"Prior to the devastating 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes, the city of Christchurch was already exhibiting signs of a housing affordability crisis. The causes and symptoms were similar to those being experienced in Auckland, but the substantial damage to the housing stock caused by the earthquakes added new dimensions and impetus to the problem. Large swathes of the most affordable housing stock in the east of the city were effectively destroyed by the earthquakes. In itself this would have pushed the mean house price upwards, but compounding problems exacerbated the situation. These include the price effects of reduced supply of both rented and owned housing and increased demand from both displaced residents and an influx of rebuild workers. The need for additional temporary housing while repairs were undertaken and the associated insurance pay-outs bidding up rents with improved rental returns leading to increased interest in property investment. Land supply constraints and consenting issues inhibiting the build of new housing and political infighting and uncertainty regarding the future of parts of the city leading to a flight of development activity to peripheral locations and adjoining local authorities. Concerns that the erosion of the city council rating base combined with inadequacy of insurance cover for infrastructure will lead to large rates increases, increased development costs and reduced amenities and services in future years. These and other issuers will be elaborated on in this paper with a view to exploring the way forward for affordable housing Christchurch City."
At the conclusion of the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes more than 5100 homes had been deemed unsafe for habitation. The land and buildings of these were labelled “red zoned” and are too badly damaged for remediation. These homes have been demolished or are destined for demolition. To assist the red zone population to relocate, central government have offered to ‘buy out’ home owners at the Governmental Value (GV) that was last reviewed in 2007. While generous in the economic context at the time, the area affected was the lowest value land and housing in Christchurch and so there is a capital shortfall between the 2007 property value and the cost of relocating to more expensive properties. This shortfall is made worse by increasing present day values since the earthquakes. Red zone residents have had to relocate to the far North and Western extremities of Christchurch, and some chose to move even further to neighbouring towns or cities. The eastern areas and commercial centres close to the red zone are affected as well. They have lost critical mass which has negatively impacted businesses in the catchments of the Red Zone. This thesis aims to repopulate the suburbs most affected by the abandonment of the red zone houses. Because of the relative scarcity of sound building sites in the East and to introduce affordability to these houses, an alternative method of development is required than the existing low density suburban model. Smart medium density design will be tested as an affordable and appropriate means of living. Existing knowledge in this field will be reviewed, an analysis of what East Christchurch’s key characteristics are will occur, and an examination of built works and site investigations will also be conducted. The research finds that at housing densities of 40 units per hectare, the spatial, vehicle, aesthetic needs of East Christchurch can be accommodated. Centralising development is also found to offer better lifestyle choices than the isolated suburbs at the edges of Christchurch, to be more efficient using existing infrastructure, and to place less reliance on cars. Stronger communities are formed from the outset and for a full range of demographics. Eastern affordable housing options are realised and Christchurch’s ever expanding suburban tendencies are addressed. East Christchurch presently displays a gaping scar of devastated houses that ‘The New Eastside’ provides a bandage and a cure for. Displaced and dispossessed Christchurch residents can be re-housed within a new heart for East Christchurch.
Planning in New Zealand in 2014 has largely been dominated by housing and urban development, potential local government and legislative reforms, and water issues. This volume’s peer reviewed research, which combines Issues 1 and 2, focuses on these issues, but with perspectives and issues that are outside the mainstream. In our lead research article, John Ryks and his co-authors review the opportunities from Treaty settlements and legislative provisions and challenges for Māori participation in urban development, such as the balancing of matawaka and mana whenua perspectives. Water issues are picked up by Ronlyn Duncan and Phil Holland who each take constructively critical views toward some currently well-regarded approaches to resolutions. We have reflective and somewhat contrasting contributions from two highly respected semi-retired planners, Malcolm Douglass (FNZPI) and Derek Hall, that challenge aspects of New Zealand’s current approach to planning. In our outreach part of this Volume we include the response of some political parties to questions put to them about planning by LPR team member Nicole Read. Finally, Lincoln University appears to have turned a corner after the earthquakes, at least in the planning programmes.
DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government's economic programme supporting stronger regional job growth? Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Commerce: Is he aware of demands being made by the Countdown supermarket group for retrospective payments from New Zealand suppliers, with threats Countdown will not stock their products? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister for Economic Development: Why is the Government holding up economic development in Auckland's CBD, according to Auckland City officials, by delaying the opening of the City Rail Link until 2025? ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received about the state of the nation in relation to social outcomes? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he aware of any proposals to transport asbestos-contaminated material from the Christchurch rebuild to sub-standard landfills? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied New Zealanders are receiving timely and affordable healthcare? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Housing: What reports has he received on positive progress being advanced on the Government's housing agenda? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does he agree with the Prime Minister's statement on the minimum wage that "I think we've been pretty fair in what we've done in the past and we probably will be in the future"? CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister of Science and Innovation: How are the National Science Challenges bringing together the best scientific talent across New Zealand? HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister for Economic Development: Will he commit to spending the $41m on reducing child poverty, after signalling that he might not now give that money to Team New Zealand to compete in the next America's Cup? Dr RAJEN PRASAD to the Minister of Immigration: When he said in response to an oral question on 29 January 2014 that it was "a pretty simple process…to alert immigration authorities", what was his understanding of the process a complainant would go through? CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Associate Minister of Transport: What progress is being made in improving road safety?
Dr JIAN YANG to the Minister of Finance: What changes has the Government made in recent years to make the tax system fairer and to help families and businesses get ahead?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Internal Affairs: On what basis was the recall and cancellation of New Zealand Passport LN138690 undertaken?
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Associate Minister of Finance: Does he still believe that a 33 cent top marginal income tax rate is the reason for fewer departures to Australia in 2014?
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: Did she write a new preference factor for Partnership School applicants on the 14 November education report "Confirming Round Two of Applications to Operate Partnership Schools"; if so, on what advice?
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Conservation: What reports has he received on the extent of the damage to West Coast forests from Cyclone Ita and what estimates are there of the area affected and the volume of wood felled?
PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Housing: How many homes out of the 5,000 earthquake damaged Housing New Zealand homes have completed repairs as part of its Repair 5000 programme?
TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made to celebrate and recognise highly effective and innovative practice happening across the education system?
Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Defence: Has there been a reduction in the capacity of the Army in the last three years to sustain an overseas deployment; if so, why?
MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What support is the Ministry of Social Development providing to people in Christchurch still dealing with the impact of the earthquakes?
GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Conservation: Does he agree with the statement given on behalf of the Minister of Energy and Resources that "there has not been a single observation of a Māui's dolphin in the block offer area"?
CAROL BEAUMONT to the Minister of Justice: Given the magnitude of the problem of family violence, is it acceptable to her that none of the Family Violence Death Review Committee's recommendations from their last annual report have been completed, and no action has been taken on a number of recommendations around funding family violence training for professionals, and addressing the need for better multi-agency practice addressing family violence?
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Statistics: What is the Government doing to modernise the next census?
Following the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes Christchurch is undergoing extensive development on the periphery of the city. This has been driven in part by the large numbers of people who have lost their homes. Prior to the earthquakes, Christchurch was already experiencing placeless subdivisions and now these are being rolled out rapidly thanks to the efficiency of a formula that has been embraced by the Council, developers and the public alike. However, sprawling subdivisions have a number of issues including inefficient land use, limited housing types, high dependence on motor vehicles and low levels of resilience and no sense of place. Sense of place is of particular interest due to its glaring absence from new subdivisions and its growing importance in the literature.
Research shows that sense of place has benefits to our feeling of belonging, well-being, and self-identity, particularly following a disaster. It improves the resilience and sustainability of our living environment and fosters a connection to the landscape thereby making us better placed to respond to future changes. Despite these benefits, current planning models such as new urbanism and transit-oriented design tend to give sense of place a low priority and as a result it can get lost. Given these issues, the focus of this research is “can landscape driven sense of place drive subdivision design without compromising on other urban planning criteria to produce subdivisions that address the issues of sprawl, as well as achieving the benefits associated with a strong sense of place that can improve our overall quality of life?”
Answering this question required a thorough review of current urban planning and sense of place literature. This was used to critique existing subdivisions to gain a thorough understanding of the issues. The outcomes of this led to extensive design exploration which showed that, not only is it possible to design a subdivision with sense of place as the key driver but by doing this, the other urban planning criteria become easier to achieve.
