DEPUTATION CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL Thursday 25 August 2016
Peer Review Report of the Tonkin & Taylor Ltd 2015 Coastal Hazard Assessment Stage Two Report.
Presented by Tim Sintes & Darrell Latham, Christchurch Coastal Residents United (CCRU)
Introduction – Tim Sintes
•CCRU acknowledges that it has been a difficult year for the CCC and for all Coastal and Christchurch residents with respect to the Coastal Hazards Policy. It is a relatively new area for councils and we acknowledge that we are all finding our way, understanding the science and, how it impacts on Council policy and citizens. We accept that it has been at times contentious for us all. However, we now have clarity with the release of the final report.
•The Coastal Hazards Policy and the release of the final report has certainly been a high profile and attracted much interest in the media during the last several days with leading items in the Christchurch Press / Editorial page. We are certain that all Christchurch and Coastal residents will be very interested in the outcome of today’s meeting. Darrell Latham to Present
The initial agreement last September between CCC and Government was to throw out the Coastal Hazards Policy and start afresh.
On the 28th September the CCRU Chairman (Mark Munro) attended a briefing with The Hon. Dr Nick Smith and the Hon. Nicky Wagner.
• They advised the CCRU Chairman that the Coastal Hazards policy was to be removed from the fast track Earthquake Recovery plan process.
• They advised the new process needed to take time to rigorously test restrictions from both an economic and risk management perspective.
• They also advised that the existing district plan had sufficient rules to deal with planning matters until a new policy was in place, which could be a number of years in the future.
• CCRU and the 47000 effected residents were very happy that finally common sense had prevailed, with a joint collaborative approach, between the Government and Council.
• It was our understanding that the spirit and intent of the agreement necessitated that the Tonkin and Taylor report was to be null and void.
• It was the view of CCRU, that council could not legitimately rely on the Tonkin and Taylor report, pending a new policy, and that Council must revert to existing planning rules.
• We asked Councillors to seriously consider our request and the implications around it, as continuing on a “business as usual “approach was likely to cause further injustices to the community.
The findings of the Peer Review panel of scientific experts has been released
Quote (European Commissioner on Climate Change – Paris 2015) ‘’We must translate the momentum we now have into an agreement. We need a robust agreement. We need a credible agreement. We need an agreement fit for purpose and fit for the future. We owe this to our residents and to our children. To succeed, we need to be doing our very best so that we are moving together in the same direction. Our credibility will depend on our collective actions.” [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
The Council requested that the scientific peer review panel suggest ways forward. The panels finding provides now provide that way forward.
We now have the opportunity to start again and do this in a way that can be an exemplar. There are good people in council, the community and local experts are engaged and we have the chance to produce something great.
What we now want [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
Christchurch Coastal Residents United (CCRU) endorses the findings of the Peer Review panel of scientific experts and that coastal flooding and erosion information should be removed from thousands of Christchurch property records. [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
In support of this, we draw your attention to: [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
Attachment A, Item 14 Page 58 - Peer Review of the Christchurch Coastal Hazard Assessment Report 18 August [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
The Way Forward (bullet points 2 and 3) [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
• “CCC to require withdrawal of the hazard maps in the Report and put to one side until final mapping is agreed amongst all stakeholders in the second and third stages of adaptive management
• CCC to advise the LIM authority that the withdrawal is necessary until the legal requirements of the NZCPS are complete because the current mapping may be legally unsound.”
Furthermore, CCRU also endorses this statement contained in the Press Editorial (24/08/2016): Coastal risk information should be on land reports once science is robust 24 August 2016 [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
"Removing less-than-robust details from those residents' LIMs is the right thing to do."
The advice Christchurch Coastal Residents United has received indicates that adding and leaving the coastal risk information on LIM notifications on those properties identified through the fast-tracking of the District Plan Review has the potential to expose the Christchurch City Council to legal liability. [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
CCRU would respectfully request, and we are confident that Councillors would also agree, that it is preferable for the Christchurch City Council to work in partnership with CCRU and the affected residence, rather than having to seek a resolution through the Courts. [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
Removing the LIM notifications is the right thing to do. CCRU formally requests that you action this, and do so as soon practicable [if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]
Thank you Mayor and Councillors for taking the time to listen. We are happy to respond to any questions that you may have.
[if !supportLineBreakNewLine] [endif]