Christchurch Press Infographic: 16 November 2012 (2), public transport
Images, UC QuakeStudies
A map showing proposed public transport routes in the central city.
A map showing proposed public transport routes in the central city.
A chart showing the drop in public transport patronage following the earthquakes.
A video of an interview with Wayne Holton-Jeffreys, Public Transport Manager at Enivonment Canterbury, about the bus shortage in Christchurch after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
The context of this study is the increasing need for public transport as issues over high private vehicle usage are becoming increasingly obvious. Public transport services need to compete with private transport to improve patronage, and issues with reliability need to be addressed. Bus bunching affects reliability through disruptions to the scheduled headways. The purpose of this study was to collect and analyse data to compare how travel time and dwell time vary, to explore the variation of key variables, and to better understand the sources of these variations. The Orbiter bus service in Christchurch was used as a case study, as it is particularly vulnerable to bus bunching. The dwell time was found to be more variable than travel time. It appeared the Canterbury earthquake had significantly reduced the average speeds for the Orbiter service. In 1964, Newell and Potts described a basic bus bunching theory, which was used as the basis for an Excel bus bunching model. This model allows input variables to vary stochastically. Random values were generated from four specified distributions derived from manually collected data, allowing variance across all bus platforms and buses. However the complexity resulted in stability and difficulty in achieving convergence, so the model was run in single Monte Carlo simulations. The outputs were realistic and showed a higher degree of bunching behaviour than previous models. The model demonstrated bunching phenomena that had not been observed in previous models, including spontaneously un-pairing, overtaking of buses delayed at platforms, and odd-numbered bunches of three buses. Furthermore, the study identified areas of further research for data collection and model development.
A video of a press conference with Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee and Mayor Lianne Dalziel. The conference was held to announce the implementation of the Accessible Transport Plan. Brownlee announces the introduction of a 30 km/h speed limit in the inner city zone, facilitating the use of bicycles and encouraging pedestrian movement within the centre city. Lianne also talks about how the plan allows for a clean, green, safe, and accessible city, reflecting the public's visions in the Share an Idea campaign.
ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: What are the priorities for the Government in assisting communities affected by yesterday’s earthquake? MATT DOOCEY to the Minister of Finance: What advice has he received about the economic impact of the Kaikōura earthquake? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Transport: What updates can he give on the transport sector’s response to earthquake damage to State Highway 1 and the rail line between Seddon and Cheviot? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: What is his initial assessment of the fiscal impact of yesterday morning’s earthquake and what, if any, new or changed Budget allocations is he considering in response to the earthquake? PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Civil Defence: How is the Government supporting people affected by the Kaikōura earthquake? RON MARK to the Minister of Civil Defence: Can the Government assure New Zealanders on our level of preparedness for all natural disasters? SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Transport: What roads and public transport services are currently not operational following damage from the earthquake yesterday and when is it expected access and services will be restored? BRETT HUDSON to the Minister of Transport: What action is the Government taking to repair damaged transport infrastructure following the Kaikōura earthquake? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Broadcasting: Will she join with me to acknowledge the work of all media in New Zealand, which is so important in times of natural disaster and crisis; if so, will she consider increasing our public broadcaster Radio New Zealand’s funding in Budget 2017? CLAYTON MITCHELL to the Minister of Civil Defence: What progress has been made, if any, on new civil defence legislation which focuses on large and significant events such as the Christchurch and Kaikōura earthquakes? ALASTAIR SCOTT to the Minister of Health: What updates has he received on the Government’s health response to the Kaikōura earthquake? CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Civil Defence: What actions have been taken by Civil Defence to ensure those people in the areas worst hit by the earthquake have enough food, clothing, water, and shelter?
Following devastating earthquakes in 2010 and 2011 in Christchurch, there is an opportunity to use sustainable urban design variables to redevelop the central city in order to address climate change concerns and reduce CO₂ emissions from land transport. Literature from a variety of disciplines establishes that four sustainable urban design variables; increased density, mixed-use development, street layout and city design, and the provision of sustainable public transport, can reduce car dependency and vehicle kilometres travelled within urban populations- widely regarded as indicators of the negative environmental effects of transport. The key question for the research is; to what extent has this opportunity been seized by NZ’s Central Government who are overseeing the central city redevelopment? In order to explore this question the redevelopment plans for the central city of Christchurch are evaluated against an adapted urban design matrix to determine whether a reduction in CO₂ emissions from land transport is likely to be achieved through their implementation. Data obtained through interviews with experts is used to further explore the extent to which sustainable urban design variables can be employed to enhance sustainability and reduce CO₂ emissions. The analysis of this data shows that the four urban design variables will feature in the Central Government’s redevelopment plans although the extent to which they are employed and their likely success in reducing CO₂ emissions will vary. Ultimately, the opportunity to redevelop the central city of Christchurch to reduce CO₂ emissions from land transport will be undermined due to timeframe, co-ordination, and leadership barriers.
<b>Aotearoa has undoubtedly some of the most beautiful landscapes in the world, a privilege for its inhabitants. However, as our cities have developed post-colonisation, the connection between the natural environment and its occupants has diminished. Designers play a vital role within an ever evolving world to progress the built environment in a way that reflects and restores vital values that have been deprioritised. Future practice should prioritise diversity, care for the land, enhancement of community space, and sustainable practices.</b> This research sets out to demonstrate that new design methodologies can encourage kaitiakitanga, whilst meeting the needs of urban public space. Initially through critical analysis and literature based research, a study of Ōtautahi Christchurch, the South Island’s largest city, was undertaken. The principles of a ‘15 minute city’ were also explored and applied to the city, establishing issues within the built environment that drove the overall research direction. Through the tools of critical reflection and a research through design methodology, a design toolkit was constructed. This toolkit sets out to provide designers with a simple streamlined method of developing urban interventions that are sustainable and beneficial for human well-being. The toolkit incorporates an abstraction of the ‘15 minute city’ ideology and introduces the concepts of evolving green transportation routes within cities. Ōtautahi Christchurch, a city with a significant history of earthquake-caused damage, was chosen as the primary site for the application of this research’s proposed toolkit. The city becomes a canvas for an urban rebuild that explores and aims to set a precedent for a progressive 21st-century city. A key finding as the toolkit research developed was the idea of a ‘temporary’ phase or intervention, being added to traditional design methodologies prior to permanent building. The research explains how this temporary phase could more actively engage diverse user groups and create active conversations between communities and designers. The refined toolkit sets outs proposed timeline phases, methods of site analysis and development of design drivers. Alongside this, a modular architectural system establishes a design proposal for the temporary phase of an individual site within an evolving green route. This outcome provides further opportunity for realistic testing, which would actively involve communities and aims to shift our priorities within urban development. The introduction of the ‘temporary’ phase is beneficial in mitigating psychological implications on people and limiting physical impacts on the landscape. The final design stage of the thesis applied the toolkit process to three sites in Ōtautahi Christchurch. Through a holistic lens, the toolkit framework set out methods to collate information that provides guidance for development on the sites. While some layers are initiated simply by recognising site characteristics, others are informed through software such as GIS. Connected by a proposed green transport route, the three initial sites are developed with temporary interventions that utilise the modular design set out previously in the research. Contextualising the interventions on real world sites tested the flexibility of the system and allowed for critical reflection on the applicability of the toolkit to Aotearoa. The research concludes by identifying future research opportunities and speculates on possible applications of its findings within the real world. Temporary Permanence highlights the significant role that we, as designers, have in shifting urban priorities to create more holistic, sustainable, and inclusive cities for people and the planet.
A video of Lianne Dalziel speaking to a public gathering about her reasons for standing for the mayoralty of Christchurch. Dalziel talks about starting her mayoralty where Share an Idea left off, making the Council a high performing team, and getting the community involved in the decisions about the future of the city. The video also includes footage of Dalziel taking a tour of the Christchurch central city. Dalziel visits the ChristChurch Cathedral, pointing out a sign which reads, "The earthquakes stopped us, but inept procedures are killing us". She also visits the new Westende Jewellers building, which she notes was the first rebuild in the Christchurch central city but will come down as part of CERA's Transport Plan. Dalziel is shown socialising with members of the public and watching the Christchurch Wizard bless New Regent Street.
Aotearoa New Zealand’s population has grown rapidly from 3.85 million in 2000, to 5 million in 2020. Ethnic diversity has consequently increased. Territorial Authorities (TAs) undertaking statutory consultation and wider public engagement processes need to respond to increased diversity and foster inclusivity. Inclusivity is necessary to facilitate a greater understanding of TA statutory functions, as well as to encourage awareness and participation in annual planning processes, and resource management plans and consents. We examined perceptions, and experiences, of planning within the ethnic Chinese immigrant population of Christchurch. The Chinese ethnic group is a significant part of the city’s population and is in itself derived from diverse cultural and language backgrounds. We surveyed 111 members of this community, via social media and in person, to identify environmental and planning issues of concern to them. We sought to ascertain their previous engagement with planning processes and to gauge their willingness for future involvement. We also undertook a small number of semi-structured interviews with Chinese immigrants to explore their experiences with planning in more detail. Results showed only 6% of respondents had been engaged in any planning processes, despite only 20% being unwilling to participate. We analysed these responses by gender, age, visa category, and length of time resident in Christchurch. Notwithstanding the low level of reported engagement, earthquake recovery (70% of respondents) along with water quality, transport, and air quality were the most important issues of concern. However, there was a general lack of awareness of the ability to make public submissions on these and other issues, and of the statutory responsibilities of TAs. We discuss possible explanations and provide several suggestions for TAs to increase awareness and to improve engagement. This includes further research to assist in identifying the nature of barriers as well as the effectiveness of trialling different solutions.
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How many working-age people are currently receiving a main benefit and how does this compare to July 2010? 2. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the cost of damage from the Canterbury earthquake? 3. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Will he agree to a full public and independent Commission of Inquiry into the collapse of South Canterbury Finance? 4. METIRIA TUREI to the Attorney-General: Does he stand by his statement that the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill "treats all New Zealanders including Māori without discrimination"? 5. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement that "the Government is totally committed to the SuperGold Card"? 6. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What is the Government doing to support the Canterbury community through the earthquake recovery? 7. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all of her statements in answer to oral question No. 8 yesterday? 8. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What reports has he received on the Canterbury District Health Board's actions following the Canterbury earthquake? 9. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: Given his answer yesterday that he agreed with the Prime Minister's statement earlier this year, "in the end if we can't reach an agreement then the status quo will remain", what acknowledgement, if any, has he received from the Māori Party that the new legal framework for settling foreshore and seabed claims will be "durable"? 10. Dr JACKIE BLUE to the Minister of Transport: What updates has he received on transport in and around Canterbury following the earthquake and numerous aftershocks? 11. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Is she currently considering any changes to employment law that were not included in the changes announced at the National Party Conference; if so, what are they? 12. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Housing: How is the Department of Building and Housing working to keep landlords and tenants informed of their rights and responsibilities following the Christchurch earthquake?
TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on progress in building a faster-growing economy? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Ministers; if so, why? Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress can he report on the numbers of patients receiving elective surgery? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by her answer to oral questions on Tuesday that "There is in New Zealand no actual poverty line" and "I do not see the measurement as a priority"? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he agree with the statement made by the Hon Bill English, in relation to the release of Natasha Fuller's private details by his Social Development Minister, that, "People who enter into public debate are welcome to do so … and should provide their full information to the public"? CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Broadcasting: What percentage of households in Hawkes Bay and on the West Coast of the South Island have gone digital ahead of the digital switchover in these regions on 30 September? CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: What assistance will be available to families unable to afford the fee of over $900 she proposes to introduce in order to access the new Family Dispute Resolution Service? JOHN HAYES to the Minister for Courts: In light of the opening of the temporary courthouse in Masterton last week, what is the range of services that courts can now offer in Masterton? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Was restoration of the Christchurch Cathedral included in the Christchurch Central City Recovery Plan; if not, why not? SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Is she satisfied with the action this Government has taken to improve the lives of women in New Zealand? JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Is she concerned that Wellington Rape Crisis is shutting its doors one day a week because of funding shortfalls? IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Minister of Transport: Which commuter rail services, if any, do not receive funding from the New Zealand Transport Agency?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Is it still a fundamental purpose of his Government to narrow the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia, and to grow local wages in New Zealand? TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on the economy? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: In dollar terms, what is the shortfall in the tax-take for the nine months to March revealed in yesterday’s Financial Statements compared to October’s pre-election update? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: How much has been raised to date by the Earthquake Kiwi Bonds and, at this rate, how many years will it take to cover the Government’s estimated $5.5 billion liability resulting from the Canterbury earthquakes? Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development: How will Budget 2012 provide greater support for young people most at risk of long-term welfare dependency? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he stand by the Prime Minister’s statement regarding asset sales that “We are not going to do anything tricky there”? Dr JIAN YANG to the Associate Minister of Health: How is the Government expanding its programme to reduce rheumatic fever in vulnerable communities? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: Does he stand by all his comments regarding housing? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: What is the plan to pay for the Government’s transport expenditure given that the Ministry of Transport’s Briefing to the Incoming Minister warns of a funding shortfall of $4.9 billion if high oil prices and low GDP growth continue? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government improving value for money in its procurement of services for the public sector? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement that “I do not want to see unnecessary change for change’s sake. Rather I am looking to put in place pragmatic solutions as we implement our manifesto commitments and let employers, employees and business focus on what they do best.”? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he still have confidence in the Minister for Social Development and the Associate Ministers for Social Development; if so, why?
MARAMA DAVIDSON to the Prime Minister: Ka tū a ia i runga i tana kōrero mō te iti rawa o te mahi haumi i roto ratonga tūmataiti, ā, nā runga i tērā, “we didn't know it would be this bad” ā, mēnā kua pēnei rawa, ka pēhea te nui o te iti rawa o te mahi haumi nei? Translation: Does she stand by her statement on underinvestment in public services that “we didn't know it would be this bad”, and if so, how significant is this underinvestment? Hon SIMON BRIDGES to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s policies and actions? Hon AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: Is he committed to reducing core Crown net debt to 20 percent of GDP by 30 June 2022? Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the state of the New Zealand economy? Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his statements and actions? JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Transport: What is the total increased level of funding for the Public Transport activity class for the next 10 years if the mid-point level of funding proposed in the draft Government Policy Statement in the 2018/19 year continues at that level for 10 years without increase; and can he confirm that when that increased funding is added together with mid-point level funding for the new Rapid Transit and Transitional Rail activity classes over 10 years, the total new and increased funding for these three activity classes is $5.398 billion? Dr DUNCAN WEBB to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: What reports has she seen about the financial impact of remedial repairs in Canterbury by EQC? Hon NATHAN GUY to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he stand by all his Government’s actions in the agricultural sector? Hon PAULA BENNETT to the Minister of Employment: Does he stand by all his policies, statements, and actions? JAN TINETTI to the Minister of Education: What funding challenges does the early child education sector face? BRETT HUDSON to the Minister for Government Digital Services: Does she agree with the comment made by ICT veteran and expert in the industry, Ian Apperley, who said “when you read the Government’s Chief Technology Officer job description it occurs to me that making the role effective is provably impossible. It is largely waffly which means the Government may not know what it wants”; if not, why not? Dr LIZ CRAIG to the Minister of Health: What advice has he received about DHB deficit levels?
Following a major earthquake event, essential public amenities such as medical facilities and transport networks need to remain functional - not only to fulfil their ongoing role in serving the community but also to cope with the added and immediate demand of a population affected by a natural disaster. Furthermore, the economic implications of wide spread damage to housing and commercial facilities should not be discounted. A shift in design approach is required that is consistent with current trends towards performance based building design. The present aim is to achieve seismic energy dissipation during the earthquake event, without the aftermath of damage to structural elements, whilst maintaining design economies. Structures permitted to rock on their foundations and provide recoverable rotations at the beam-column interfaces offer significant advantages over those using conventional ductile detailing. A jointed construction philosophy can be applied whereby structural elements are connected with unbonded prestressing tendons. Supplemental damping is provided by replaceable flexural steel components designed to deform inelastically. For this research a multi-storey test building of one quarter scale has been constructed and tested on an earthquake simulator at the University of Canterbury. A computer model has been developed and a set ofpreliminary design procedures proposed.
Questions to Ministers 1. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Finance: What steps are the Government and the Earthquake Commission taking to streamline the Canterbury earthquake claims process? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "the vast majority" of people will be "better off" as a result of his tax switch on 1 October 2010? 3. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Conservation: Does she agree with Forest and Bird that "many endangered species will meet a watery death, or be rudely shunted from their homes", if the Mōkihinui dam is given the green light? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for ACC: Is he satisfied with the performance of ACC? 5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Economic Development: What steps will the Government take to aid the recovery of the Canterbury region from the recent major earthquake? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What advice, if any, did Treasury receive from KordaMentha in relation to South Canterbury Finance's financial condition prior to approving the extension of the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme, and did this advice question whether such an extension was appropriate? 7. COLIN KING to the Minister of Transport: What is the Government doing to address challenges in delivering supplies into the area affected by the Canterbury earthquake? 8. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Health: When will all the District Health Board Annual Plans for 2010/11 be publicly available? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Education: How were Canterbury schools affected by last Saturday's earthquake, and what is the current situation for schools in the region? 10. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: Is his objective under the new foreshore and seabed bill to settle the protracted controversy around foreshore and seabed? 11. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Agriculture: What is the Government doing to support the rural Canterbury community through the earthquake recovery? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by all of the statements made on her behalf in response to question for oral answer No. 11 on 9 September 2010? Questions to Members 1. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions were received on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No. 2) as at 5pm Monday, 13 September 2010?
A review of the week's news including... An immigration lawyer says 'paying for jobs' is so rampant in New Zealand there needs to be a fresh look at powers available to officials, criminals are using sex to blackmail Indian male students, Auckland lays out its plan to spend 83 billion dollars on transport, the electrified section of the main trunk line between Auckland and Wellington could be mothballed, frustrated advocates are calling for better reporting of suicides committed by current and former members of the military, doctors say making voluntary euthanasia legal would involve many complex and difficult decisions and New Zealand should avoid it, the Morning Report Wellington mayoral candidates debate, a Maori fisheries body wants the Maori Party to abandon its support for the Government if plans for a Kermadec ocean sanctuary go ahead unchanged, Maori representation becomes a virtual no-go area for those vying for public office in New Plymouth, Colin Craig denies ever sending his former press secretary explicit text messages, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child raises concerns about the naming of the new children's ministry, MPs hear emotional pleas from the family of soldiers killed in action and buried in Malaysia for the government to bring their remains home, Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band will perform in Christchurch on the eve of the sixth anniversary of the Canterbury earthquakes this summer and Prince Charles praises New Zealand soldiers who fought at the Somme at a centennary ceremony in Northern France.
Fine grained sediment deposition in urban environments during natural hazard events can impact critical infrastructure and properties (urban terrain) leading to reduced social and economic function and potentially adverse public health effects. Therefore, clean-up of the sediments is required to minimise impacts and restore social and economic functionality as soon as possible. The strategies employed to manage and coordinate the clean-up significantly influence the speed, cost and quality of the clean-up operation. Additionally, the physical properties of the fine grained sediment affects the clean-up, transport, storage and future usage of the sediment. The goals of the research are to assess the resources, time and cost required for fine grained sediment clean-up in an urban environment following a disaster and to determine how the geotechnical properties of sediment will affect urban clean-up strategies. The thesis focuses on the impact of fine grained sediment (<1 mm) deposition from three liquefaction events during the Canterbury earthquake sequence (2010-2011) on residential suburbs and transport networks in Christchurch. It also presents how geotechnical properties of the material may affect clean-up strategies and methods by presenting geotechnical analysis of tephra material from the North Island of New Zealand. Finally, lessons for disaster response planning and decision making for clean-up of sediment in urban environments are presented. A series of semi-structured interviews of key stakeholders supported by relevant academic literature and media reports were used to record the clean-up operation coordination and management and to make a preliminary qualification of the Christchurch liquefaction ejecta clean-up (costs breakdown, time, volume, resources, coordination, planning and priorities). Further analysis of the costs and resources involved for better accuracy was required and so the analysis of Christchurch City Council road management database (RAMM) was done. In order to make a transition from general fine sediment clean-up to specific types of fine disaster sediment clean-up, adequate information about the material properties is required as they will define how the material will be handled, transported and stored. Laboratory analysis of young volcanic tephra from the New Zealand’s North Island was performed to identify their geotechnical properties (density, granulometry, plasticity, composition and angle of repose). The major findings of this research were that emergency planning and the use of the coordinated incident management system (CIMS) system during the emergency were important to facilitate rapid clean-up tasking, management of resources and ultimately recovery from widespread and voluminous liquefaction ejecta deposition in eastern Christchurch. A total estimated cost of approximately $NZ 40 million was calculated for the Christchurch City clean-up following the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence with a partial cost of $NZ 12 million for the Southern part of the city, where up to 33% (418 km) of the road network was impacted by liquefaction ejecta and required clearing of the material following the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Over 500,000 tonnes of ejecta has been stockpiled at Burwood landfill for all three liquefaction inducing earthquake events. The average cost per kilometre for the event clean-up was $NZ 5,500/km (4 September 2010), $NZ 11,650/km (22 February 2011) and $NZ 11,185/km (13 June 2011). The duration of clean-up time of residential properties and the road network was approximately two to three months for each of the three liquefaction ejecta events; despite events volumes and spatial distribution of ejecta. Interviews and quantitative analysis of RAMM data revealed that the experience and knowledge gained from the Darfield earthquake (4 September 2010) clean-up increased the efficiency of the following Christchurch earthquake induced liquefaction ejecta clean-up events. Density, particle size, particle shape, clay content and moisture content, are the important geotechnical properties that need to be considered when planning for a clean-up method that incorporates collection, transport and disposal or storage. The geotechnical properties for the tephra samples were analysed to increase preparedness and reaction response of potentially affected North Island cities from possible product from the active volcanoes in their region. The geotechnical results from this study show that volcanic tephra could be used in road or construction material but the properties would have to be further investigated for a New Zealand context. Using fresh volcanic material in road, building or flood control construction requires good understanding of the material properties and precaution during design and construction to extra care, but if well planned, it can be economically beneficial.
This research attempts to understand whether community resilience and perceived livability are influenced by housing typologies in Christchurch, New Zealand. Using recent resident surveys undertaken by the Christchurch City Council, two indexes were created to reflect livability and community resilience. Indicators used to create both indexes included (1) enjoyment living in neighbourhood (2) satisfaction with local facilities (3) safety walking and (4) safety using public transport, (5) sense of community (6) neighbour interactions, (7) home ownership and (8) civic engagement. Scores were attributed to 72 neighbourhoods across Christchurch –and each neighbourhood was classified in one of the following housing typologies; (1) earthquake damaged, (2) relatively undamaged, (3) medium density and (4) greenfield developments. Spatial analysis of index scores and housing classifications suggest housing typologies do influence resident’s perceived livability and community bonds to an extent. It was found that deprivation also had a considerable influence on these indexes as well as residential stability. These additional influences help explain why neighbourhoods within the same housing classification differ in their index scores. Based on these results, several recommendations have been made to the CCC in relation to future research, urban development strategies and suburb specific renewal projects. Of chief importance, medium density neighbourhoods and deprived neighbourhoods require conscious efforts to foster community resilience. Results indicate that community resilience might be more important than livability in having a positive influence on the lived experience of residents. While thoughtful design and planning are important, this research suggests geospatial research tools could enable better community engagement outcomes and planning outcomes, and this could be interwoven into proactive and inclusive planning approaches like placemaking.
Disasters can create the equivalent of 20 years of waste in only a few days. Disaster waste can have direct impacts on public health and safety, and on the environment. The management of such waste has a great direct cost to society in terms of labor, equipment, processing, transport and disposal. Disaster waste management also has indirect costs, in the sense that slow management can slow down a recovery, greatly affecting the ability of commerce and industry to re-start. In addition, a disaster can lead to the disruption of normal solid waste management systems, or result in inappropriate management that leads to expensive environmental remediation. Finally, there are social impacts implicit in disaster waste management decisions because of psychological impact we expect when waste is not cleared quickly or is cleared too quickly. The paper gives an overview of the challenge of disaster waste management, examining issues of waste quantity and composition; waste treatment; environmental, economic, and social impacts; health and safety matters; and planning. Christchurch, New Zealand, and the broader region of Canterbury were impacted during this research by a series of shallow earthquakes. This has led to the largest natural disaster emergency in New Zealand’s history, and the management of approximately 8 million tons of building and infrastructure debris has become a major issue. The paper provides an overview of the status of disaster waste management in Christchurch as a case study. A key conclusion is the vital role of planning in effective disaster waste management. In spite of the frequency of disasters, in most countries the ratio of time spent on planning for disaster waste management to the time spent on normal waste management is extremely low. Disaster waste management also requires improved education or training of those involved in response efforts. All solid waste professionals have a role to play to respond to the challenges of disaster waste management.
1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Has the tax switch which he promised would leave no-one worse off fully compensated all New Zealanders for the rise in the cost of living over the last year; if not, which groups are worse off? 2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree that due to inflation, no new spending in the upcoming Budget is the equivalent of a cut in real terms? 3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: What tax changes take effect on or around 1 April? 4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Why did he announce on 17 March 2011 that the Government would carry all the costs of earthquake reconstruction on its balance sheet with no reduction in operating spending, when the Prime Minister said just three days later that new operating spending would be reduced to zero? 5. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Education: What progress has been made re-opening schools and early childhood education centres in Christchurch following the 22 February earthquake? 6. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Civil Defence: To date, how many buildings have been demolished in Canterbury without notifications to the building or business owners? 7. HONE HARAWIRA to the Attorney-General: Is he satisfied that he has the support required for the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill to pass into law? 8. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: What impact, if any, will the Christchurch earthquake have on the Government's employment law changes due to be implemented on 1 April? 9. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Corrections: What progress has been made toward the implementation of the smoking ban in New Zealand prisons? 10. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: By what date will the 75 percent of urban New Zealanders receive ultra-fast broadband under his current proposal? 11. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that the "Government will build the effectiveness of New Zealand's public transport networks" and "will be working closely with the Auckland Council as they develop their strategic vision for the City through the Auckland Spatial Plan"? 12. TODD McCLAY to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What counselling support is available for Cantabrians impacted by the earthquake?
1. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy? 2. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: Does she agree that the test of practicability in the Health and Safety in Employment (Mining-Underground) Regulations 1999 is likely to result in different mines having different safety standards, in contrast to the regulations in place until 1992? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: In light of his comment that "New Zealand is to be congratulated because, at least in terms of the gender pay gap, ours is the third lowest in the OECD", does that mean he is satisfied with the 10.6 percent gap between men's and women's pay in our country? 4. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What reports has she received on the latest benefit numbers? 5. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he consider the allocation of the value of the land within the rating valuation process to be robust, when it has produced such variable outcomes, leaving many in the red zone with insufficient funds to buy a section to take advantage of the replacement option in their insurance policy? 6. Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister for the Environment: What work is his Ministry doing to help New Zealand take up the opportunity from green growth following the OECD May 2011 report on the high expected global demand for such products and services? 7. Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: How many human resources contracts, if any, were let by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade without tenders being invited in 2010/2011, and what criteria were used to assess non-tendered contractors? 8. PAUL QUINN to the Minister of Transport: What is the Government doing to improve Wellington's commuter rail network? 9. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "there is no question in my mind - someone would be better off in paid employment than on welfare. If they were not, that is a real indictment on the welfare system"? 10. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Finance: When he said that "I did visit the Chinese Investment Corporation … They are very pleased with New Zealand's economic policy", was one of the policies he discussed with this foreign sovereign wealth fund his plan for privatising state assets? 11. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Broadcasting: What recent announcements has the Government made on progress towards digital switchover? 12. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement to the Cabinet Expenditure Control Committee that "we may need to take some tough choices regarding the scope and range of services the public health system can provide to New Zealanders"?
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon RODNEY HIDE to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Does she accept her Ministry's advice that the value of New Zealand's onshore minerals excluding hydrocarbons is $194 billion overall with $80 billion estimated in Schedule 4 land; if so, what plans does the Government have to allow their development? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister for the Rugby World Cup: What advice has the Prime Minister, the Government or Rugby New Zealand 2011 been given on Christchurch's ability to host Rugby World Cup matches later this year? 3. CHESTER BORROWS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy's prospects after New Zealand meets the immediate challenges of the Christchurch earthquake? 4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: Would he indicate his agreement to a further extension, if it were required, to the report back date for the Telecommunications (TSO, Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill? 5. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Minister of Agriculture: Is he concerned to learn that New Zealand's first majority Māori-owned dairy company, Miraka, has reportedly stated that there is a serious risk that Fonterra's proposed Trading Among Farmers exchange will be illiquid, volatile and unstable; if so, what assurances can he give Miraka and other dairy processors and industry groups, that anti-competitive behaviour will not be tolerated? 6. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Acting Minister for Economic Development: Has he been advised by the Prime Minister whether his appointment as Acting Minister for Economic Development is temporary or expected to carry on to the election? 7. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Education: What progress has been made on re-opening Christchurch schools and early childhood education centres since the 22 February earthquake? 8. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Does he favour the sale of any public hospitals in New Zealand; if so, which one or ones? 9. SIMON BRIDGES to the Minister for Building and Construction: What advice has he received from the Department of Building and Housing regarding last month's Christchurch earthquake? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: What factors did she consider in deciding to increase the minimum wage by 25 cents from 1 April in her latest review? 11. CHRIS TREMAIN to the Minister of Transport: What progress has been made on roading projects in the Hawke's Bay region? 12. GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Finance: What steps, if any, is he taking to reduce New Zealand's economic vulnerability that stems from dependence on oil? Questions to Members 1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submissions have been received so far on the Telecommunications (TSO, Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill? 2. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submitters on the Telecommunications (TSO, Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill have requested an oral hearing? 3. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: Is he aware of any complaints about times allocated to submitters on the Telecommunications (TSO, Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill?
It is not a matter of if a major earthquake will happen in New Zealand, it is when. Earthquakes wreak havoc, cut off power and water supply, lines of communication, sewer, supply chains, and transport infrastructure. People get injured and whole communities can get cut off the rest of the country for extended periods of time. Countries taking measures to increase the population's preparedness tend to suffer less severe consequences than those that do not. Disaster management authorities deliver comprehensive instructions and preparation guidance, yet communities remain grossly underprepared. There are multiple factors that influence motivation for preparedness. Personal experience is one of the most significant factors that influence preparedness motivation. Not many people will experience a severe and damaging earthquake in their lifetime. A serious game (SG) that is a computer simulation of an earthquake is a tool that can let participants experience the earthquake and its aftermath from the safety of their computer. The main result of this research is a positive answer to the question: Can a serious game motivate people to prepare for earthquakes at least just as good as a personal experience of at least a moderate earthquake? There are different levels of immersion this serious game can be implemented at. In this thesis the same earthquake experience scenario – SG “ShakeUp” is implemented as a desktop application and a virtual reality (VR) application. A user study is conducted with the aim of comparing the motivation level achieved by the two versions of the SG “ShakeUp”. In this study no benefits of using VR over traditional desktop application were found: participants trying both versions of the SG “ShakeUp” reported similar levels of motivation to prepare for earthquakes immediately after the experiment. This means that both versions of the experience were equally effective in motivating participants to prepare for earthquakes. An additional benefit of this result is that the cheaper and easier to deliver desktop version can be widely used in various education campaigns. Participants reported being more motivated to prepare for earthquakes by either version of the SG “ShakeUp” than by any other contributing factor, including their previous earthquake experience or participation in a public education campaign. Both versions of the SG “ShakeUp” can successfully overcome personal bias, unrealistic optimism, pessimism, lack of perceived control over one’s earthquake preparation actions, fatalism, and sense of helplessness in the face of the earthquakes and motivate the individual to prepare for earthquakes. Participants without the prior earthquake experience benefit most from the SG “ShakeUp” regardless of the version tried, compared to the participants who had experienced an earthquake: significantly more of them will reconsider their current level of earthquake preparedness; about 24% more of them attribute their increased level of motivation to prepare for earthquakes to the SG “ShakeUp”. For every earthquake preparation action there is about 25% more people who felt motivated to do it after trying the SG “ShakeUp” than those who have done this preparation action before the experiment. After trying either version of the SG “ShakeUp”, people who live in a free standing house and those who live in a rental property reported highest levels of intent to carry on with the preparation actions. The proposed application prototype has been discussed with the University of Canterbury Earthquake Centre and received very positive feedback as having potential for practical use by various disaster management authorities and training institutions. The research shows that the SG “ShakeUp” motivates people to prepare for earthquakes as good as a personal earthquake experience and can be successfully used in various education campaigns.