The Kaikoura earthquake in November 2016 highlighted the vulnerability of New Zealand’s rural communities to locally-specific hazard events, which generate regional and national scale impacts. Kaikoura was isolated with significant damage to both the east coast road (SH1) and rail corridor, and the Inland Road (Route 70). Sea bed uplift along the coast was significant – affecting marine resources and ocean access for marine operators engaged in tourism and harvesting, and recreational users. While communities closest to the earthquake epicentre (e.g., Kaikoura, Waiau, Rotherham and Cheviot) suffered the most immediate earthquake damage, the damage to the transport network, and the establishment of an alternative transport route between Christchurch and Picton, has significantly impacted on more distant communities (e.g., Murchison, St Arnaud and Blenheim). There was also considerable damage to vineyard infrastructure across the Marlborough region and damage to buildings and infrastructure in rural settlements in Southern Marlborough (e.g., Ward and Seddon).
Successful urban regeneration projects generate benefits that are realised over a much longer timeframe than normal market developments and benefits well beyond those that can be uplifted by a market developer. Consequently there is substantial evidence in the literature that successful place-making and urban regeneration projects are usually public-private partnerships and involve a funder, usually local or central government, willing to contribute ‘patient’ capital. Following the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes that devastated the centre of Christchurch, there was an urgent need to rebuild and revitalise the heart of the city, and increasing the number of people living in or near the city centre was seen as a key ingredient of that. In October 2010, an international competition was launched to design and build an Urban Village, a project intended to stimulate renewed residential development in the city. The competition attracted 58 entrants from around world, and in October 2013 the winning team was chosen from four finalists. However the team failed to secure sufficient finance, and in November 2015 the Government announced that the development would not proceed. The Government was unwilling or unable to recognise that an insistence on a pure market approach would not deliver the innovative sustainable village asked for in the competition brief, and failed to factor in the opportunity cost to government, local government, local businesses and the wider Christchurch community of delaying by many years the residential development of the eastern side of the city. As a result, the early vision of the vitality that a thriving residential neighbourhood would bring to the city has not yet been realised.
Please contact supervisor Lin Roberts at Lincoln University to request a copy of this dissertation to read.Cities around the world are becoming greener, with many striving to make their cities as green as possible. Christchurch was devastated by an Earthquake in 2011, which resulted in many fatalities. Though this impacted the city negatively, this sad event was used as an opportunity for the broken city to become a better one. The Christchurch City Council (CCC) ran an exercise called ‘Share an Idea’, which asked the public what they wanted the new city to look like. The main theme extrapolated by researchers was that people wanted the city to be greener. A draft plan was created by the CCC but was deemed not good enough and replaced by a new plan called the Blueprint Plan created by the government. Through the process of public consultation to the finalized plan and the implementation of the finalized plan, there were many changes made to the inclusion of nature into Central Christchurch’s urban regeneration. The aim of this research is to assess the role of nature in the urban regeneration of Christchurch, by evaluating the recovery process, and comparing the level of greenness the public wanted by looking at what they said in Share an Idea, and then seeing how that translated into the proposed plans, and then finally looking at what is being implemented.
