This report contributes to a collaborative project between the Marlborough District Council (MDC) and University of Canterbury (UC) which aims to help protect and promote the recovery of native dune systems on the Marlborough coast. It is centred around the mapping of dune vegetation and identification of dune protection zones for old-growth seed sources of the native sand-binders spinifex (Spinifex sericeus) and pīngao (Ficinia spiralis). Both are key habitat-formers associated with nationally threatened dune ecosystems, and pīngao is an important weaving resource and Ngāi Tahu taonga species. The primary goal is to protect existing seed sources that are vital for natural regeneration following major disturbances such as the earthquake event. Several additional protection zones are also identified for areas where new dunes are successfully regenerating, including areas being actively restored in the Beach Aid project that is assisting new native dunes to become established where there is available space.
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.
Following the Canterbury earthquake sequence of 2010-11, a large and contiguous tract of vacated ‘red zoned’ land lies alongside the lower Ōtākaro / Avon River and is known as the Avon-Ōtākaro Red Zone (AORZ). This is the second report in the Ecological Regeneration Options (ERO) project that addresses future land uses in the AORZ. The purpose of this report is to present results from an assessment of restoration opportunities conducted in April 2017. The objectives of the assessment were to identify potential benefits of ecological restoration activities across both land and water systems in the AORZ and characterise the key options for their implementation. The focus of this report is not to provide specific advice on the methods for achieving specific restoration endpoints per se. This will vary at different sites and scales with a large number of combinations possible. Rather, the emphasis is on providing an overview of the many restoration and regeneration options in their totality across the AORZ. An additional objective is to support their adequate assessment in the identification of optimum land uses and adaptive management practices for the AORZ. Participatory processes may play a useful role in assessment and stakeholder engagement by providing opportunities for social learning and the co-creation of new knowledge. We used a facilitated local knowledge based approach that generated a large quantity of reliable and site specific data in a short period of time. By inviting participation from a wide knowledge-holder network inclusivity is improved in comparison to small-group expert panel approaches. Similar approaches could be applied to other information gathering and assessment needs in the regeneration planning process. Findings from this study represent the most comprehensive set of concepts available to date to address the potential benefits of ecological regeneration in the AORZ. This is a core topic for planning to avoid missed opportunities and opportunity costs. The results identify a wide range of activities that may be applied to generate benefits for Christchurch and beyond, all involving aspects of a potential new ecology in the AORZ. These may be combined at a range of scales to create scenarios, quantify benefits, and explore the potential for synergies between different land use options. A particular challenge is acquiring the information needed within relatively short time frames. Early attention to gathering baseline data, addressing technical knowledge gaps, and developing conceptual frameworks to account for the many spatio-temporal aspects are all key activities that will assist in delivering the best outcomes. Methodologies by which these many facets can be pulled together in quantitative and comparative assessments are the focus of the final report in the ERO series.
1. INTRODUCTION. Earthquakes and geohazards, such as liquefaction, landslides and rock falls, constitute a major risk for New Zealand communities and can have devastating impacts as the Canterbury 2010/2011 experience shows. Development patterns expose communities to an array of natural hazards, including tsunamis, floods, droughts, and sea level rise amongst others. Fostering community resilience is therefore vitally important. As the rhetoric of resilience is mainstreamed into the statutory framework, a major challenge emerges: how can New Zealand operationalize this complex and sometimes contested concept and build ‘community capitals’? This research seeks to provide insights to this question by critically evaluating how community capitals are conceptualized and how they can contribute to community resilience in the context of the Waimakariri District earthquake recovery and regeneration process.
A city’s planted trees, the great majority of which are in private gardens, play a fundamental role in shaping a city’s wild ecology, ecosystem functioning, and ecosystem services. However, studying tree diversity across a city’s many thousands of separate private gardens is logistically challenging. After the disastrous 2010–2011 earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, over 7,000 homes were abandoned and a botanical survey of these gardens was contracted by the Government’s Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) prior to buildings being demolished. This unprecedented access to private gardens across the 443.9 hectares ‘Residential Red Zone’ area of eastern Christchurch is a unique opportunity to explore the composition of trees in private gardens across a large area of a New Zealand city. We analysed these survey data to describe the effects of housing age, socio-economics, human population density, and general soil quality, on tree abundance, species richness, and the proportion of indigenous and exotic species. We found that while most of the tree species were exotic, about half of the individual trees were local native species. There is an increasing realisation of the native tree species values among Christchurch citizens and gardens in more recent areas of housing had a higher proportion of smaller/younger native trees. However, the same sites had proportionately more exotic trees, by species and individuals, amongst their larger planted trees than older areas of housing. The majority of the species, and individuals, of the larger (≥10 cm DBH) trees planted in gardens still tend to be exotic species. In newer suburbs, gardens in wealthy areas had more native trees than gardens from poorer areas, while in older suburbs, poorer areas had more native big trees than wealthy areas. In combination, these describe, in detail unparalleled for at least in New Zealand, how the tree infrastructure of the city varies in space and time. This lays the groundwork for better understanding of how wildlife distribution and abundance, wild plant regeneration, and ecosystem services, are affected by the city’s trees.
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.
