 2017
The election process was introduced by Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner who saw the Chairs role as being one of providing effective leadership, ensuring everyone has an opportunity to speak, keeping the meeting on task, running to time and ensuring matters on the agenda were relevant and timely.
Before nominations were called Pam Richardson advised that she had decided to not to put her name forward for the Chair’s position.
That the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee elect:
Paula Smith as Chair for 2017
Pam Richardson as Deputy Chair for 2017
Thomas Kulpe as Regional Representative for 2017
9. Environment Canterbury - Quarterly Report on 5 year Outcomes
In the discussion that ensued comment was made including a suggestion to add an extra column to show “Next Steps”.
Additional actions members raised that were not recorded in the Quarterly report included:
· Access to Safe Drinking Water
Tikao Bay residents were keen to improve their security of supply, Pam Richardson facilitated a meeting with ECan staff who provided information they were looking for. An Okains Bay investigation into the water supply is included in the draft City Council Annual Plan out now for consultation.
Canterbury Drinking Water Reference Group – the committee needs further information on what progress this group is making and how the committee could feed into it.
The Little River Rating District has a community meeting scheduled for 11 April
· Improved Stormwater Management – Road Cutting Project
Three sites have been identified as trial sites – between Lyttelton and Governor’s Bay. City Council roading staff are involved.
· Operate at GMP
Ian Lloyd and Geoff Thompson, are working on a catchment by catchment approach, starting at Wairewa and Port Levy, and intend to produce a map of Banks Peninsula showing the areas covered by farm environment plans.
· Whakaraupo/Lyttelton Catchment Management Plan
Things are moving quiet quickly. The Science Advisory Group is finalising a draft issues & options paper, and plan to go back to the community with this in May/June – final plan is expected in November 2017.
· Akaroa Waste Water
Intense/challenging period of community discussions – difficult to change perception of treated waste water from liability to asset, difficult geography means options limited, difficult community discussions, yet to see where this ends up.
· Resource Consent Monitoring
Monthly meeting underway with ECan staff to identify any consent/compliance issues – working on a way to determine septic tank effectiveness/compliance The 1999 Takamatua septic tanks has been found. Next step is to prepare a newsletter for ? about ?.
Pam Richardson advised things like Strategic Directions were being brought in as a pilot project for community boards. How can we share information, such as coastal hazards and valuing water resources?
That the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee receives the report.
10. Port Hills Fire - Ohinetahi Summit Road Society/QEII Covenant
Further to the written report Lesley Woudberg gave a general update on the recovery. She also clarified that the $16,500 cost of fencing quoted was half the fencing cost, ecological assessments had not been carried out as the area was only beginning to be opened for experts other than fire fighters, the ecological score is likely to low given the fire damage and identified the eleven possible projects that would be delayed until the 2017/18 allocation of Immediate Steps funding.
Claire Findlay referred to the Parrish Farm where a fire break had been cut across the property and asked in this case how would reinstatement occur?
A reworded motion agreeing to provide up to $35,000 of Immediate Steps funding to landowners on the Whakaraupō/Lyttelton side affected by the Port Hills fire including Ohinetahi Bush Reserve was proposed.
Discussion followed as to whether based on last month’s decision on the Diamond Harbour Gully application, the motion now being put forward would succeed if there was no documentation on ecological values or clear consensus among committee members. Andrew Turner referred to the urgent and extra-ordinary nature of this application, brought about by the fire and the window of opportunity to carry out remedial work
That the Banks Peninsula Water Management Committee agree to support the Summit Road Society by contributing up to $35,000 of Immediate Steps funding for fire recovery of Ohinetahi Bush Reserve.
That the Committee agrees to support the Summit Road Society and adjacent properties affected by the Port Hills fire, by contributing up to $35,000 of Immediate Steps funding and;
That if the Diamond Harbour Gully project has not attracted funding by the beginning of the 2017/8 financial year then $5,000 Immediate Steps Funding be approved for the project provided further value is added to the project by enhancing public awareness, understanding and support for biodiversity (criteria 4) and improve the range of knowledge and information about Canterbury’s biodiversity for its sustainable management (criteria 6).
A dinner break was taken between 6.35pm and 7.00pm.
Tim Davie advised that he would have a full paper for the next meeting, but in the interim he was happy to discuss the matter.
At the October 2016 Workshop two outcomes were agreed as ways forward – agency monitoring/reporting and community led monitoring. He explained the type of monitoring/investigations that Environment Canterbury undertook i.e. state of environment, investigations and project outcomes (e.g. IS project Wainui QEII covenant). He suggested that Environment Canterbury could add to this by taking a targeted approach – i.e. undertake electric fishing at some sites where fishing had been undertaken in the past and data already existed to see whether the same species are present and what is not present.
That the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee receives the verbal report, and that the Committee looks forward to a paper on the proposed approach at the next meeting, 18 April 2017.
12. Report for Information
The Committee discussed the Government’s Clean Water Package. The Ministry for the Environment was looking for feedback by 28 April 2017. The Committee discussed what was important for Banks Peninsula. Some members were disappointed that there were streams on Banks Peninsula that do not meet the 4th order or above category for inclusion in the swimming water quality targets.
Andrew Turner and Elizabeth Cunningham agreed to convey the Committees thoughts back to their respective councils.
Pam Richardson – CCC significant ecological sites process is coming to an end. Need to now work with farmers to share details of “significant ecological sites” on their properties and still awaiting a resolution to the High Court appeal.
Kevin Simcock – Akaroa Wastewater Working Party is formidable learning process – both personal and technical, there were many complications, including the different levels of treatment.
Elizabeth Cunningham – A session for Environment Canterbury councillors is being held next week to talk about priorities and the Long-Term Plan.
Claire Findlay – fire recovery ecological stakeholders group meeting organised by CCC and BPCT – feeling from Governors Bay residents that they were not invited. The committee should be “championing” fire recovery and ensure fire risk, recovery and land-use are addressed in Outcome 8 Climate Change.
June Swindells – Mahinga kai, shellfish and watercress are important to the Rūnanga – and therefore water quality standards should be raised from “swimmable” to “eatable”.
Manaia Cunningham – project with Corrections to build six composting toilets (ref rec 7.9)
John Benn - Acknowledgment needs to be given to the Department of Conservation as statutory managers of the bed of Te Roto o Wairewa in the Annual Report (Page 46).
CONFIRMED THIS 18TH DAY OF APRIL 2017
17/374017
To update the Banks Peninsula Zone Committee on the latest monitoring results concerning the health of Te Roto o Wairewa (Lake Forsyth)
Trophic level index combines measurements of nitrogen, phosphorus and chlorophyll a into a single index. The higher the index more eutrophic the lake (increasing nutrient concentrations and phytoplankton). The index is meant to be calculated as an annual average (see figure 1). The long-term desired outcome for the lake is a TLI of less than 4.0. This has yet to be reached. The Wairewa sub-regional plan sets an objective for the lake that equates to a TLI of 5, this has also yet to be reached.
Figure 1: Annual TLI for Te Roto o Wairewa (Lake Forsyth). N.B. 2016-17 is shown as hashed because it does not have all data until June 30, 2017.
TLI can be calculated on a monthly basis, which is useful to analyse the variability within a year (see figure 2). The latest results show that the TLI has decreased slightly after several peaks during 2016. It is difficult to draw absolute conclusions on why the TLI has got worse after several years of improvement. This may be part of cyclical change or possibly the dry and warm 2016 drove the high TLI last year. Figure 3 shows the lake levels in recent years. It is noticeable that the level has remained higher throughout most of the last than the last.
Figure 2: Monthly TLI for Te Roto o Wairewa (Lake Forsyth)
Figure 3: Lake levels in Te Roto o Wairewa (Lake Forsyth) since 2013.
A desired outcome for the lake is that the chlorophyll a concentrations are low and less than 30% of the samples are above 20 mg/l. Figure 4 shows the percentage of samples within a year that are under 20 mg/l. This shows we have not reached this ZIP aim.
Figure 4: Percentage of samples (within a year) with chlorophyll a concentrations greater than 20 mg/l
Figure 5: Toxic cyanobacteria readings since 2011.
The lake has been in a notifiable cyanobacteria bloom since January 2017 having been in bloom for most of 2016. The bloom since January is Anaebena rather than Nodularia. Anabaena is more characteristic of freshwater conditions. It is still toxic and requires notification. Overleaf is the notification information for 2015-17
Wairewa/Lake Forsyth
Action trigger first exceeded
8/10/2015*
Anabaena > 1.8 mm3/L
Notified CPH & CCC
CDHB media release
Consecutive results below Action mode
1/12/2015*
Aphanizomenon sp. AND Nodularia < 1.8 mm3/L
Anabaena AND Nodularia > 1.8 mm3/L
Nodularia < 1.8 mm3/L
Visible cyanobacterial scums. Confirmed by lab analysis Anabaena/Dolichospermum cf. lemmermannii > 1.8mm3/L
None as of April 2017
17/374103
To provide a response to Forsyth community questions.
There are a lot of unknowns about the issues of public health around the lake and other environmental risks. The community who live around the lake want to be informed.
The following is a short list of questions that have come from the community.
1. What do we do if some child is swimming in the canal or lake at the time of a bloom?
There should be no swimming in the canal or the lake during a bloom. You should inform them that there is a bloom and explain the associated risks. The warning released by Community and Public Health is to warn people about the potential health risks if they come into contact with the affected waterbody.
The guidelines we follow are not mandatory and are used to address the risk to public health from cyanobacteria in recreational waters.
2. What does it mean when the lake goes blue? and how concerned do we need to be?
The iridescent/neon blue, like what was observed in 2016, generally indicates that the species of toxic cyanobacteria, Nodularia is present at high enough concentrations that form scums on the water surface. A warning can be put into immediate effect based on the presence of these scums- we don’t need to wait for lab results, however samples will be taken to confirm the species and concentrations present. If you see these iridescent/neon blue scums (or the green “paint-like” scums characteristic of the toxic Anabaena species), call the Environment Canterbury customer services team.
3. What is known about the Aerosol health risk of blue powder? and What is known about the Aerosol health risk of water spray?
A study conducted by Wood & Dietrich1 during a Nodularia bloom in Lake Forsyth found aerosolized nodularin concentrations do not represent an acute or chronic hazard to humans via inhalation.
Skin irritations may still occur as a result of aerosolized cyanotoxins.
1 Wood & Dietrich. (2011). Quantitative assessment of aerosolized cyanobacterial toxins at two New Zealand lakes. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 13, 1617.
4. The signage that has gone up is a huge improvement, but the blue scum was on the Bossu Road side of the canal and there is no sign at the end of Bossu Road, some recreationalists approach the area from the Bossu Road direction. Will there be a sign placed there?
Unfortunately we are not able to monitor and erect signs at all entry points. Christchurch City Council, who are responsible for signage, completed a review of signage positions last year and added in a number of additional sites.
Permanent signs are at the following sites:
· The window of the CCC service centre/post office in Little River.
· The gate opposite the Little River Hotel.
· Catons Bay - the picnic area on the lake side of the main road before the Little River Hotel.
· Lake front on two posts at Birdlings Flat.
· Rail Trail at the Lake Junction.
· Carpark at Birdlings Flat.
· New Brighton Power Boat Club building.
· North end of rail trail opposite the Little River Hotel.
· The Lake Terrace road entrance.
· Entrance to the Councils Regional Park.
· Bossu Road carpark.
We also communicate the warnings via local papers, and on a number of websites and social media platforms.
5. The signage says that in a period of high risk people should not sail, swim, let dogs swim or drink the lake water. In medium risk times, the sign says: do not swim or let dogs swim. In periods of low risk there is no warning. What does this mean? It is Okay to drink the water in periods of low or medium risk? What about the fish? Can people eat the fish?
When the signage indicates the lake is in the high risk/red zone, toxic cyanobacteria are exceeding guidelines for contact recreation. Contact with the affected waterbody is not recommended.
In the medium risk/orange zone, cyanobacteria are present but not at high enough levels to action a warning. This generally occurs when there has been a bloom early in the summer season and it is possible it may go into bloom again later on. Favourable conditions including the right combination of warm temperatures, sunlight, low or stable river flows and nutrients indicate the bloom risk is still high.
Cyanobacteria abundance can increase rapidly (particularly in the summer months) therefore the purpose of the medium risk/orange zone is to alert the lake users to be more cautious and assess the situation before entering the water.
Cyanobacteria toxins are not removed by boiling, normal filtering systems or by adding household disinfectants.
CDHB advice is that if you choose to eat fish from waters containing toxic cyanobacteria, you should eat them in moderation. Avoid eating internal organs, such as the liver and kidney of the fish, as this is where accumulation of toxins may be the greatest. Affected fish may taste earthy. Avoid contact with the water while fishing and wash all fish in clean water.
6. What monitoring is being done and can Ecan make that monitoring data publicly available through their website?
Environment Canterbury conducts monthly water quality monitoring off SH75, west of Catons bay (by the lake level recorder).
The national LAWA (Land Air Water Aotearoa) website displays data from this monitoring site ( https://www.lawa.org.nz/ ).
We also have a monitoring station at this site which records continuous data. This site is due for an upgrade and new monitoring equipment is awaiting deployment. Once this is in, we hope to make that data publically available on our website along with monitoring data from Lake Ellesmere/Te Waihora.
7. When is the plume monitoring going to be undertaken?
I am unsure what this question is referring to.
8. Has Ecan or the zone committee or anyone considered taking drone photography to record how the bloom changes and cycles in the lake, and what happens to it on the coast?
We are always looking for cost effective monitoring techniques. The suggested “monitoring” looks like an intensive investigation that is possible but we have no plans for this as part of our normal monitoring. We work closely with the University of Canterbury and will suggest this to them as a possible research project.
9. Can Tuna and fish toxin monitoring be done annually
This not part of our routine monitoring and would require a considerable addition of resources to be added. The work done by Dr Dolamore at Ara Institute showed that even during a high cyanobacterial bloom the flesh of tuna was safe to eat (but not the liver).
10. Is there any environmental monitoring of the marine environment being undertaken or being planned? eg shellfish toxins, algal build up on rocks
MPI monitor shellfish toxins along the NZ coastline. More information found here:
11. When is the bridge going to be built?
CCC and Wairewa Runanga to answer
12. When is the next annual community information day where community can hear and ask questions? We understood that this is required once a year. The last one was over a year ago.
Community Day Sunday 9th April
17/373879
Provide an update to the committee on the work to progress this project and to confirm the committee’s commitment to funding the project from Immediate Steps up to $60,000.
· Receives the report
· Agrees to fund the bank stabilisation project from Immediate Steps up to $60,000 spread over two financial years subject to a project plan approved by the zone committee.
During the March 2016 meeting the committee “…agreed that:
1. The zone committee encourages Environment Canterbury to put together a Stream Bank Stabilisation Pilot project; and
2. In principle up to $60,000 of Immediate Steps funding could be used for such a project; and
3. A full project proposal would need to be approved by the zone committee.”
Since this time further work has been undertaken including the commissioning of a second report by Rob Blakely on Enhanced Sediment Mitigation in the Wairewa Catchment (summary attached, full report available at the ZC meeting). The purpose of this report was to identify the river bank areas that required treatment and to provide an approximate cost.
The key finding of the report is that the estimated cost of treating all the banks identified would be in the order of $83,000.
We have discussed the report with Wairewa Rūnanga who is working with us to further develop the project.
With the commitment of the zone committee to provide up to $60,000 from Immediate Steps spread over two financial years, we are confident we can raise a further $20 - 40,000 from other funders to undertake all the stabilisation work required in the valley floor.
Enhanced Sediment Mitigation
17/372517
To provide summary information on one new Immediate Steps fund project proposal.
That the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee agree to fund the Ohinetahi Valley Stream project to the sum of $11,585 from the 2017/2018 financial year’s budget
The zone committee has $100,000 of Immediate Steps funding per year to spend on projects to protect / enhance biodiversity. The Immediate Steps fund was set up in recognition that protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems requires a dual approach of action on the ground (eg. covenants and planting) and improved planning frameworks.
The Banks Peninsula zone has fully allocated the funds for the 2016/2017 year with the last $35,000 being granted for fire recovery in Ohinetahi Reserve and neighbouring properties.
This project, on one of the properties immediately adjacent to Ohinetahi Reserve, was under development at the time of the fire but the area it relates to was not directly affected by the fire. The landowners are keen to have this project under way as soon as possible as, along with its own inherent benefits it will also be of benefit to the recovery of Ohinetahi Reserve as a seed source and to provide good stream cover where upstream much of the bush has been burnt.
There is an area of forestry between the reserve and this project which the owners will be replacing with native bush cover in the next few years so the end result will create native bush along the stream for most of its length. They are also discussing covenanting with the Banks Peninsula Conservation Trust.
Projects are assessed against these six criteria:
3. Increase the integration and sustainable use of indigenous species in modified environments (eg. farm, urban, lifestyle blocks).
17/372988
1.1 The general purpose of this report is to update the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Joint Committee (BPZC, the Zone Committee) on progress with developing a plan for reviewing the Zone Implementation Programme and the Wairewa Zone Implementation Programme Addendum (referred collectively as the ZIP).
1.2 The specific purpose of this report is provide a proposed approach to the review of the ZIP and to suggest that the ‘BPZC ZIP Review Sub-committee’ report back to the Zone Committee with a ‘final’ review plan including clarity on the roles and responsibilities of Zone Committee members and various partner organisations, as well as timeframes.
2.1 The decision(s) in this report are low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
(a) Agree in principle to the approach outlined in this report to review the BPZC ZIP, subject to any amendments agreed to by the Zone Committee at the 18 April 2017 BPZC Zone Committee meeting.
At the 22 November 2016 BPZC meeting the Committee agreed with a Christchurch City Council staff recommendation (report reference 16/1329136) that a full review of the ZIP and ZIPA was appropriate.
The Committee also agreed with a Christchurch City Council staff recommendation to select three members of the Committee to form a group (referred to as the ‘ZIP Review Sub-committee’), and with the support of the Environment Canterbury Zone Facilitator and Christchurch City Council Principal Advisor, to report back to the Committee by April 2017 with a plan for completing the review of the ZIP by December 2017. The three Zone Committee members selected to be part of the ‘ZIP Review Sub-committee and to develop a review plan were Pam Richardson, Claire Findlay and Paula Smith.
The report to the 22 November 2016 BPZC meeting provides background information on various ZIP matters including the preparation of the ZIP in 2013 and ZIPA in 2014, and the rolling-review of ZIP chapter recommendations during 2016. The report also provides comment on why a review of the ZIP and ZIPA is considered appropriate.
Due to various constraints the ‘ZIP Review Sub-committee’ were unable to meet in time to prepare a draft ZIP review plan for the April 20017 BPZC meeting. The approach outlined in this report to review the BPZC ZIP is the work of the author and may not reflect the views of the ‘ZIP Review Sub-committee’.
Proposed approach to review the BPZC ZIP
Seven main parts to the review of the BBZC ZIP have been identified. Some of these parts may occur concurrently. At this time no dates have been set for the completion of the various parts of the ZIP review. Completion dates will be confirmed following the Zone Committee’s agreement on the structure of the review. The key parts of the review are summarised as:
Part 1: Review of ZIP chapter recommendations: Complete the rolling-review of the remaining four chapters of the BPZC ZIP and compile all the chapter reviews into one document with cross-referencing between chapters where appropriate. The review of the chapters to date has allowed the Zone Committee to not only assess progress with addressing ZIP recommendations but also to consider the ‘relevance’ and ‘appropriateness’ of the current ZIP recommendations. The review of the remaining four ZIP chapters will be completed using a similar approach to that used for previous chapter reviews during 2016. That is, Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council staff will prepare a draft chapter review document to be discussed and finalised at a Zone Committee meeting.
Part 2: CWMS guidance note: With the support of Environment Canterbury Canterbury Water Management Strategy (CWMS) staff prepare a guidance note for the Zone Committee on the anticipated nature of a second-generation ZIP. Since 2011, through the preparation of ZIP’s and ZIPA’s across Canterbury, there has been significant learnings on both the structure and content of ZIP’s. It is anticipated that the guidance note would include any updates on CWMS targets and related matters that should be addressed in a ZIP, comment on ZIP structures including ZIPA inclusion, any statutory matters (including regulatory framework) that need to be addressed as part of the review, and any other matters to assist the Zone Committee with their review.
Part 3: Review of ZIP chapter Introductions and Priority Outcomes: Zone Committee members to select a chapter(s) for which they will be the ‘champion’ (chapter leader). It may be appropriate to review the relevance and appropriateness of current chapter ‘subjects’ at this time. Each chapter leader, with assistance from Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council staff (facilitated by the Canterbury Zone Facilitator and Christchurch City Council Principal Advisor) will review and revise their chapter Introduction and Priority Outcomes with consideration of the Part 2 CWMS guidance note and their understanding and knowledge of the key subject matter issues. The chapter leaders will report back to the Zone Committee with their revised chapter Introduction and Priority Outcomes and across-chapter matters will be discussed. The Zone Committee will endorse the Introductions and Priority Outcomes for the purpose of wider community consultation and engagement. The chapter Introductions and Priority Outcomes serve as a summary of the most significant issues within the context of the management of fresh water.
Part 4: Prepare a community consultation and engagement plan: Prepare a community consultation and engagement plan for the review of the ZIP. The preparation of the community consultation and engagement plan will be led by the ‘ZIP Review Sub-committee’ with support from Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council community consultation and engagement, and communications staff. As part of the community consultation and engagement plan, the methods by which to engage with other organisations, such as the Department of Conservation, will be outlined. Cross-boundary matters with the Selwyn-Waihora Zone and Christchurch-West Melton Zone will need to be part of the broad community consultation and engagement plan. The consultation and engagement plan will need to identify methods by which the wider community are informed on progress with the review.
Part 5: Carry out a programme of community consultation and engagement: Complete the programme of community consultation and engagement with support from Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council community consultation and engagement, and communications staff. A summary report of the findings of the community consultation and engagement programme will be prepared.
Part 6: Prepare draft second-generation BPZC ZIP: Chapter leaders to prepare a draft of their second-generation BPZC ZIP chapters. With support from the Canterbury Zone Facilitator and Christchurch City Council Principal Advisor, the ZIP Review Sub-committee to compile the draft second-generation BPZC ZIP for BPZC approval.
Part 7: Finalise second-generation BPZC ZIP: Present draft second-generation BPZC ZIP to the Christchurch City Council and Environment Canterbury for approval.
Reporting on progress with the ZIP review will be through the regular reports to Christchurch City Council and Environment Canterbury, and through other established relationships and communication methods.
17/372175
027 7064273
To inform the Zone Committee of;
· Report on actions/events/media over the last month
6 April Report to Christchurch City Council
9 April Okuti community family day – introducing the critters of the Okuiti River to the community
11 April Annual Little River Rating District meeting
Field Trip - Port Hills Fire
CWM ZC
CCC/ECan
Ch 2 Water Quality
Ch 4 Biodiversity
Lyttelton Port Company Dredging Hearing – begins
ZC update to CCC
ZC Annual Reports to ECan
March $35k boost for reserve
24 March Freshwater Fund Day – Little River
24 March Getting Green Fingers – Koukourarata
24 March Akaroa Wastewater – Akaroa
4 April Recycled water - Akaroa
d) Letter of support (attached)
Support Healthy Harbour partnership group funding bid - Whakaraupō
Lake Wairewa MOU