Search

found 2 results

Research Papers, Lincoln University

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.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Designing a structure for higher- than-code seismic performance can result in significant economic and environmental benefits. This higher performance can be achieved using the principles of Performance-Based Design, in which engineers design structures to minimize the probabilistic lifecycle seismic impacts on a building. Although the concept of Performance-Based Design is not particularly new, the initial capital costs associated with designing structures for higher performance have historically hindered the widespread adoption of performance-based design practices. To overcome this roadblock, this research is focused on providing policy makers and stakeholders with evidence-based environmental incentives for designing structures in New Zealand for higher seismic performance. In the first phase of the research, the environmental impacts of demolitions in Christchurch following the Canterbury Earthquakes were quantified to demonstrate the environmental consequences of demolitions following seismic events. That is the focus here. A building data set consisting of 142 concrete buildings that were demolished following the earthquake was used to quantify the environmental impacts of the demolitions in terms of the embodied carbon and energy in the building materials. A reduced set of buildings was used to develop a material takeoff model to estimate material quantities in the entire building set, and a lifecycle assessment tool was used to calculate the embodied carbon and energy in the materials. The results revealed staggering impacts in terms of the embodied carbon and energy in the materials in the demolished buildings. Ongoing work is focused developing an environmental impact framework that incorporates all the complex factors (e.g. construction methodologies, repair methodologies (if applicable), demolition methodologies (if applicable), and waste management) that contribute to the environmental impacts of building repair and demolition following earthquakes.