Responses have been edited for length and/or clarity.
|Policy||Policy Description||Our Rating|
|Climate Change||View of climate change: Climate change needs to be taken seriously. The Christchurch city council needs to be the leader to inspire people and communities to actively work towards a climate smart Christchurch that reduces its greenhouse gas emissions and is resilient to the social, cultural, economic and environmental effects of climate change.
Christchurch becoming carbon neutral by 2050: Yes. I want to see the council and the city move away from non-renewable energy used in Council buildings, swimming pools, street lights, water pumps and vehicles is the main source of greenhouse gas emissions from the Council. This must be done through education but also integration of sustainable building practices into all new works showing the long term benefits over short term ease. All new buildings should be building to the maximum energy star rating using the 10 star homes first built in Christchurch as an example. Taking that standard and using it as a normal not a goal.
View on climate smart strategy: The Climate Smart Strategy is a good goal for the city to work towards, it has clear objectives to achieve. But like many documents, the Climate Smart Strategy cannot sit in a shelf and be forgotten about. This needs to be a living document that is integrated into all practices of council and the city. Climate Change and the understanding around it is always changing and as new understanding come to light and new technologies are developed these documents can and should change to reflect that so that we stay a smart city at the forefront of innovation.
How can CCC encourage reductions in GHG emissions?: Three areas I am interested in here are, transport, home energy use and industrial energy use. Having well ventilated and insulated homes are comfortable and use less energy. Home energy generation could generate excess energy which could offset industrial energy needs. The council's part could be setting a vision around the city's energy use. I support the integration of low energy use public transport.
Should we join C40 cities?: I support Christchurch becoming a part of this. We are however a member of the 100 resilient cities framework already and I personally would like to see all of these type of things integrate into one common framework for cities and people to follow and be part of.
|Transport||Do you see a need for active transport to be prioritised in Christchurch?: I think this is an honourable goal but I do not support the notion of taking away from people their right to choose their form of transport. I support the integration of walking lanes, cycleways and the accessible city transport chapter of the Central City plan has some very good methods and ideas in how to do this. Peoples attitude could change with the possible walking and cycling corridors in the Residential Red Zone.
Do you think public transport needs to be improved in Christchurch?: The current system isn't working for people. The cost needs to be lowered as it is prohibitive for some. The city should own the entire network and for it to be a cost neutral business operation with dividends reinvested into the network and to lowering the costs for users who would otherwise use it. I would like to see smaller buses doing regular routes, with free bus routes for inside the central city.
Do you think we need to actively reduce the number of trips made by private vehicles in Christchurch?: Yes I think this is something that could be worked on if we got the bus routes correct and if we encouraged people to start living back in the city. Alongside the 2200 residents who will live in the frame there are many other areas where residential living could happen making the core of the city a central activity area where people walked to work, walked to recreate and had all their needs close by.
Thoughts on re-introducing electric buses to Christchurch: I want to see this happen. There are some cool technologies being developed and we can act as the technology improves and becomes accessible.
View on encouraging the uptake of electric vehicles in Christchurch: Charging stations. Christchurch city is already a leader in this, and I would like to see more.
|Building regulations / urban planning||Reducing lifetime energy costs of buildings: Yes. The lifetime costs including energy, retrofitting and future demolition and rebuild need to be considered. The saying the greenest building is the one that’s already standing. This hasn't happened, but developers should be encouraged to be smart with buildings. If we create an environment where tenants will desire future proofed buildings, developers will have more certainty about leasing the buildings, hence bear the extra upfront costs.
Urban densification: I think this is a good idea for the central city. This is what will happen in the frame with 900 houses housing up to 2200 people in a 4 block area. There are other parts of the city that can use this. We must however be sensitive to historical and existing areas where people have bought into a lifestyle and harsh changes shouldn’t be imposed on those locations. This will in the long run crate diverse neighbourhoods which do create interesting places to live.
Introduction of minimum green star standards: There are current standards in the building act. However, there is room to improve and I would support a move to such codes as long as it was not going to impair the current activity in the rebuild. There is a fine line with stopping things from being done because it has a small impact that isn’t desirable.
|Natural Hazards||Responding to sea level rise: Understanding the risk and communicating it to people in affected areas, and then focusing on mitigating the risk. Trust needs to be made between Council, residents and the science.
Communication and an understanding of what risk there is to all people in affected areas. Then ways of either mitigating the risk must be addressed. A level of trust needs to be made, between the council, the residents and the science. The science must be credible and trusted. We cannot have homeowners in a situation where they are at undue risk and where they face reducing capital values on their properties due to this threat. There is time to get this right and right now we must communicate and build trust.
Rezoning land at risk of sea level rise: Long-term, nature will win. But in the short term we have to take care of the people whose lives are affected. I will investigate every reasonable way of doing that. This is about making sure all communities affected are consulted and made aware and understand the risks. The crown needs to work with councils in developing something in this area that is legal and protects the rights of people.