Search

found 17 results

Images for Rutherford; more images...

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A scanned copy of a black and white photograph belonging to University of Canterbury alumnus Colin Lau. The photograph depicts several University of Canterbury buildings, including the Chemistry and Physics building (now known as the Rutherford building) in the background.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Gold Award presented to Jade Rutherford and Gina Scandrett, the 'voices' of the Student Volunteer Army, who co-ordinated and tracked all jobs and movements of the organisation. Jade is from Tauranga and Gina is from Christchurch.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Gold Award, Jade Rutherford on left and Gina Scandrett on right, the 'voices' of the Student Volunteer Army who, co-ordinated and tracked all jobs, movements of the organisation. Pictured here with Vice-Chancellor Dr Rod Carr, Prime Minister John Key and Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Gerry Brownlee.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

The Canterbury region of New Zealand was shaken by major earthquakes on the 4th September 2010 and 22nd February 2011. The quakes caused 185 fatalities and extensive land, infrastructure and building damage, particularly in the Eastern suburbs of Christchurch city. Almost 450 ha of residential and public land was designated as a ‘Red Zone’ unsuitable for residential redevelopment because land damage was so significant, engineering solutions were uncertain, and repairs would be protracted. Subsequent demolition of all housing and infrastructure in the area has left a blank canvas of land stretching along the Avon River corridor from the CBD to the sea. Initially the Government’s official – but enormously controversial – position was that this land would be cleared and lie fallow until engineering solutions could be found that enabled residential redevelopment. This paper presents an application of a choice experiment (CE) that identified and assessed Christchurch residents’ preferences for different land use options of this Red Zone. Results demonstrated strong public support for the development of a recreational reserve comprising a unique natural environment with native fauna and flora, healthy wetlands and rivers, and recreational opportunities that align with this vision. By highlighting the value of a range of alternatives, the CE provided a platform for public participation and expanded the conversational terrain upon which redevelopment policy took place. We conclude the method has value for land use decision-making beyond the disaster recovery context.