University of Canterbury students walk along University Drive to get to lectures, after most pathways through campus were cordoned off while buildings were structurally tested. The photographer comments, "Lawns beside University Drive became main walkways".
A pathway through trees on the University of Canterbury campus, beside the Avon River. The photographer comments, "Path by the river, University Drive".
A photograph of the clock drive from the Townsend Telescope. Many of the plates around the clock drive broke off during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the clock drive from the Townsend Telescope. Many of the plates around the clock drive broke off during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the weight for the clock drive from the Townsend Telescope. The weight was chipped and scratched during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "University of Canterbury researchers in the Estuary. From Humphreys Drive".
A photograph of a sign on the corner of Ilam Road and University Drive at the University of Canterbury. The sign reads, "Emergency, campus closed, no entry".
A photograph of the worm gear drive from the Townsend Telescope
The University of Canterbury sign on University Drive. In the background, tents have been set up in the Arts car park to act as temporary lecture rooms while the buildings were being checked for damage.
A close-up photograph of the wheel from the worm gear drive of the Townsend Telescope.
A photograph of the damage to a gear from the worm gear drive of the Townsend Telescope. The gear was bent during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the damage to the teeth of a gear from the worm gear drive of the Townsend Telescope. The gear was damaged during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the damage to the teeth of a gear from the worm gear drive of the Townsend Telescope. The gear was damaged during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the clock drive of the Townsend Telescope. The telescope is in the Observatory at the Christchurch Arts Centre. This image was used by Graeme Kershaw, Technician at the University of Canterbury Department of Physics and Astronomy, to identify the telescope's parts after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A damaged wooden footbridge across the Avon River beside University Drive is blocked off with sheets of plywood and danger signs. The photographer comments, "The University restarts its teaching, and the techies in e-learning move out of NZi3. The bridge to the Rec Centre".
A photograph of the side plate from the clock drive of the Townsend Telescope.
A photograph of the declinator axle and counterweight from the Townsend Telescope. The axle broken off from the weight during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the Townsend Telescope in the Observatory at the Christchurch Arts Centre. In the bottom right-hand corner of the photograph is a pulley for the telescope's clock drive. This is one of the pieces that went missing when the Observatory tower collapsed in the 22 February 2011 earthquake. This image was used by Graeme Kershaw, Technician at the University of Canterbury Department of Physics and Astronomy, to identify the telescope's parts after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of the earthquake-damaged output shaft from the top-plate of the Townsend Telescope's clock drive. The output shaft was bent out of shape during the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
At 00:02 on 14 November, 2016 a destructive 7.8 Mw earthquake struck the North Canterbury region of New Zealand’s South Island. Prior to and following the earthquake, natural and social scientists conducted a significant amount of research on the resilience processes and recovery efforts in North Canterbury. This thesis examines community resilience in Kaikōura, a small town and district greatly impacted by the earthquake. Community resilience has been widely used in disaster risk reduction research, policy, and practice to describe how a group of individuals within a boundary respond to events, hazards, and shifts in their everyday life. Using exploratory inquiry, this thesis adopts qualitative research methods including document analysis, 24 semi-structured interviews, and participant observation to explore the idea that the recent scholarly emphasis on resilience has come at the expense of critical engagement with the complexities of communities. I draw on the idea of ‘collectives’ (comprising community-based organisations or less formal social networks with a shared purpose) as a lens to consider how, when unexpected life events happen, collectives can be regarded as a resource for change or constancy. The examination of collectives following a disaster can lend insight into the many elements of community as they bring people together in collaboration or drive them apart in conflict. This thesis therefore contributes to an enhanced practical and theoretical understanding of both community and resilience.
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.
In the wake of the Canterbury earthquakes, one of the biggest threats to our heritage buildings is the risk of earthquakes and the associated drive to strengthen or demolish buildings. Can Small Town NZ balance the requirements of the EQPB legislation and economic realities of their places? The government’s priority is on safety of building occupants and citizens in the streets. However, maintaining and strengthening privately-owned heritage buildings is often cost prohibitive. Hence, heritage regulation has frequently been perceived as interfering with private property rights, especially when heritage buildings occupy a special place in the community becoming an important place for people (i.e. public benefits are larger than private). We investigate several case studies where building owners have been given green light to demolish heritage listed buildings to make way for modern developments. In two of the case studies developers provided evidence of unaffordable strengthening costs. A new trend that has emerged is a voluntary offer of contributing to an incentive fund to assist with heritage preservation of other buildings. This is a unique example where private owners offer incentives (via council controlled organisations) instead of it being purely the domain of the central or local governments.
Seismic isolation is an effective technology for significantly reducing damage to buildings and building contents. However, its application to light-frame wood buildings has so far been unable to overcome cost and technical barriers such as susceptibility to movement during high-wind loading. The precursor to research in the field of isolation of residential buildings was the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (6.7 MW) in the United States and the 1995 Kobe Earthquake (6.9 MW) in Japan. While only a small number of lives were lost in residential buildings in these events, the economic impact was significant with over half of earthquake recovery costs given to repair and reconstruction of residential building damage. A value case has been explored to highlight the benefits of seismically isolated residential buildings compared to a standard fixed-base dwellings for the Wellington region. Loss data generated by insurance claim information from the 2011 Christchurch Earthquake has been used by researchers to determine vulnerability functions for the current light-frame wood building stock. By further considering the loss attributed to drift and acceleration sensitive components, and a simplified single degree of freedom (SDOF) building model, a method for determining vulnerability functions for seismic isolated buildings was developed. Vulnerability functions were then applied directly in a loss assessment using the GNS developed software, RiskScape. Vulnerability was shown to dramatically reduce for isolated buildings compared to an equivalent fixed-base building and as a result, the monetary savings in a given earthquake scenario were significant. This work is expected to drive further interest for development of solutions for the seismic isolation of residential dwellings, of which one option is further considered and presented herein.
The seismic tremor that shook Christchurch on February 22, 2011, not only shattered buildings but also the spirit of the city’s residents. Amidst the ruins, this design-focused thesis unravels two intertwining narratives, each essential to the city’s resurrection. At its core, this thesis probes the preservation of Christchurch’s memory and character, meticulously chronicling the lost heritage architecture and the subsequent urban metamorphosis. Beyond bricks and mortar, it also confronts the silent aftershocks - the pervasive mental health challenges stemming from personal losses and the disfigured cityscape. As a native of Christchurch, intimately connected to its fabric, my lens reflects not just on the architectural reconstruction but also on the emotional reconstruction. My experience as an autistic individual, a recently discovered facet of my identity, infuses this design journey with a distinct prism through which I perceive and interact with the world. The colourful sketches that drive the design process aren’t mere illustrations but manifestations of my interpretation of spaces and concepts, evoking joy and vitality—a testament to embracing diversity in design. Drawing parallels between healing my own traumas with my colourful and joyful neurodivergent worldview, I’ve woven this concept into proposals aimed at healing the city through whimsy, joy, and vibrant colours. Personal experiences during and post-earthquakes profoundly shape my design proposals. Having navigated the labyrinth of my own mental health amid the altered cityscape, I seek avenues for reconciliation, both personal and communal. The vibrant sketches and designs presented in this thesis encapsulate this vision—a fusion of vivid, unconventional interpretations and a dedication to preserving the essence of the original cityscape while still encouraging movement into the future.