The increase in urban population has required cities to rethink their strategies for minimising greenhouse gas impacts and adapting to climate change. While urban design and planning policy have been guided by principles such as walkability (to reduce the dependence on cars) and green infrastructure (to enhance the quality of open spaces to support conservation and human values), there have been conflicting views on what spatial strategies will best prepare cities for a challenging future. Researchers supporting compact cities based upon public Transit Oriented Development have claimed that walkability, higher density and mixed-uses make cities more sustainable (Owen, 2009) and that, while green spaces in cities are necessary, they are dull in comparison with shopfronts and street vendors (Speck, 2012, p 250). Other researchers claim that green infrastructure is fundamental to improving urban sustainability and attracting public space users with improved urban comfort, consequently encouraging walkability (Pitman and Ely, 2013). Landscape architects tend to assume that ‘the greener the better’; however, the efficiency of urban greenery in relation to urban comfort and urbanity depends on its density, distribution and the services provided. Green infrastructure can take many forms (from urban forests to street trees) and provide varied services (amended microclimate, aesthetics, ecology and so forth). In this paper, we evaluate the relevance of current policy in Christchurch regarding both best practice in green infrastructure and urban comfort (Tavares, 2015). We focus on the Christchurch Blueprint for rebuilding the central city, and critically examine the post-earthquake paths the city is following regarding its green and grey infrastructures and the resulting urban environment. We discuss the performance and appropriateness of the current Blueprint in post-earthquake Christchurch, particularly as it relates to the challenges that climate change is creating for cities worldwide.
1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Finance? 2. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: How much does the Government expect to spend over the next few years to help rebuild Christchurch in the aftermath of the two earthquakes? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her statement in regard to hardship assistance that "…I think it proves that the help is there when people need it,"; if so, why? 4. RAHUI KATENE to the Minister of Health: What action, if any, has been taken in light of the study Ethnicity and Management of Colon Cancer in New Zealand: Do Indigenous Patients Get a Worse Deal?, which concluded that Māori New Zealanders with colon cancer were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and experienced a lower quality of care compared with non-Māori patients? 5. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What steps is the Government taking to increase renewable electricity generation in light of reports that greenhouse gas emissions from this sector have increased by 120 percent, which is more than any other sector since 1990? 6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: Excluding the banks and non-bank financial institutions covered by the deposit guarantee scheme, are there any other companies that might be provided with a government guarantee while the Rt Hon John Key is Prime Minister? 7. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What is Petrobras able to do under the permit granted to it in the Raukumara Basin? 8. DAVID CLENDON to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What environmental protection provisions, if any, did the Government include in the permit granted to Petrobras to explore for oil and drill off the East Cape? 9. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all Ministers involved in the Mediaworks frequency payment arrangement? 10. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Revenue: What has Inland Revenue done to assist the people in Christchurch after the February earthquake? 11. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services: Does he stand by his statements in relation to the purchase of 34 BMWs by Ministerial Services, including one with heated seats, that "Yeah I don't know what's in Dunedin" and "It's beyond me, it's not my car anyway"? 12. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture: What has been the result of enforcement action taken by the Ministry of Fisheries under Operation Paid and Taskforce Webb?
At the conclusion of the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes more than 5100 homes had been deemed unsafe for habitation. The land and buildings of these were labelled “red zoned” and are too badly damaged for remediation. These homes have been demolished or are destined for demolition. To assist the red zone population to relocate, central government have offered to ‘buy out’ home owners at the Governmental Value (GV) that was last reviewed in 2007. While generous in the economic context at the time, the area affected was the lowest value land and housing in Christchurch and so there is a capital shortfall between the 2007 property value and the cost of relocating to more expensive properties. This shortfall is made worse by increasing present day values since the earthquakes. Red zone residents have had to relocate to the far North and Western extremities of Christchurch, and some chose to move even further to neighbouring towns or cities. The eastern areas and commercial centres close to the red zone are affected as well. They have lost critical mass which has negatively impacted businesses in the catchments of the Red Zone. This thesis aims to repopulate the suburbs most affected by the abandonment of the red zone houses. Because of the relative scarcity of sound building sites in the East and to introduce affordability to these houses, an alternative method of development is required than the existing low density suburban model. Smart medium density design will be tested as an affordable and appropriate means of living. Existing knowledge in this field will be reviewed, an analysis of what East Christchurch’s key characteristics are will occur, and an examination of built works and site investigations will also be conducted. The research finds that at housing densities of 40 units per hectare, the spatial, vehicle, aesthetic needs of East Christchurch can be accommodated. Centralising development is also found to offer better lifestyle choices than the isolated suburbs at the edges of Christchurch, to be more efficient using existing infrastructure, and to place less reliance on cars. Stronger communities are formed from the outset and for a full range of demographics. Eastern affordable housing options are realised and Christchurch’s ever expanding suburban tendencies are addressed. East Christchurch presently displays a gaping scar of devastated houses that ‘The New Eastside’ provides a bandage and a cure for. Displaced and dispossessed Christchurch residents can be re-housed within a new heart for East Christchurch.
Recent global tsunami events have highlighted the importance of effective tsunami risk management strategies (including land-use planning, structural and natural defences, warning systems, education and evacuation measures). However, the rarity of tsunami means that empirical data concerning reactions to tsunami warnings and tsunami evacuation behaviour is rare when compared to findings about evacuations to avoid other sources of hazard. To date empirical research into tsunami evacuations has focused on evacuation rates, rather than other aspects of the evacuation process. More knowledge is required about responses to warnings, pre-evacuation actions, evacuation dynamics and the return home after evacuations. Tsunami evacuation modelling has the potential to inform evidence-based tsunami risk planning and response. However to date tsunami evacuation models have largely focused on timings of evacuations, rather than evacuation behaviours. This Masters research uses a New Zealand case study to reduce both of these knowledge gaps. Qualitative survey data was gathered from populations across coastal communities in Banks Peninsula and Christchurch, New Zealand, required to evacuate due to the tsunami generated by the November 14th 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake. Survey questions asked about reactions to tsunami warnings, actions taken prior to evacuating and movements during the 2016 tsunami evacuation. This data was analysed to characterise trends and identify factors that influenced evacuation actions and behaviour. Finally, it was used to develop an evacuation model for Banks Peninsula. Where appropriate, the modelling inputs were informed by the survey data. Three key findings were identified from the results of the evacuation behaviour survey. Although 38% of the total survey respondents identified the earthquake shaking as a natural cue for the tsunami, most relied on receiving official warnings, including sirens, to prompt evacuations. Respondents sought further official information to inform their evacuation decisions, with 39% of respondents delaying their evacuation in order to do so. Finally, 96% of total respondents evacuated by car. This led to congestion, particularly in more densely populated Christchurch city suburbs. Prior to this research, evacuation modelling had not been completed for Banks Peninsula. The results of the modelling showed that if evacuees know how to respond to tsunami warnings and where and how to evacuate, there are no issues. However, if there are poor conditions, including if people do not evacuate immediately, if there are issues with the roading network, or if people do not know where or how to evacuate, evacuation times increase with there being more bottlenecks leading out of the evacuation zones. The results of this thesis highlight the importance of effective tsunami education and evacuation planning. Reducing exposure to tsunami risk through prompt evacuation relies on knowledge of how to interpret tsunami warnings, and when, where and how to evacuate. Recommendations from this research outline the need for public education and engagement, and the incorporation of evacuation signage, information boards and evacuation drills. Overall these findings provide more comprehensive picture of tsunami evacuation behaviour and decision making based on empirical data from a recent evacuation, which can be used to improve tsunami risk management strategies. This empirical data can also be used to inform evacuation modelling to improve the accuracy and realism of the evacuation models.
Questions to Ministers 1. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy moving away from government spending, housing speculation and borrowing, and towards savings and exporting? 2. Hon PETE HODGSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to question No 11 yesterday that Sammy Wong did not accompany Pansy Wong on any ministerial trips to China? 3. HONE HARAWIRA to the Associate Minister of Health: What is the rationale behind the move to prohibit the display of tobacco products for sale in retail outlets? 4. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister of Transport: Has he received any feedback or information in support of lowering the adult blood alcohol concentration to 0.05 that has given him any doubt or cause for reflection this year about his decision to retain the level at 0.08? 5. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcement has he made about the direction of social housing in New Zealand? 6. BRENDON BURNS to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is the Government's response package, announced last week to assist Canterbury businesses affected by the 4 September earthquake, universally supported by the Government and its supporters? 7. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Alternative Welfare Working Group that welfare reform should be focused on "the relentless pursuit of well-being"? 8. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will the mining of lignite form part of his New Zealand Energy Strategy? 9. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Education: What were the results of the Programme for International Assessment (PISA), which looked at New Zealand students' achievement in reading, maths and scientific literacy? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Transport: How many emails has he received on the decision of the New Zealand Transport Agency to start charging CarJam and similar web-based information services for accessing the Agency's stored basic motor vehicle information? 11. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent steps has the Government taken to control bovine TB? 12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: Which Minister is to be responsible for the enforcement of the Education Act 1989 in relation to limited attendance early childhood centres following the passing of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2)? Questions to Members 1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Student Loan Scheme Bill? 2. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submitters on the Student Loan Scheme Bill have requested to be heard in person? 3. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill? 4. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill have requested to be heard in person? 5. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill? 6. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill have requested to be heard in person? 7. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill? 8. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submitters on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill have requested to be heard in person? 9. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill? 10. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submitters on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill have requested to be heard in person? 11. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: Has the Finance and Expenditure Committee conducted the 2009/10 financial review of the Office of the Retirement Commissioner? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill? 13. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submitters on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person? 14. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill? 15. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill? 16. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person? 17. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Legal Services Bill? 18. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Legal Services Bill have requested to be heard in person? 19. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill? 20. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill have requested to be heard in person? 21. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Food Bill? 22. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Food Bill have requested to be heard in person? 23. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill? 24. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person?
In September 2010 and February 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was struck by two powerful earthquakes, registering magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively on the Richter scale. The second earthquake was centred 10 kilometres south-east of the centre of Christchurch (the region’s capital and New Zealand’s third most populous urban area, with approximately 360,000 residents) at a depth of five kilometres. 185 people were killed, making it the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history. (66 people were killed in the collapse of one building alone, the six-storey Canterbury Television building.) The earthquake occurred during the lunch hour, increasing the number of people killed on footpaths and in buses and cars by falling debris. In addition to the loss of life, the earthquake caused catastrophic damage to both land and buildings in Christchurch, particularly in the central business district. Many commercial and residential buildings collapsed in the tremors; others were damaged through soil liquefaction and surface flooding. Over 1,000 buildings in the central business district were eventually demolished because of safety concerns, and an estimated 70,000 people had to leave the city after the earthquakes because their homes were uninhabitable. The New Zealand Government declared a state of national emergency, which stayed in force for ten weeks. In 2014 the Government estimated that the rebuild process would cost NZ$40 billion (approximately US$27.3 billion, a cost equivalent to 17% of New Zealand’s annual GDP). Economists now estimate it could take the New Zealand economy between 50 and 100 years to recover. The earthquakes generated tens of thousands of insurance claims, both against private home insurance companies and against the New Zealand Earthquake Commission, a government-owned statutory body which provides primary natural disaster insurance to residential property owners in New Zealand. These ranged from claims for hundreds of millions of dollars concerning the local port and university to much smaller claims in respect of the thousands of residential homes damaged. Many of these insurance claims resulted in civil proceedings, caused by disputes about policy cover, the extent of the damage and the cost and/or methodology of repairs, as well as failures in communication and delays caused by the overwhelming number of claims. Disputes were complicated by the fact that the Earthquake Commission provides primary insurance cover up to a monetary cap, with any additional costs to be met by the property owner’s private insurer. Litigation funders and non-lawyer claims advocates who took a percentage of any insurance proceeds also soon became involved. These two factors increased the number of parties involved in any given claim and introduced further obstacles to resolution. Resolving these disputes both efficiently and fairly was (and remains) central to the rebuild process. This created an unprecedented challenge for the justice system in Christchurch (and New Zealand), exacerbated by the fact that the Christchurch High Court building was itself damaged in the earthquakes, with the Court having to relocate to temporary premises. (The High Court hears civil claims exceeding NZ$200,000 in value (approximately US$140,000) or those involving particularly complex issues. Most of the claims fell into this category.) This paper will examine the response of the Christchurch High Court to this extraordinary situation as a case study in innovative judging practices and from a jurisprudential perspective. In 2011, following the earthquakes, the High Court made a commitment that earthquake-related civil claims would be dealt with as swiftly as the Court's resources permitted. In May 2012, it commenced a special “Earthquake List” to manage these cases. The list (which is ongoing) seeks to streamline the trial process, resolve quickly claims with precedent value or involving acute personal hardship or large numbers of people, facilitate settlement and generally work proactively and innovatively with local lawyers, technical experts and other stakeholders. For example, the Court maintains a public list (in spreadsheet format, available online) with details of all active cases before the Court, listing the parties and their lawyers, summarising the facts and identifying the legal issues raised. It identifies cases in which issues of general importance have been or will be decided, with the expressed purpose being to assist earthquake litigants and those contemplating litigation and to facilitate communication among parties and lawyers. This paper will posit the Earthquake List as an attempt to implement innovative judging techniques to provide efficient yet just legal processes, and which can be examined from a variety of jurisprudential perspectives. One of these is as a case study in the well-established debate about the dialogic relationship between public decisions and private settlement in the rule of law. Drawing on the work of scholars such as Hazel Genn, Owen Fiss, David Luban, Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Judith Resnik, it will explore the tension between the need to develop the law through the doctrine of precedent and the need to resolve civil disputes fairly, affordably and expeditiously. It will also be informed by the presenter’s personal experience of the interplay between reported decisions and private settlement in post-earthquake Christchurch through her work mediating insurance disputes. From a methodological perspective, this research project itself gives rise to issues suitable for discussion at the Law and Society Annual Meeting. These include the challenges in empirical study of judges, working with data collected by the courts and statistical analysis of the legal process in reference to settlement. September 2015 marked the five-year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. There remains widespread dissatisfaction amongst Christchurch residents with the ongoing delays in resolving claims, particularly insurers, and the rebuild process. There will continue to be challenges in Christchurch for years to come, both from as-yet unresolved claims but also because of the possibility of a new wave of claims arising from poor quality repairs. Thus, a final purpose of presenting this paper at the 2016 Meeting is to gain the benefit of other scholarly perspectives and experiences of innovative judging best practice, with a view to strengthening and improving the judicial processes in Christchurch. This Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association in New Orleans is a particularly appropriate forum for this paper, given the recent ten year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the plenary session theme of “Natural and Unnatural Disasters – human crises and law’s response.” The presenter has a personal connection with this theme, as she was a Fulbright scholar from New Zealand at New York University in 2005/2006 and participated in the student volunteer cleanup effort in New Orleans following Katrina. http://www.lawandsociety.org/NewOrleans2016/docs/2016_Program.pdf