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 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.
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.
