High rise developments dominate skylines and are contentious in many low rise urban environments. Christchurch is no exception and its residents have historically been vocal in articulating their opinions on matters they care about, especially in regard to projects they perceive will ruin their ‘garden city’. At the turn of the millennium, developers were preparing yet another proposal which would get the tongues wagging in Christchurch with the development of the former Ferrymead Tavern site on Ferry Road. The planning process was a long and antagonistic one with many individuals viewing the built towers with a look of ‘disgust’ and discontent. In an ironic twist, the seismic activity in Christchurch over the last few years which has had major implications for a range of planning issues, incrementally led to the death of highly controversial Ferrymead ‘Water’s Edge’ Apartments.
The concept of geoparks was first introduced in the first international conference on geoparks held in China in 2004. Here in New Zealand, Kiwis are accustomed to national parks, land reserves, marine reserves, and urban cities and regional parks. The concept of these protected areas has been long-standing in the country, whereas the UNESCO concept of geoparks is still novel and yet to be established in New Zealand.
In this dissertation, I explored the geopark concept for better understanding of its merits and examined the benefits of geotourism attractions as a sustainable economic development strategy to retrieve a declining rural economy. This research is focused on Kaikoura as a case study with geological significance, and emphasizes pre-earthquake existing geological heritages and new existing geological heritages post-earthquake to determine whether the geopark concept is appropriate and what planning framework is available to process this concept proposal should Kaikoura be interested in future.
The earthquake swarm that has struck Canterbury, New Zealand from September 2010 has led to widespread destruction and loss of life in the city of Christchurch. In response to this the New Zealand government convened a Royal Commission under the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1908. The terms of reference for this enquiry were wide ranging, and included inquiry into legal and best-practice requirements for earthquake-prone buildings and associated risk management strategies. The Commission produced a final report on earthquake-prone buildings and recommendations which was made public on the 7th December 2012. Also on the 7th of December 2012 the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) released a Consultation Document that includes many of the recommendations put forward by the Royal Commission. This paper examines the evidence presented to the Royal Commission and reviews their recommendations and those of MBIE in relation to the management of earthquake-prone buildings. An analysis of the likely impacts of the recommendations and proposals on both the property market and society in general is also undertaken.
During the 21st century, New Zealand has experienced increasing public concern over the quality of the design and appearance of new developments, and their effects on the urban environment. In response to this, a number of local authorities developed a range of tools to address this issue, including urban design panels to review proposals and provide independent advice. Following the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, the commitment to achieve high quality urban design within Christchurch was given further importance, with the city facing the unprecedented challenge of rebuilding a ‘vibrant and successful city’.
The rebuild and regeneration reinforced the need for independent design review, putting more focus and emphasis on the role and use of the urban design panel; first through collaboratively assisting applicants in achieving a better design outcome for their development by providing an independent set of eyes on their design; and secondly in assisting Council officers in forming their recommendations on resource consent decisions. However, there is a perception that urban design and the role of the urban design panel is not fully understood, with some stakeholders arguing that Council’s urban design requirements are adding cost and complexity to their developments.
The purpose of this research was to develop a better understanding on the role of the Christchurch urban design panel post-earthquake in the central city; its direct and indirect influence on the built environment; and the deficiencies in the broader planning framework and institutional settings that it might be addressing. Ultimately, the perceived role of the Panel is understood, and there is agreement that urban design is having a positive influence on the built environment, albeit viewed differently amongst the varying groups involved. What has become clear throughout this research is that the perceived tension between the development community and urban design well and truly exists, with the urban design panel contributing towards this. This tension is exacerbated further through the cost of urban design to developers, and the drive for financial return from their investments.
The panel, albeit promoting a positive experience, is simply a ‘tick box’ exercise for some, and as the research suggests, groups or professional are determining themselves what constitutes good urban design, based on their attitude, the context in which they sit and the financial constraints to incorporate good design elements. It is perhaps a bleak time for urban design, and more about building homes.
Environmental assessment in New Zealand is governed by the provisions of the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991. The Act requires persons wishing to undertake certain activities to apply for resource consent from their local or regional council - a procedure termed the Resource Consent Process. The key component of a resource consent application is an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) report; a statement of the environmental effects of a proposed activity.
Problems arise when environmental assessments are complicated by uncertain and abnormal circumstances such as natural hazards. Natural hazards (including earthquakes, floods, tsunami, and coastal erosion) can be catastrophic to an environment. If hazards are not avoided or successfully mitigated, they can result in serious consequences to proposed development and to the environment which the proposal relates. The aim of this study is to assess the adequacy of the resource consent process (as outlined in the Resource Management Act 1991) for dealing with proposed development affected by natural hazards.
This study reviews the context of the resource consent process for dealing with natural hazards to identify potential issues in the assessment process. Guidance criteria for assessing natural hazards (termed Natural Hazard Assessment) are developed to evaluate against two resource consent applications affected by natural hazards. The findings of the consent process review and case study evaluation are discussed to determine the adequacy of the consent process for dealing with natural hazards.
From the review of the consent process it was evident that the process has a number of problems for accommodating natural hazards into the assessment. Although many important traits are provided for in the process, such traits are not always reflected in environmental assessments.
Evaluation of two resource consent applications against the process of Natural Hazard Assessment (NHA) showed that these consent applications did not adequately detail key information relating to natural hazards. Many problems evident in these applications were not amended by the Consent Authorities in the review process and subsequently consent was granted to information-deficient applications. Problematic issues identified in this study include:
• A distinct lack of guidance (legal or otherwise) for the applicant and Consent Authority regarding the boundaries of inclusion of an effect;
• Deficiencies in planning documents are reflected in AEE reports, the review of the consent application and in the end-decision;
• Under-utilisation of "experts" throughout the consent process;
• Minimal identification and account for the degree of uncertainty throughout the consent process;
• Resource consents are being granted even though information in consent applications, and the means for assessing the information is deficient.
These issues reflect that decisions are not being made based on all elements involved in a potential hazard. Subsequently, the resource consent process is not adequate for dealing with all aspects of natural hazards.
The Natural Hazard Assessment process provides educated assessment criteria to assess development affected by natural hazards. By accounting for the problems evident in the consent process, the introduction of a three-tier identification, risk and vulnerability assessment, and evaluation process to account for uncertainties, Natural Hazard Assessment provides a platform for a thorough assessment of natural hazards. The application of the principles of Natural Hazard Assessment to the consent applications affected by natural hazards showed that many key issues were not covered in the assessment under the consent process.
The nature of a natural event is that one may not occur in a given region over many lifetimes, however they will occur at some stage and planning and environmental assessment needs to provide for the associated hazards. Implementation of Natural Hazard Assessment is needed to help provide answers for the problems experienced in the resource consent process. Natural Hazard Assessment would allow decision-makers to make informed judgements on the situation at hand, leading to better planning and land-use options.
Change to current practice is needed, as following the current path of environmental assessment will be the hazard in the end.
