The collapse of Redcliffs’ cliff in the 22 February 2011 and 13 June 2011 earthquakes were the first times ever a major failure incident occurred at Redcliffs in approximately 6000 years. This master’s thesis is a multidisciplinary engineering geological investigation sought to study these particular failure incidents, focusing on collecting the data necessary to explain the cause and effect of the cliff collapsing in the event of two major earthquakes. This study provides quantitative and qualitative data about the geotechnical attributes and engineering geological nature of the sea-cut cliff located at Redcliffs. Results from surveying the geology of Redcliffs show that the exposed lithology of the cliff face is a variably jointed rock body of welded and (relatively intact) unwelded ignimbrite, a predominantly massive unit of brecciated tuff, and a covering of wind-blown loess and soil deposit (commonly found throughout Canterbury) on top of the cliff. Moreover, detailing the external component of the slope profile shows that Redcliffs’ cliff is a 40 – 80 m cliff with two intersecting (NE and SE facing) slope aspects. The (remotely) measured geometry of the cliff face comprises of multiple outstanding gradients, averaging a slope angle of ~67 degrees (post-13 June 2011), where the steepest components are ~80 degrees, whereas the gentle sloping sections are ~44 degrees. The physical structure of Redcliffs’ cliff drastically changed after each collapse, whereby seismically induced alterations to the slope geometry resulted in material deposited on the talus at the base of the cliff. Prior to the first collapse, the variance of the gradient down the slope was minimal, with the SE Face being the most variable with up to three major gradients on one cross section. However, after each major collapse, the variability increased with more parts of the cliff face having more than one major gradient that is steeper or gentler than the remainder of the slope. The estimated volume of material lost as a result of the gradient changes was 28,267 m³ in February and 11,360 m³ in June 2011. In addition, surveys of the cliff top after the failure incidents revealed the development of fissures along the cliff edge. Monitoring 10 fissures over three months indicated that fissured by the cliff edge respond to intense seismicity (generally ≥ Mw 4) by widening. Redcliffs’ cliff collapsed on two separate occasions as a result of an accumulated amount of damage of the rock masses in the cliff (caused by weathering and erosion over time), and two Mw 6.2 trigger earthquakes which shook the Redcliffs and the surrounding area at a Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) estimated to be around 2 g. The results of the theoretical study suggests that PGA levels felt on-site during both instances of failure are the result of three major factors: source of the quake and the site affected; topographic amplification of the ground movement; the short distance between the source and the cliff for both fault ruptures; the focus of seismic energy in the direction of thrust faulting along a path that intercepts Redcliffs (and the Port Hills). Ultimately, failure on the NE and SE Faces of Redcliffs’ cliff was concluded to be global as every part of the exposed cliff face deposited a significant volume of material on the talus at the base of the cliff, with the exception of one section on the NE Face. The cliff collapses was a concurrent process that is a single (non-monotonic) event that operated as a complex series of (primarily) toppling rock falls, some sliding of blocks, and slumping of the soil mantle on top of the cliff. The first collapse had a mixture of equivalent continua slope movement of the heavily weathered / damaged surface of the cliff face, and discontinuous slope movement of the jointed inner slope (behind the heavily weathered surface); whereas the second collapse resulted in only discontinuous slope movement on account of the freshly exposed cliff face that had damage to the rock masses, in the form of old and (relatively) new discontinuous fractures, induced by earthquakes and aftershocks leading up to the point of failure.
The Porter's Pass-Amberley Fault Zone (PPAFZ) is a complex zone of anastomosing faults and folds bounding the south-eastern edge of the transition from subducting Pacific Plate to continental collision on the Australia Plate boundary. This study combines mapping of a 2000 km2 zone from the Southern Alps northeast to the coast near Amberley, 40 km north of metropolitan Christchurch, with an analysis of seismicity and a revision of regional seismic hazard. Three structural styles: 1) a western strike-slip, and 2) a more easterly thrust and reverse domain, pass into 3) a northwest verging fold belt on the northern Canterbury Plains, reflecting the structural levels exposed and the evolving west to east propagation. Basal remnants of a Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic, largely marine sedimentary cover sequence are preserved as outliers that unconformably overlie Mesozoic basement (greywacke and argillite of the Torlesse terrain) in the mountains of the PPAFZ and are underlain by a deeply leached zone which is widely preserved. Structure contouring of the unconformity surface indicates maximum, differential uplift of c.2600 m in the southwest, decreasing to c.1200 m in the coastal fold belt to the northeast. Much lower rates (or reversal) of uplift are evident a few kilometres southeast of the PPAFZ range-front escarpment. The youngest elements of the cover sequence are basement-derived conglomerates of Plio-Pleistocene age preserved on the SE margin. The source is more distant than the intervening mountains of the PPAFZ, probably from the Southern Alps, to the west and northwest. The absence of another regional unconformity on Mesozoic basement, older than Pleistocene, indicates that this uplift is post-Pliocene. Late Pleistocene(<100 kyr) differential uplift rates of c.0.5-2.7 m/kyr from uplifted marine terraces at the east coast, and rates of 2.5-3.3 m/kyr for tectonically-induced river-down cutting further west, suggest that uplift commenced locally during the last 1 Ma, and possibly within the last 0.5 Ma, if average rates are assumed to be uniform over time. Analysis of seismicity, recorded during a 10 week regional survey of micro earthquakes in 1990, identified two seismic zones beneath North Canterbury: 1) a sub-horizontal zone of activity restricted to the upper crust (≤12 km); and 2) a seismic zone in the lower crust (below a ceiling of ≤17 km), that broadens vertically to the north and northwest to a depth of c.40 km, with a bottom edge which dips 10°N and 15°NW, respectively. No events were recorded at depths between 12 km and 17 km, which is interpreted as a relatively aseismic, mid-crustal ductile layer. Marked differences (up to 60°) in the trend of strain axes for events above and below the inferred ductile layer are observed only north of the PPAFZ. A fundamental, north-to-south increase in the Wave-length of major geological structures occurs across the PPAFZ, and is interpreted as evidence that the upper crust beneath the Canterbury Plains is coupled to the lower crust, whereas the upper crust further north is not. Most of the recorded micro earthquakes <12 km deep beneath the PPAFZ have strike-slip mechanisms. It is probable that faults splay upward into the thrusts and folds at the surface as an evolving transpression zone in response to deep shear in basement. There have been no historic surface ruptures of the PPAFZ, but the zone has been characterised historically by frequent small earthquakes. Paleoseismic data (dated landslides and surface ruptures) compiled in this study, indicate a return period of 1500-1900 years between the last two M>7-7.5 earthquakes, and 500-700 years have elapsed since the last. The magnitudes of these events are estimated at c.M7.5, which represents a probable maximum magnitude for the PPAFZ. There are insufficient data to determine whether or not the frequency of large earthquakes conforms to a recognised model of behaviour, but comparison of the paleoseismic data with the historic record of smaller earthquakes, suggests that the magnitudes of the largest earthquakes in this zone are not exponentially distributed. A seismicity model for the PPAFZ (Elder et al., 1991) is reviewed, and a b-value of 1.0 is found to be consistent with the newly acquired paleoseismic data. This b-value reduces the predicted frequency of large earthquakes (M≥7.0) in this zone by a factor of 3.5, while retaining a conservative margin that allows for temporal variations in the frequency of large events and the possibility that the geological database is incomplete, suggesting grounds for revising the hazard model for Christchurch.
This thesis describes the management process of innovation through construction infrastructure projects. This research focuses on the innovation management process at the project level from four views. These are categorised into the separate yet related areas of: “innovation definition”, “Project time”, “project team motivation” and “Project temporary organisation”. A practical knowledge is developed for each of these research areas that enables project practitioners to make the best decision for the right type of innovation at the right phase of projects, through a capable project organisation. The research developed a holistic view on both innovation and the construction infrastructure project as two complex phenomena. An infrastructure project is a long-term capital investment, highly risky and an uncertain. Infrastructure projects can play a key role in innovation and performance improvement throughout the construction industry. The delivery of an infrastructure project is affected in most cases by critical issues of budget constraint, programme delays and safety Where the business climate is characterized by uncertainty, risk and a high level of technological change, construction infrastructure projects are unable to cope with the requirement to develop innovation. Innovation in infrastructure projects, as one of the key performance indicators (KPI) has been identified as a critical capability for performance improvement through the industry. However, in spite of the importance of infrastructure projects in improving innovation, there are a few research efforts that have developed a comprehensive view on the project context and its drivers and inhibitors for innovation in the construction industry. Two main reasons are given as the inhibitors through the process of comprehensive research on innovation management in construction. The first reason is the absence of an understanding of innovation itself. The second is a bias towards research at a firm and individual level, so a comprehensive assessment of project-related factors and their effects on innovation in infrastructure projects has not been undertaken. This study overcomes these issues by adopting as a case study approach of a successful infrastructure project. This research examines more than 500 construction innovations generated by a unique infrastructure alliance. SCIRT (Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team) is a temporary alliancing organisation that was created to rebuild and recover the damaged infrastructure after the Christchurch 2011 earthquake. Researchers were given full access to the innovation project information and innovation systems under a contract with SCIRT Learning Legacy, provided the research with material which is critical for understanding innovations in large, complex alliancing infrastructure organisation. In this research, an innovation classification model was first constructed. Clear definitions have been developed for six types of construction innovation with a variety of level of novelties and benefits. The innovation classification model was applied on the SCIRT innovation database and the resultant trends and behaviours of different types of innovation are presented. The trends and behaviours through different types of SCIRT innovations developed a unique opportunity to research the projectrelated factors and their effect on the behaviour of different classified types of innovation throughout the project’s lifecycle. The result was the identification of specific characteristics of an infrastructure project that affect the innovation management process at the project level. These were categorised in four separate chapters. The first study presents the relationship between six classified types of innovation, the level of novelty and the benefit they come up with, by applying the innovation classification model on SCIRT innovation database. The second study focused on the innovation potential and limitations in different project lifecycle phases by using a logic relationship between the six classified types of innovation and the three classified phases of the SCIRT project. The third study result develops a holistic view of different elements of the SCIRT motivation system and results in a relationship between the maturity level of definition developed for innovation as one of the KPIs and a desire though the SCIRT innovation incentive system to motivate more important innovations throughout the project. The fourth study is about the role of the project’s temporary organisation that finally results in a multiple-view innovation model being developed for project organisation capability assessment in the construction industry. The result of this thesis provides practical and instrumental knowledge to be used by a project practitioner. Benefits of the current thesis could be categorized in four groups. The first group is the innovation classification model that provides a clear definition for six classified types of innovation with four levels of novelty and specifically defined outcomes and the relationship between the innovation types, novelty and benefit. The second is the ability that is provided for the project practitioner to make the best decision for the right type of innovation at the right phases of a project’s lifecycle. The third is an optimisation that is applied on the SCIRT innovation motivation system that enables the project practitioner to incentivize the right type of innovation with the right level of financial gain. This drives the project teams to develop a more important innovation instead of a simple problemsolving one. Finally, the last and probably more important benefit is the recommended multiple-view innovation model. This is a tool that could be used by a project practitioner in order to empower the project team to support innovation throughout the project.
This thesis studies the behaviour of diaphragms in multi-storey timber buildings by providing methods for the estimation of the diaphragm force demand, developing an Equivalent Truss Method for the analysis of timber diaphragms, and experimentally investigating the effects of displacement incompatibilities between the diaphragm and the lateral load resisting system and developing methods for their mitigation. The need to better understand the behaviour of diaphragms in timber buildings was highlighted by the recent 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake series, where a number of diaphragms in traditional concrete buildings performed poorly, compromising the lateral load resistance of the structure. Although shortcomings in the estimation of force demand, and in the analysis and design of concrete floor diaphragms have already been partially addressed by other researchers, the behaviour of diaphragms in modern multi-storey timber buildings in general, and in low damage Pres-Lam buildings (consisting of post-tensioned timber members) in particular is still unknown. The recent demand of mid-rise commercial timber buildings of ten storeys and beyond has further highlighted the lack of appropriate methods to analyse timber diaphragms with irregular floor geometries and large spans made of both light timber framing and massive timber panels. Due to the lower stiffness of timber lateral load resisting systems, compared with traditional construction materials, and the addition of in-plane flexible diaphragms, the effect of higher modes on the global dynamic behaviour of a structure becomes more critical. The results from a parametric non-linear time-history analysis on a series of timber frame and wall structures showed increased storey shear and moment demands even for four storey structures when compared to simplistic equivalent static analysis. This effect could successfully be predicted with methods available in literature. The presence of diaphragm flexibility increased diaphragm inter-storey drifts and the peak diaphragm demand in stiff wall structures, but had less influence on the storey shears and moments. Diaphragm force demands proved to be significantly higher than the forces derived from equivalent static analysis, leading to potentially unsafe designs. It is suggested to design all diaphragms for the same peak demand; a simplified approach to estimate these diaphragm forces is proposed for both frame and wall structures. Modern architecture often requires complex floor geometries with long spans leading to stress concentrations, high force demands and potentially large deformations in the diaphragms. There is a lack of guidance and regulation regarding the analysis and design of timber diaphragms and a practical alternative to the simplistic equivalent deep beam analysis or costly finite element modelling is required. An Equivalent Truss Method for the analysis of both light timber framed and massive timber diaphragms is proposed, based on analytical formulations and verified against finite element models. With this method the panel unit shear forces (shear flow) and therefore the fastener demand, chord forces and reaction forces can be evaluated. Because the panel stiffness and fastener stiffness are accounted for, diaphragm deflection, torsional effects and transfer forces can also be assessed. The proposed analysis method is intuitive and can be used with basic analysis software. If required, it can easily be adapted for the use with diaphragms working in the non-linear range. Damage to floor diaphragms resulting from displacement incompatibilities due to frame elongation or out-of plane deformation of walls can compromise the transfer of inertial forces to the lateral load resisting system as well as the stability of other structural elements. Two post-tensioned timber frame structures under quasi-static cyclic and dynamic load, respectively, were tested with different diaphragm panel layouts and connections investigating their ability to accommodate frame elongations. Additionally, a post-tensioned timber wall was loaded under horizontal cyclic loads through two pairs of collector beams. Several different connection details between the wall and the beams were tested, and no damage to the collector beams or connections was observed in any of the tests. To evaluate the increased strength and stiffness due to the wall-beam interaction an analytical procedure is presented. Finally, a timber staircase core was tested under bi-directional loading. Different connection details were used to study the effect of displacement incompatibilities between the orthogonal collector beams. These experiments showed that floor damage due to displacement incompatibilities can be prevented, even with high levels of lateral drift, by the flexibility of well-designed connections and the flexibility of the timber elements. It can be concluded that the flexibility of timber members and the flexibility of their connections play a major role in the behaviour of timber buildings in general and of diaphragms specifically under seismic loads. The increased flexibility enhances higher mode effects and alters the diaphragm force demand. Simple methods are provided to account for this effect on the storey shear, moment and drift demands as well as the diaphragm force demands. The analysis of light timber framing and massive timber diaphragms can be successfully analysed with an Equivalent Truss Method, which is calibrated by accounting for the panel shear and fastener stiffnesses. Finally, displacement incompatibilities in frame and wall structures can be accommodated by the flexibilities of the diaphragm panels and relative connections. A design recommendations chapter summarizes all findings and allows a designer to estimate diaphragm forces, to analyse the force path in timber diaphragms and to detail the connections to allow for displacement incompatibilities in multi-storey timber buildings.
In the last century, seismic design has undergone significant advancements. Starting from the initial concept of designing structures to perform elastically during an earthquake, the modern seismic design philosophy allows structures to respond to ground excitations in an inelastic manner, thereby allowing damage in earthquakes that are significantly less intense than the largest possible ground motion at the site of the structure. Current performance-based multi-objective seismic design methods aim to ensure life-safety in large and rare earthquakes, and to limit structural damage in frequent and moderate earthquakes. As a result, not many recently built buildings have collapsed and very few people have been killed in 21st century buildings even in large earthquakes. Nevertheless, the financial losses to the community arising from damage and downtime in these earthquakes have been unacceptably high (for example; reported to be in excess of 40 billion dollars in the recent Canterbury earthquakes). In the aftermath of the huge financial losses incurred in recent earthquakes, public has unabashedly shown their dissatisfaction over the seismic performance of the built infrastructure. As the current capacity design based seismic design approach relies on inelastic response (i.e. ductility) in pre-identified plastic hinges, it encourages structures to damage (and inadvertently to incur loss in the form of repair and downtime). It has now been widely accepted that while designing ductile structural systems according to the modern seismic design concept can largely ensure life-safety during earthquakes, this also causes buildings to undergo substantial damage (and significant financial loss) in moderate earthquakes. In a quest to match the seismic design objectives with public expectations, researchers are exploring how financial loss can be brought into the decision making process of seismic design. This has facilitated conceptual development of loss optimisation seismic design (LOSD), which involves estimating likely financial losses in design level earthquakes and comparing against acceptable levels of loss to make design decisions (Dhakal 2010a). Adoption of loss based approach in seismic design standards will be a big paradigm shift in earthquake engineering, but it is still a long term dream as the quantification of the interrelationships between earthquake intensity, engineering demand parameters, damage measures, and different forms of losses for different types of buildings (and more importantly the simplification of the interrelationship into design friendly forms) will require a long time. Dissecting the cost of modern buildings suggests that the structural components constitute only a minor portion of the total building cost (Taghavi and Miranda 2003). Moreover, recent research on seismic loss assessment has shown that the damage to non-structural elements and building contents contribute dominantly to the total building loss (Bradley et. al. 2009). In an earthquake, buildings can incur losses of three different forms (damage, downtime, and death/injury commonly referred as 3Ds); but all three forms of seismic loss can be expressed in terms of dollars. It is also obvious that the latter two loss forms (i.e. downtime and death/injury) are related to the extent of damage; which, in a building, will not just be constrained to the load bearing (i.e. structural) elements. As observed in recent earthquakes, even the secondary building components (such as ceilings, partitions, facades, windows parapets, chimneys, canopies) and contents can undergo substantial damage, which can lead to all three forms of loss (Dhakal 2010b). Hence, if financial losses are to be minimised during earthquakes, not only the structural systems, but also the non-structural elements (such as partitions, ceilings, glazing, windows etc.) should be designed for earthquake resistance, and valuable contents should be protected against damage during earthquakes. Several innovative building technologies have been (and are being) developed to reduce building damage during earthquakes (Buchanan et. al. 2011). Most of these developments are aimed at reducing damage to the buildings’ structural systems without due attention to their effects on non-structural systems and building contents. For example, the PRESSS system or Damage Avoidance Design concept aims to enable a building’s structural system to meet the required displacement demand by rocking without the structural elements having to deform inelastically; thereby avoiding damage to these elements. However, as this concept does not necessarily reduce the interstory drift or floor acceleration demands, the damage to non-structural elements and contents can still be high. Similarly, the concept of externally bracing/damping building frames reduces the drift demand (and consequently reduces the structural damage and drift sensitive non-structural damage). Nevertheless, the acceleration sensitive non-structural elements and contents will still be very vulnerable to damage as the floor accelerations are not reduced (arguably increased). Therefore, these concepts may not be able to substantially reduce the total financial losses in all types of buildings. Among the emerging building technologies, base isolation looks very promising as it seems to reduce both inter-storey drifts and floor accelerations, thereby reducing the damage to the structural/non-structural components of a building and its contents. Undoubtedly, a base isolated building will incur substantially reduced loss of all three forms (dollars, downtime, death/injury), even during severe earthquakes. However, base isolating a building or applying any other beneficial technology may incur additional initial costs. In order to provide incentives for builders/owners to adopt these loss-minimising technologies, real-estate and insurance industries will have to acknowledge the reduced risk posed by (and enhanced resilience of) such buildings in setting their rental/sale prices and insurance premiums.
This report provides an initial overview and gap analysis of the multi-hazards interactions that might affect fluvial and pluvial flooding (FPF) hazard in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. As per the terms of reference, this report focuses on a one-way analysis of the potential effects of multi-hazards on FPF hazard, as opposed to a more complex multi-way analysis of interactions between all hazards. We examined the relationship between FPF hazard and hazards associated with the phenomena of tsunamis; coastal erosion; coastal inundation; groundwater; earthquakes; and mass movements. Tsunamis: Modelling research indicates the worst-case tsunami scenarios potentially affecting the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment are far field. Under low probability, high impact tsunami scenarios waves could travel into Pegasus Bay and the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai, reaching the mouth and lower reaches of the Heathcote catchment and river, potentially inundating and eroding shorelines in sub-catchments 1 to 5, and temporarily blocking fluvial drainage more extensively. Any flooding infrastructure or management actions implemented in the area of tsunami inundation would ideally be resilient to tsunami-induced inundation and erosion. Model results currently available are a first estimate of potential tsunami inundation under contemporary sea and land level conditions. In terms of future large tsunami events, these models likely underestimate effects in riverside sub-catchments, as well as effects under future sea level, shoreline and other conditions. Also of significance when considering different FPF management structures, it is important to be mindful that certain types of flood structures can ‘trap’ inundating water coming from ocean directions, leading to longer flood durations and salinization issues. Coastal erosion: Model predictions indicate that sub-catchments 1 to 3 could potentially be affected by coastal erosion by the timescale of 2065, with sub-catchments 1-6 predicted to be potentially affected by coastal erosion by the time scale of 2115. In addition, the predicted open coast effects of this hazard should not be ignored since any significant changes in the New Brighton Spit open coast would affect erosion rates and exposure of the landward estuary margins, including the shorelines of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. Any FPF flooding infrastructure or management activities planned for the potentially affected sub-catchments needs to recognise the possibility of coastal erosion, and to have a planned response to the predicted potential shoreline translation. Coastal inundation: Model predictions indicate coastal inundation hazards could potentially affect sub-catchments 1 to 8 by 2065, with a greater area and depth of inundation possible for these same sub-catchments by 2115. Low-lying areas of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment and river channel that discharge into the estuary are highly vulnerable to coastal inundation since elevated ocean and estuary water levels can block the drainage of inland systems, compounding FPF hazards. Coastal inundation can overwhelm stormwater and other drainage network components, and render river dredging options ineffective at best, flood enhancing at worst. A distinction can be made between coastal inundation and coastal erosion in terms of the potential impacts on affected land and assets, including flood infrastructure, and the implications for acceptance, adaptation, mitigation, and/or modification options. That is, responding to inundation could include structural and/or building elevation solutions, since unlike erosion, inundation does not necessarily mean the loss of land. Groundwater: Groundwater levels are of significant but variable concern when examining flooding hazards and management options in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment due to variability in soils, topographies, elevations and proximities to riverine and estuarine surface waterbodies. Much of the Canterbury Plains part of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment has a water table that is at a median depth of <1m from the surface (with actual depth below surface varying seasonally, inter-annually and during extreme meteorological events), though the water table depth rapidly shifts to >6m below the surface in the upper Plains part of the catchment (sub-catchments 13 to 15). Parts of Waltham/Linwood (sub-catchments 5 & 6) and Spreydon (sub-catchment 10) have extensive areas with a particularly high water table, as do sub-catchments 18, 19 and 20 south of the river. In all of the sub-catchments where groundwater depth below surface is shallow, it is necessary to be mindful of cascading effects on liquefaction hazard during earthquake events, including earthquake-induced drainage network and stormwater infrastructure damage. In turn, subsidence induced by liquefaction and other earthquake processes during the CES directly affected groundwater depth below surface across large parts of the central Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. The estuary margin of the catchment also faces increasing future challenges with sea level rise, which has the potential to elevate groundwater levels in these areas, compounding existing liquefaction and other earthquake associated multi-hazards. Any increases in subsurface runoff due to drainage system, development or climate changes are also of concern for the loess covered hill slopes due to the potential to enhance mass movement hazards. Earthquakes: Earthquake associated vertical ground displacement and liquefaction have historically affected, or are in future predicted to affect, all Ōpāwaho Heathcote sub-catchments. During the CES, these phenomena induced a significant cascades of changes in the city’s drainage systems, including: extensive vertical displacement and liquefaction induced damage to stormwater ‘greyware’, reducing functionality of the stormwater system; damage to the wastewater system which temporarily lowered groundwater levels and increased stormwater drainage via the wastewater network on the one hand, creating a pollution multi-hazard for FPF on the other hand; liquefaction and vertical displacement induced river channel changes affected drainage capacities; subsidence induced losses in soakage and infiltration capacities; changes occurred in topographic drainage conductivity; estuary subsidence (mainly around the Ōtākaro Avon rivermouth) increased both FPF and coastal inundation hazards; estuary bed uplift (severe around the Ōpāwaho Heathcote margins), reduced tidal prisms and increased bed friction, producing an overall reduction the waterbody’s capacity to efficiently flush catchment floodwaters to sea; and changes in estuarine and riverine ecosystems. All such possible effects need to be considered when evaluating present and future capacities of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment FPF management systems. These phenomena are particularly of concern in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment since stormwater networks must deal with constraints imposed by stream and river channels (past and present), estuarine shorelines and complex hill topography. Mass movements: Mass movements are primarily a risk in the Port Hills areas of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment (sub-catchments 1, 2, 7, 9, 11, 16, 21), though there are one or two small but susceptible areas on the banks of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote River. Mass movements in the form of rockfalls and debris flows occurred on the Port Hills during the CES, resulting in building damage, fatalities and evacuations. Evidence has also been found of earthquake-triggered tunnel gully collapsesin all Port Hill Valleys. Follow-on effects of these mass movements are likely to occur in major future FPF and other hazard events. Of note, elevated groundwater levels, coastal inundation, earthquakes (including liquefaction and other effects), and mass movement exhibit the most extensive levels of multi-hazard interaction with FPF hazard. Further, all of the analysed multi-hazard interactions except earthquakes were found to consistently produce increases in the FPF hazard. The implications of these analyses are that multihazard interactions generally enhance the FPF hazard in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. Hence, management plans which exclude adjustments for multi-hazard interactions are likely to underestimate the FPF hazard in numerous different ways. In conclusion, although only a one-way analysis of the potential effects of selected multi-hazards on FPF hazard, this review highlights that the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment is an inherently multi- hazard prone environment. The implications of the interactions and process linkages revealed in this report are that several significant multi-hazard influences and process interactions must be taken into account in order to design a resilient FPF hazard management strategy.
