Six years on from the Christchurch earthquakes, one in five residents of the city say the disaster is still taking its toll. The latest wellbeing survey by the Canterbury DHB found people living in north-east and east Christchurch were the most likely to be suffering from issues such as anxiety, from ongoing aftershocks, being in a damaged environment, and surrounded by construction.
This paper presents preliminary results of an experimental campaign on three beam-column joint subassemblies extracted from a 22-storey reinforced concrete frame building constructed in late 1980s at the Christchurch’s Central Business District (CBD) area, damaged and demolished after the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes sequence (CES). The building was designed following capacity design principles. Column sway (i.e., soft storey) mechanisms were avoided, and the beams were provided with plastic hinge relocation details at both beam-ends, aiming at developing plastic hinges away from the column faces. The specimens were tested under quasi-static cyclic displacement controlled lateral loading. One of the specimens, showing no visible residual cracks was cyclically tested in its as-is condition. The other two specimens which showed residual cracks varying between hairline and 1.0mm in width, were subjected to cyclic loading to simulate cracking patterns consistent with what can be considered moderate damage. The cracked specimens were then repaired with an epoxy injection technique and subsequently retested until reaching failure. The epoxy injection techniques demonstrated to be quite efficient in partly, although not fully, restoring the energy dissipation capacities of the damaged specimens at all beam rotation levels. The stiffness was partly restored within the elastic range and almost fully restored after the onset of nonlinear behaviour.
The Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 caused significant damage and disruption to the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. A Royal Commission was established to report on the causes of building failure as a result of the earthquakes as well as look at the legal and best-practice requirements for buildings in New Zealand Central Business Districts. The Royal Commission made 189 recommendations on a variety of matters including managing damaged buildings after an earthquake, the adequacy of building codes and standards, and the processes of seismic assessments of existing buildings to determine their earthquake vulnerability. In response the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, the agency responsible for administering building regulation in New Zealand, established a work programme to assist with the Canterbury rebuild and to implement the lessons learned throughout New Zealand. The five primary work streams in the programme are: • Facilitating the Canterbury Rebuild • Structural Performance and Design Standards • Geotechnical and structural guidance • Existing Building Resilience • Post Disaster Building Management This paper provides more detail on each of the work streams. There has been significant collaboration between the New Zealand Government and the research community, technical societies, and engineering consultants, both within New Zealand and internationally, to deliver the programme and improve the resilience of the New Zealand built environment. This has presented major challenges for an extremely busy industry in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. The paper identifies the items of work that have been completed and the work that is still in progress at the time of writing.
PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister for Building and Construction: Does he agree with Mainfreight founder and Chairman Bruce Plested that housing is a “social disgrace”, that the market cannot sort out this problem, and that real leadership and intestinal fortitude is needed now? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on real after-tax wages rising in New Zealand? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Will she apologise on behalf of the Government for the flawed handling of the Canterbury school mergers and closures after the 2011 earthquakes; if not, why not? ANDREW BAYLY to the Minister for Building and Construction: What progress has the Government made in improving the tenancy laws and guidance for dealing with the problem of methamphetamine testing and contamination? CARMEL SEPULONI to the Associate Minister for Social Housing: What motels has the Government purchased in response to the increased emergency housing demand, and how much has this cost? RON MARK to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on the Clutha-Southland electorate office issue even if facts known to him make doing so extraordinarily difficult? MAUREEN PUGH to the Minister of Corrections: How is Budget 2017 investing in rehabilitation and reintegration outcomes for offenders? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Local Government: Does she agree with the Prime Minister’s answer yesterday that drinking-water contamination in Havelock North was “about local government performance and overseeing ratepayer-funded assets whose purpose is to deliver clean and healthy water to its local people. The extensive inquiry into that incident was warranted by widespread illness in the area ... it is about local body performance in overseeing their clean water system”? BRETT HUDSON to the Minister of Local Government: What recent announcements has she made regarding Wellington’s resilience to natural hazards? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: Will the Government start building rail to the airport sooner if Auckland hosts the next America’s Cup regatta or will Aucklanders still have to wait 30 years? STUART NASH to the Minister of Police: Does she have any concerns about any of the results of the New Zealand Police Workplace Survey 2017; if so, what in particular? ALASTAIR SCOTT to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements has he made to improve school infrastructure in the Wairarapa?
METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for the Environment: Ki Te Minita mō Te Taiao: Ka tukua e ngā paerewa e whakaarohia akehia nei mō te pai ake o te wai i roto i te pūhera Wai Mā, te kaha kē atu, te iti kē iho rānei o te uru atu o te tūkinotanga ki roto i ō tātou awa wai, e ngā mea whakakapi? Translation: Do the proposed standards for water quality in the Clean Water package allow more pollution or less to enter our waterways than the ones they will replace? BRETT HUDSON to the Minister of Finance: How much is the Government committing to spend on infrastructure over the next 4 years? ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Given his predecessor told the Pike River families, “I’m here to give you absolute reassurance we’re committed to getting the boys out, and nothing’s going to change that”, when, if ever, will he be announcing the re-entry of the drift? STUART SMITH to the Minister of Transport: What announcements has he made recently regarding the Government’s commitment to reinstate key transport links following the Kaikōura earthquake? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Children: When was she first notified that the Ministry for Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki, or its predecessor CYF, were placing children and younger persons in a hotel or motel for short-term care without a supervisor, and what was her first action, if any? MELISSA LEE to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that 55,000 care and support workers will share in the $2 billion pay equity settlement announced on 18 April 2017? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Dominion Post editorial that his Government has “singularly failed to answer the pressures of Auckland”; if not, why does he think they would write this? ANDREW BAYLY to the Minister for Building and Construction: How do the latest reports on the level of building activity in Auckland and nationwide for the month, quarter, and year compare with 2016? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, how? PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Transport: Why has the completion of the $2.4 billion Western Ring Route been delayed, and when can Aucklanders expect the new motorway to be open? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Conservation: Is it Government policy to increase the logging of native forests on West Coast conservation land? Dr MEGAN WOODS to the Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration: Does she agree that the first homes in the East Frame will be completed 5 months ahead of schedule? Questions to Members CLARE CURRAN to the Chairperson of the Commerce Committee: Does she intend to call for further submissions on the petition of Dame Fiona Kidman before it is reported back to the House, in light of the recently released footage shot inside the drift of the Pike River mine?
Worldwide turbidity is a huge concern for the health of aquatic ecosystems. Human activities on the land such as construction, deforestation, agriculture, and mining all have impacts on the amount of particulate solids that enter the world’s waterways. These particulate solids can pose a number of risks to aquatic life, but primary among them is the turbidity that they create in the water column. The way suspended solids interact with light creates cloudiness in the water which interferes with the vision, and visually mediated behaviours of aquatic organisms, particularly fish. The Avon-Heathcote estuary of Christchurch, New Zealand, is one such body of water that is subject to tremendous variation in turbidity, no doubt exacerbated by the destruction of Christchurch in the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes, as well as the subsequent ongoing rebuild. The yellow eyed mullet, Aldrichetta Forsteri, is one species that is common with the estuary, and uses it as a habitat for breeding. Though very common throughout New Zealand, and even a part of the catch of commercial fisheries, the yellow eyed mullet is a largely unstudied organism, with virtually no published scientific enquiry based on the species. The present work assesses how several behaviours of the yellow eyed mullet are effected by acute turbidity at 10, 50, 90, 130 and 170 NTU, finding that: 1) The optomotor response of mullet to 2.5 mm stripes drops to insignificant levels between 10 and 50 NTU, 2) The swimming activity of the yellow eyed mullet is highest at 10 NTU and drops to a significantly lower level at higher turbidities, 3) The grouping behaviour of small groups of yellow eyed mullet are unchanged by increasing turbidity levels, 4) that yellow eyed mullet do not exhibit significantly different behavioural response to a simulated predator at any of the tested turbidities, and 5) that yellow eyed mullet to do significantly alter their oxygen consumption during exposure to the turbidities in an increasing series. The results presented in these studies indicate that turbidites above 50 NTU pose a significant risk to the lifestyle of the yellow eyed mullet, potentially impacting their ability to perceive their surroundings, feed, school, and avoid predation. Future work has a lot of ground to cover to more precisely determine the relationship between yellow eyed mullet behaviour and physiology, and the turbidity of their environment. In particular, future work should focus more closely on the turbidities between 10 and 50 NTU, as well as looking to field work to see what the predominant predators of the mullet are, and specifically whether turbidity increases or decreases the risk of mullet being subject to avian predation. There is also considerable scope for studies on the effects of chronic turbidity upon mullet, which will add understand to the predicament of escalating turbidity and its effects upon this common and yet mysterious native fish.