This study contains an evaluation of the seismic hazard associated with the Springbank Fault, a blind structure discovered in 1998 close to Christchurch. The assessment of the seismic hazard is approached as a deterministic process in which it is necessary to establish: 1) fault characteristics; 2) the maximum earthquake that the fault is capable of producing and 3) ground motions estimations. Due to the blind nature of the fault, conventional techniques used to establish the basic fault characteristics for seismic hazard assessments could not be applied. Alternative methods are used including global positioning system (GPS) surveys, morphometric analyses along rivers, shallow seismic reflection surveys and computer modelling. These were supplemented by using multiple empirical equations relating fault attributes to earthquake magnitude, and attenuation relationships to estimate ground motions in the near-fault zone. The analyses indicated that the Springbank Fault is a reverse structure located approximately 30 km to the northwest of Christchurch, along a strike length of approximately 16 km between the Eyre and Ashley River. The fault does not reach the surface, buy it is associated with a broad anticline whose maximum topographic expression offers close to the mid-length of the fault. Two other reverse faults, the Eyrewell and Sefton Faults, are inferred in the study area. These faults, together with the Springbank and Hororata Faults and interpreted as part of a sys of trust/reverse faults propagating from a decollement located at mid-crustal depths of approximately 14 km beneath the Canterbury Plains Within this fault system, the Springbank Fault is considered to behave in a seismically independent way, with a fault slip rate of ~0.2 mm/yr, and the capacity of producing a reverse-slip earthquake of moment magnitude ~6.4, with an earthquake recurrence of 3,000 years. An earthquake of the above characteristics represents a significant seismic hazard for various urban centres in the near-fault zone including Christchurch, Rangiora, Oxford, Amberley, Kaiapoi, Darfield, Rollestion and Cust. Estimated peak ground accelerations for these towns range between 0.14 g to 0.5 g.
Environmental assessment in New Zealand is governed by the provisions of the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991. The Act requires persons wishing to undertake certain activities to apply for resource consent from their local or regional council - a procedure termed the Resource Consent Process. The key component of a resource consent application is an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) report; a statement of the environmental effects of a proposed activity.
Problems arise when environmental assessments are complicated by uncertain and abnormal circumstances such as natural hazards. Natural hazards (including earthquakes, floods, tsunami, and coastal erosion) can be catastrophic to an environment. If hazards are not avoided or successfully mitigated, they can result in serious consequences to proposed development and to the environment which the proposal relates. The aim of this study is to assess the adequacy of the resource consent process (as outlined in the Resource Management Act 1991) for dealing with proposed development affected by natural hazards.
This study reviews the context of the resource consent process for dealing with natural hazards to identify potential issues in the assessment process. Guidance criteria for assessing natural hazards (termed Natural Hazard Assessment) are developed to evaluate against two resource consent applications affected by natural hazards. The findings of the consent process review and case study evaluation are discussed to determine the adequacy of the consent process for dealing with natural hazards.
From the review of the consent process it was evident that the process has a number of problems for accommodating natural hazards into the assessment. Although many important traits are provided for in the process, such traits are not always reflected in environmental assessments.
Evaluation of two resource consent applications against the process of Natural Hazard Assessment (NHA) showed that these consent applications did not adequately detail key information relating to natural hazards. Many problems evident in these applications were not amended by the Consent Authorities in the review process and subsequently consent was granted to information-deficient applications. Problematic issues identified in this study include:
• A distinct lack of guidance (legal or otherwise) for the applicant and Consent Authority regarding the boundaries of inclusion of an effect;
• Deficiencies in planning documents are reflected in AEE reports, the review of the consent application and in the end-decision;
• Under-utilisation of "experts" throughout the consent process;
• Minimal identification and account for the degree of uncertainty throughout the consent process;
• Resource consents are being granted even though information in consent applications, and the means for assessing the information is deficient.
These issues reflect that decisions are not being made based on all elements involved in a potential hazard. Subsequently, the resource consent process is not adequate for dealing with all aspects of natural hazards.
The Natural Hazard Assessment process provides educated assessment criteria to assess development affected by natural hazards. By accounting for the problems evident in the consent process, the introduction of a three-tier identification, risk and vulnerability assessment, and evaluation process to account for uncertainties, Natural Hazard Assessment provides a platform for a thorough assessment of natural hazards. The application of the principles of Natural Hazard Assessment to the consent applications affected by natural hazards showed that many key issues were not covered in the assessment under the consent process.
The nature of a natural event is that one may not occur in a given region over many lifetimes, however they will occur at some stage and planning and environmental assessment needs to provide for the associated hazards. Implementation of Natural Hazard Assessment is needed to help provide answers for the problems experienced in the resource consent process. Natural Hazard Assessment would allow decision-makers to make informed judgements on the situation at hand, leading to better planning and land-use options.
Change to current practice is needed, as following the current path of environmental assessment will be the hazard in the end.
