Search

found 57 results

Images for Christchurch Mail; more images...

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Members of the Red Cross civil defence response team and South Canterbury Police have been in Christchurch helping with the earthquake clean up. Welfare checks required the team to walk along River Road checking on householders. Pictured looking at a damaged bridge on River Road near Tai Tapu are (from left) Andy Todd, Anna Munro and Ken Weavers".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Bunny babes: In a magical Avon Loop property a bunny stranger appeared after the September earthquake, and then there were heaps more. At back, on the garden seat from left: Grace Stedman (5), Lili Belton-Ilarri (7), Sophia Stedman (12) and Asher Scully (5). On the ground from left: Inaki Belton, Arlo Stedman and Lilli Scully".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Chris Lin and his wife Caleen Xue at the door of their cool store safe where they slept for three weeks after the 4 September earthquake to guard what was left of their stock, while their teenage children rented a single room in a house up the road for their safety".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Chris Lin and his wife Caleen Xue at the door of their cool store safe where they slept for three weeks after the 4 September earthquake to guard what was left of their stock, while their teenage children rented a single room in a house up the road for their safety".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Members of the Red Cross civil defence response team and South Canterbury Police have been in Christchurch helping with the earthquake clean up. Welfare checks required the team to walk along River Road checking on householders. Pictured from left are Aaron Sole, Andy Todd, Anna Munro, Ken Weavers, Tim Mitchell (Emergency Management Officer) and Tom Connolly".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Businesswoman Angel Wu, president of North South Business Incorporated, says members of the mainly Chinese group of businesses and store operators have been rallying around to try to help members hardest hit by the earthquake. She talks of serious suffering for those worst-affected".

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

Text reads 'Refugees told they're not welcome in NZ...' The cartoon shows a boat full of refugees, which has tattered sails, one bearing the words 'We need a home'. A helicopter flies by and someone says 'False alarm! They're Christchurch residents trying to get out!' Context - A boat full of Sri Lanken Tamils supposedly want to come to New Zealand as refugees has been told by Prime Minister John Key that they are 'not welcome'. The pm has been accused of 'scaremongering' and that he 'has misjudged his response'. (Nelson Mail 13 July 2011). Also a reference to the plight of many people in Christchurch whose houses have been condemned by the earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

As a global phenomenon, many cities are undergoing urban renewal to accommodate rapid growth in urban population. However, urban renewal can struggle to balance social, economic, and environmental outcomes, whereby economic outcomes are often primarily considered by developers. This has important implications for urban forests, which have previously been shown to be negatively affected by development activities. Urban forests serve the purpose of providing ecosystem services and thus are beneficial to human wellbeing. Better understanding the effect of urban renewal on city trees may help improve urban forest outcomes via effective management and policy strategies, thereby maximising ecosystem service provision and human wellbeing. Though the relationship between certain aspects of development and urban forests has received consideration in previous literature, little research has focused on how the complete property redevelopment cycle affects urban forest dynamics over time. This research provides an opportunity to gain a comprehensive understanding of the effect of residential property redevelopment on urban forest dynamics, at a range of spatial scales, in Christchurch, New Zealand following a series of major earthquakes which occurred in 2010 – 2011. One consequence of the earthquakes is the redevelopment of thousands of properties over a relatively short time-frame. The research quantifies changes in canopy cover city-wide, as well as, tree removal, retention, and planting on individual residential properties. Moreover, the research identifies the underlying reasons for these dynamics, by exploring the roles of socio-economic and demographic factors, the spatial relationships between trees and other infrastructure, and finally, the attitudes of residential property owners. To quantify the effect of property redevelopment on canopy cover change in Christchurch, this research delineated tree canopy cover city-wide in 2011 and again in 2015. An object-based image analysis (OBIA) technique was applied to aerial imagery and LiDAR data acquired at both time steps, in order to estimate city-wide canopy cover for 2011 and 2015. Changes in tree canopy cover between 2011 and 2015 were then spatially quantified. Tree canopy cover change was also calculated for all meshblocks (a relatively fine-scale geographic boundary) in Christchurch. The results show a relatively small magnitude of tree canopy cover loss, city-wide, from 10.8% to 10.3% between 2011 and 2015, but a statistically significant change in mean tree canopy cover across all the meshblocks. Tree canopy cover losses were more likely to occur in meshblocks containing properties that underwent a complete redevelopment cycle, but the loss was insensitive to the density of redevelopment within meshblocks. To explore property-scale individual tree dynamics, a mixed-methods approach was used, combining questionnaire data and remote sensing analysis. A mail-based questionnaire was delivered to residential properties to collect resident and household data; 450 residential properties (321 redeveloped, 129 non- redeveloped) returned valid questionnaires and were identified as analysis subjects. Subsequently, 2,422 tree removals and 4,544 tree retentions were identified within the 450 properties; this was done by manually delineating individual tree crowns, based on aerial imagery and LiDAR data, and visually comparing the presence or absence of these trees between 2011 and 2015. The tree removal rate on redeveloped properties (44.0%) was over three times greater than on non-redeveloped properties (13.5%) and the average canopy cover loss on redeveloped properties (52.2%) was significantly greater than on non-redeveloped properties (18.8%). A classification tree (CT) analysis was used to model individual tree dynamics (i.e. tree removal, tree retention) and candidate explanatory variables (i.e. resident and household, economic, land cover, and spatial variables). The results indicate that the model including land cover, spatial, and economic variables had the best predicting ability for individual tree dynamics (accuracy = 73.4%). Relatively small trees were more likely to be removed, while trees with large crowns were more likely to be retained. Trees were most likely to be removed from redeveloped properties with capital values lower than NZ$1,060,000 if they were within 1.4 m of the boundary of a redeveloped building. Conversely, trees were most likely to be retained if they were on a property that was not redeveloped. The analysis suggested that the resident and household factors included as potential explanatory variables did not influence tree removal or retention. To conduct a further exploration of the relationship between resident attitudes and actions towards trees on redeveloped versus non-redeveloped properties, this research also asked the landowners from the 450 properties that returned mail questionnaires to indicate their attitudes towards tree management (i.e. tree removal, tree retention, and tree planting) on their properties. The results show that residents from redeveloped properties were more likely to remove and/or plant trees, while residents from non- redeveloped properties were more likely to retain existing trees. A principal component analysis (PCA) was used to explore resident attitudes towards tree management. The results of the PCA show that residents identified ecosystem disservices (e.g. leaf litter, root damage to infrastructure) as common reasons for tree removal; however, they also noted ecosystem services as important reasons for both tree planting and tree retention on their properties. Moreover, the reasons for tree removal and tree planting varied based on whether residents’ property had been redeveloped. Most tree removal occurred on redeveloped properties because trees were in conflict with redevelopment, but occurred on non- redeveloped properties because of perceived poor tree health. Residents from redeveloped properties were more likely to plant trees due to being aesthetically pleasing or to replace trees removed during redevelopment. Overall, this research adds to, and complements, the existing literature on the effects of residential property redevelopment on urban forest dynamics. The findings of this research provide empirical support for developing specific legislation or policies about urban forest management during residential property redevelopment. The results also imply that urban foresters should enhance public education on the ecosystem services provided by urban forests and thus minimise the potential for tree removal when undertaking property redevelopment.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Questions to Ministers 1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with 57 percent of New Zealanders who, according to a recent UMR poll, support the introduction of a temporary earthquake levy to pay for the rebuilding of Christchurch? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: What, according to the 2010 Investment Statement of the Government of New Zealand, was the average total shareholder return over the last five years from State-owned Enterprises and the average bond rate, and is that consistent with his statement that "it is the Government's intention to use the proceeds of those initial public offerings to actually invest in other assets that the Government would have to fund through the Government bond rate"? 3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister for Infrastructure: What progress has the Government made on its infrastructure programme? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "this Government is not prepared to turn its back on our most vulnerable citizens when they most need our help"? 5. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Is it government policy for New Zealand to become a "highly attractive global destination" for oil exploration, with expansion of the oil and coal sectors leading to a "step change" in the country's economic growth as set out in the document Developing Our Energy Potential; if not, why not? 6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Is the Government considering extending the business assistance package for employers and employees beyond the 14-week period currently signalled; if not, why not? 7. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Police: What reports has she received on the latest trends in the level of crime in New Zealand? 8. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Did he tell a meeting in Timaru last week "The entire time I've been Prime Minister I've had Treasury in my office week after week, month after month, telling me South Canterbury Finance was going bankrupt"? 9. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What advice has he received on major resource consents being considered under the Government's new national consenting policy? 10. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Does she agree that the joint scheme initiated by the Green Party and the Government, Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart, is the best initiative in the Draft New Zealand Energy Strategy because it is providing hundreds of thousands of New Zealand households with warm, dry, energy efficient homes, and creating thousands of clean green jobs? 11. Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Fisheries: Does he still have no major concerns about the way foreign boats were used by New Zealand companies as the Nelson Mail reports he said last year? 12. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcements has he made regarding the Government's Housing Innovation Fund?