A news item titled, "Project Lyttelton Earthquake Fund", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Thursday, 29 September 2011.
Website of the EQR (Earthquake Recovery) Project Management Office, established by the EQC and managed by Fletcher Construction, that responds to claims for the repair and rebuilding of houses damaged in the Feb. 2011 Canterbury earthquake.
In the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake, the Natural Hazards Research Platform (NHRP) initiated a series of Short Term Recovery Projects (STRP) aimed at facilitating and supporting the recovery of Christchurch from the earthquake impacts. This report presents the outcomes of STRP 6: Impacts of Liquefaction on Pipe Networks, which focused on the impacts of liquefaction on the potable water and wastewater systems of Christchurch. The project was a collaborative effort of NHRP researchers with expertise in liquefaction, CCC personnel managing and designing the systems and a geotechnical practitioner with experience/expertise in Christchurch soils and seismic geotechnics.
A sign on the furniture in the Words of Hope project. Words have been added to the sign so it now reads, "The vehicle of recovery is public assembly, together we will rise".
Paul Millar, associate professor at Canterbury University, is concerned that future generations won't have access to the full picture of the Canterbury earthquakes, so he got the CEISMIC Project under way. The project is an archive of earthquake-related digital material and includes resources from the National Library, the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, Christchurch City Libraries, Te Papa, NZ On Screen, the Canterbury Museum and the Ngai Tahu Research Centre. Paul says the aim is to document the impact of the disaster and the process of recovery, and make all that material available for free.
Nick Rogers, project director, Canterbury Land Assessment for Tonkin & Taylor. Tonkin & Taylor is the environmental and engineering consultancy doing the Canterbury land damage assessment work for EQC and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority.
There is a critical strand of literature suggesting that there are no ‘natural’ disasters (Abramovitz, 2001; Anderson and Woodrow, 1998; Clarke, 2008; Hinchliffe, 2004). There are only those that leave us – the people - more or less shaken and disturbed. There may be some substance to this; for example, how many readers recall the 7.8 magnitude earthquake centred in Fiordland in July 2009? Because it was so far away from a major centre and very few people suffered any consequences, the number is likely to be far fewer than those who remember (all too vividly) the relatively smaller 7.1 magnitude Canterbury quake of September 4th 2010 and the more recent 6.3 magnitude February 22nd 2011 event. One implication of this construction of disasters is that seismic events, like those in Canterbury, are as much socio-political as they are geological. Yet, as this paper shows, the temptation in recovery is to tick boxes and rebuild rather than recover, and to focus on hard infrastructure rather than civic expertise and community involvement. In this paper I draw upon different models of community engagement and use Putnam’s (1995) notion of ‘social capital’ to frame the argument that ‘building bridges’ after a disaster is a complex blend of engineering, communication and collaboration. I then present the results of a qualitative research project undertaken after the September 4th earthquake. This research helps to illustrate the important connections between technical rebuilding, social capital, recovery processes and overall urban resilience.
The timeliness and quality of recovery activities are impacted by the organisation and human resourcing of the physical works. This research addresses the suitability of different resourcing strategies on post-disaster demolition and debris management programmes. This qualitative analysis primarily draws on five international case studies including 2010 Canterbury earthquake, 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, 2009 Samoan Tsunami, 2009 Victorian Bushfires and 2005 Hurricane Katrina. The implementation strategies are divided into two categories: collectively and individually facilitated works. The impacts of the implementation strategies chosen are assessed for all disaster waste management activities including demolition, waste collection, transportation, treatment and waste disposal. The impacts assessed include: timeliness, completeness of projects; and environmental, economic and social impacts. Generally, the case studies demonstrate that detritus waste removal and debris from major repair work is managed at an individual property level. Debris collection, demolition and disposal are generally and most effectively carried out as a collective activity. However, implementation strategies are affected by contextual factors (such as funding and legal constraints) and the nature of the disaster waste (degree of hazardous waste, geographical spread of waste etc.) and need to be designed accordingly. Community involvement in recovery activities such as demolition and debris removal is shown to contribute positively to psychosocial recovery.
As part of the 'Project Masonry' Recovery Project funded by the New Zealand Natural Hazards Research Platform, commencing in March 2011, an international team of researchers was deployed to document and interpret the observed earthquake damage to masonry buildings and to churches as a result of the 22nd February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The study focused on investigating commonly encountered failure patterns and collapse mechanisms. A brief summary of activities undertaken is presented, detailing the observations that were made on the performance of and the deficiencies that contributed to the damage to approximately 650 inspected unreinforced clay brick masonry (URM) buildings, to 90 unreinforced stone masonry buildings, to 342 reinforced concrete masonry (RCM) buildings, to 112 churches in the Canterbury region, and to just under 1100 residential dwellings having external masonry veneer cladding. In addition, details are provided of retrofit techniques that were implemented within relevant Christchurch URM buildings prior to the 22nd February earthquake and brief suggestions are provided regarding appropriate seismic retrofit and remediation techniques for stone masonry buildings. http://www.nzsee.org.nz/publications/nzsee-quarterly-bulletin/
Questions to Ministers 1. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What challenges does the Government face in putting together Budget 2011? 2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his pre-Budget statement "The key sector which is not saving right now is the Government"; if so, what steps has he taken to increase government revenue? 3. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "…we can use this time to transform the economy to make us stronger…"; if so, does this transformation involve an economy that uses fewer natural resources and produces less pollution? 4. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on KiwiSaver? 5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What reports has he received on progress made to provide winter heating for residents affected by the Canterbury earthquakes? 6. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: What advice did he receive from the most recent food bank he visited about the current cost of living? 7. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for the Environment: What practical initiatives is the Government taking in preparation for Rugby World Cup 2011 to protect the environment and New Zealand's important clean green brand? 8. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What was the annual rate of GDP growth for the year ended December 2010 projected in Budget 2010, and what was the actual rate of growth for that period according to Statistics New Zealand? 9. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Education: What recent decisions have been made regarding schooling in Christchurch? 10. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: When was construction completed on the new early childhood education centre at Weymouth Primary School and why is the centre empty? 11. COLIN KING to the Minister of Agriculture: What steps has the Government recently taken to support innovation in the Manuka honey industry? 12. CARMEL SEPULONI to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by his statement "This Government is committed to ensuring that everyone…has access to justice"?