TEU Canterbury Branch Post-Earthquake Member Survey: Response 6
Articles, UC QuakeStudies
Response 6 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 6 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 61 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 46 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 48 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 43 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 45 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 47 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 63 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 7 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 9 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 50 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 13 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 58 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 10 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 67 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 69 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 4 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 54 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 70 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
Response 65 of 90 to a survey of members carried out by the Canterbury Branch of the TEU following the February 2011 earthquake.
People often ask what we’re learning as a result of all this post-earthquake archaeology. Quite a lot, as this blog reveals. But, to date, the blog has focused on the individual sites and/or stories – there’s not been much of … Continue reading →
Most of the work I do as a buildings archaeologist focuses on the humble 19th century cottage. These types of buildings, their construction methods and materials have become well trod territory in post-earthquake Christchurch, meaning we now have a fair … Continue reading →
Way back in the winter of 2012, at the height of the post-earthquake demolition, I was pretty excited to learn we were going to get the chance to investigate the site of John and Charlotte Godley’s house in Lyttelton. John … Continue reading →
A PDF copy of pages 282-283 of the book Christchurch: The Transitional City Pt IV. The pages document the transitional project 'Co-Location of Secondary Schools in Christchurch Post 22 February 2011 Earthquake'. Photo: Phil Arvidson. With permission: St Bede's, Marian College and the Ministry of Education.
The previously unknown Greendale Fault ruptured to the ground surface, causing up to 5 metres horizontal and 1 metre vertical permanent offset of the ground, during the September 2010 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake. Environment Canterbury commissioned GNS Science, with help from the University of Canterbury, to define a fault avoidance zone and to estimate the fault recurrence interval. There is little evidence for past movement on the fault in the past 16,000 years. However, because of the uncertainties involved, a conservative approach was taken and the fault has been categorised as a Recurrence Interval Class IV fault (a recurrence interval of between 5,000 and 10,000 years). A PhD study by a University of Canterbury student will work towards refining the Recurrence Interval Class over the next three years. Taking a risk-based approach, the Ministry for the Environment Active Fault Guidelines recommend that normal residential development be allowed within the fault avoidance zone for faults of this Recurrence Interval Class, but recommends restrictions for larger community buildings or facilities with post-disaster functions. The report is assisting Selwyn District Council in granting consents for rebuilding houses on or near the Greendale Fault that were damaged by permanent distortion of the ground due to the fault rupture in the September 2010 earthquake. The report provides specific recommendations for building on or close to the Greendale Fault, which are being implemented by Selwyn District Council. See Object Overview for background and usage information.