Damaged buildings and empty demolition sites. The building on the left has had tarpaulins placed on it to prevent weather damage to the inside of the building.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 6 February 2013 entitled, "Charming Chimney".
Damaged retail stores on Cashel Street.
A photograph of the backs of badly-damaged High Street buildings.
A damaged building on Hereford Street.
Transcript of Pete Cosgrove's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 15 July 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 17 June 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 20 May 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 14 January 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
Due to earthquake damage.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 2 July 2013 entitled, "Canvas Cathedral?".
A photograph of damaged buildings on Manchester Street.
The backs of damaged buildings on High Street.
The backs of damaged buildings on High Street.
The backs of damaged buildings on High Street.
A story submitted by Maria to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Jocelyn to the QuakeStories website.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 17 January 2013 entitled, "Vale Vero".
Transcript of Robyn Gosset's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 15 April 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 10 June 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 18 March 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 8 April 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
Christchurch earthquake events have raised questions on the adequacy of performance-based provisions in the current national building code. At present, in the building code the performance objectives are expressed in terms of safety and health criteria that could affect building occupants. In general, under the high intensity Christchurch events, buildings performed well in terms of life-safety (with a few exceptions) and it proved that the design practices adopted for those buildings could meet the performance objectives set by the building code. However, the damage incurred in those buildings resulted in unacceptably high economic loss. It is timely and necessary to revisit the objectives towards building performance in the building code and to include provisions for reducing economic implications in addition to the current requirements. Based on the observed performance of some buildings, a few specific issues in the current design practices that could have contributed to extensive damage have been identified and recommended for further research leading towards improved performance of structures. In particular, efforts towards innovative design/construction solutions with low-damage concepts are encouraged. New Zealand has been one of the leading countries in developing many innovative technologies. However, such technically advanced research findings usually face challenges towards implementation. Some of the reasons include: (i) lack of policy requirements; (iii) absence of demonstrated performance of new innovations to convince stakeholders; and (iv) non-existence of design guidelines. Such barriers significantly affect implementation of low damage construction and possible strategies to overcome those issues are discussed in this paper.
A photograph of the back of damaged buildings behind an overgrown building site on High Street.
A photograph of badly-damaged buildings on High Street.
A photograph of badly-damaged buildings on High Street.
Damaged buildings on Madras Street seen through cordon fencing.
A photograph of badly-damaged buildings on Bedford Row.