Construction Management Plan
Articles, UC QuakeStudies
A plan which describes how SCIRT is to carry out construction works. The first version of this plan was produced on 10 August 2011.
A plan which describes how SCIRT is to carry out construction works. The first version of this plan was produced on 10 August 2011.
A plan which defines the procurement activities to be applied to SCIRT and explains how those activities are to be undertaken to meet SCIRT objectives and requirements. The first version of this plan was produced on 14 September 2011.
A plan which proactively addresses the risk of fraud and lays out the actions that SCIRT will take when any suspected fraud is reported or discovered. The first version of this plan was produced on 12 February 2014.
A plan which outlines how timely and accurate information relating to estimating, actual project costs, future commitments and total forecast cost will be managed and reported for each project phase in the programme. The first version of this plan was produced on 24 June 2011.
A plan which provides SCIRT with clear direction and guidelines regarding communication in the event of a crisis. The first version of this plan was produced on 1 December 2013. Note that personal details of key personnel have been removed from this document.
A plan which sets out how SCIRT will carry out internal communication over the life of its programme of work. The first version of this plan was produced on 24 January 2011.
A plan which outlines the principles and methodology for the development of projects. The first version of this plan was produced on 20 September 2011.
A plan which outlines the scope, approach and key deliverables for communications and stakeholder engagement for SCIRT. The first version of this plan was produced on 7 January 2013.
A plan which introduces SCIRT, its management structure and its set of management plans. The first version of this plan was produced on 10 August 2011.
A plan which defines the framework for performance measurement to align SCIRT with the objectives from the Alliance Agreement objectives. The first version of this plan was produced on 20 August 2011.
A plan which describes how SCIRT will manage the coordination of utility authority liaison and utility relocation or protection during the design and construction phases of the rebuild schedule. The first version of this plan was produced on 15 November 2011.
A plan which identifies items that will define value for the programme of work and explain processes that will measure the achievement of value outcomes. The first version of this plan was produced on 6 September 2011.
A plan which describes how SCIRT will carry out design work. The first version of this plan was produced on 1 September 2011.
A plan which defines the risk and opportunity management activities to be applied by SCIRT to meet SCIRT objectives. The first version of this plan was produced on 12 September 2011.
A plan which describes SCIRT's approach to schedule management. The first version of this plan was produced on 20 September 2011.
A plan which outlines the processes and IT applications and services required to manage the SCIRT programme. The first version of this plan was produced on 9 August 2011.
A plan which outlines how SCIRT is to carry out condition investigations and analysis. The first version of this plan was produced on 1 September 2011.
A plan which describes how SCIRT would manage the risks associated with rebuilding horizontal infrastructure within Christchurch's central city area. The first version of this plan was produced on 24 October 2013.
A plan which documents the process SCIRT will follow to identify and pass on learnings from its programme of work. The first version of this plan was produced on 21 June 2016.
A plan which provides SCIRT with a map for building and sustaining outstanding performance. The first version of this plan was produced on 18 February 2013.
A plan which documents how SCIRT is to efficiently and effectively ramp down the delivery of its work, demobilise facilities and resources and wind up the organisation.
A plan which outlines the function, roles and responsibilities of SCIRT during an emergency event affecting SCIRT construction works. The first version of this plan was produced on 30 April 2012. Note that personal details of key personnel have been removed from this document.
A plan which aims to ensure an environment of Zero Harm on SCIRT worksites. The first version of this plan was produced on 29 July 2011.
A plan which outlines how to manage the environmental impacts that result from SCIRT works. The first version of this plan was produced on 20 July 2011.
Diverse Density proposes an alternative housing strategy to the idealistic top-down process of housing development. The term ‘Top – down’ refers to a situation in which decisions are made by a few people in authority rather than by the people who are affected by the decisions (Cambridge). Problems/Position/Question: New Zealand’s urban housing is in a period of flux. Pressures of densification have permitted the intervention of medium density housing development schemes but these are not always successful. These typically top-down processes often result in internally focused design schemes that do not adhere to their specific context. The subsequent design outcomes can cause detrimental impacts to the local, urban and architectural conditions. With vast quantities of council regulations, building restrictions and design guidelines clouding over the housing sector, commonly referred to as ‘red tape’, occupant participation in the housing development sector is dwindling. A boundless separation between top-down and traditional housing processes has occurred and our existing neighbourhoods and historic architectural character are taking on the brunt of the problem. The thought-provoking, alternative housings strategies of key research theorists Alejandro Aravena and John Habraken frame positions that challenge contemporary densification methods with an alternative strategy. This position is addressed by endeavoring to answer; How can demands for denser housing achieve dynamic design responses that adhere to changes in occupancy, function and local site conditions? Aim: The aim of this thesis is to challenge New Zealand’s current housing densification methods by proposing an alternative densification strategy. Explicit devotion will be attributed to opposing top-down building developments. Secondly, this thesis aims to test a speculative site-specific housing model. The implementation of a Christchurch housing scenario will situate an investigative study to test the strategy and its ability to stimulate greater diversity, site responsiveness, functional adaptability and occupancy permutation. The post-earthquake housing conditions of Christchurch provide an appropriate scenario to test and implement design-led investigations. Objectives: The primary objectives of this design-led research investigation it to challenge the idealistic top-down method of developing density with a new method to: - Develop contextual architectural cohesion - Encourage residential diversity - Reinvigorate architectural autonomy - Respond to, and recognise, existing site conditions - Develop a housing model that: - Adapts to occupant functionality preferences - Caters to occupancy diversity - Achieves contextual responsiveness The proposition is addressed through a speculative design-led scenario study. A well-established Christchurch urban environment is adopted to implement and critique the envisioned alternative strategy. Development of the designs responsiveness, adaptability, and functionality produce a prototype housing model that actively adheres to its particular context. Implication: The implications of this research would be an alternative densification strategy to perceive the advancement of punctual assessment of building compliance. With accelerated building processes, the research may have implications for addressing New Zealand’s housing crisis whilst simultaneously providing diverse, personable and responsive architectural solutions. A more dynamic, up-to-date and responsive housing development sector would be informed.
A pdf copy of a post from the One Voice Te Reo Kotahi blog. The post is titled, "Urban Development Strategy (UDS) - refresh process".
A document which outlines the communication strategy behind the Lonely Cone campaign.
A video of a presentation by Jane Murray and Stephen Timms during the Social Recovery Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Land Use Recovery Plan: How an impact assessment process engaged communities in recovery planning".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: In response to the Canterbury earthquakes, the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery directed Environment Canterbury (Canterbury's regional council) to prepare a Land Use Recovery Plan that would provide a spatial planning framework for Greater Christchurch and aid recovery from the Canterbury earthquakes. The Land Use Recovery Plan sets a policy and planning framework necessary to rebuild existing communities and develop new communities. As part of preparing the plan, an integrated assessment was undertaken to address wellbeing and sustainability concerns. This ensured that social impacts of the plan were likely to achieve better outcomes for communities. The process enabled a wide range of community and sector stakeholders to provide input at the very early stages of drafting the document. The integrated assessment considered the treatment of major land use issues in the plan, e.g. overall distribution of activities across the city, integrated transport routes, housing typography, social housing, employment and urban design, all of which have a key impact on health and wellbeing. Representatives from the Canterbury Health in All Policies Partnership were involved in designing a three-part assessment process that would provide a framework for the Land Use Recovery Plan writers to assess and improve the plan in terms of wellbeing and sustainability concerns. The detail of these assessment stages, and the influence that they had on the draft plan, will be outlined in the presentation. In summary, the three stages involved: developing key wellbeing and sustainability concerns that could form a set of criteria, analysing the preliminary draft of the Land Use Recovery Plan against the criteria in a broad sector workshop, and analysing the content and recommendations of the Draft Plan. This demonstrates the importance of integrated assessment influencing the Land Use Recovery Plan that in turn influences other key planning documents such as the District Plan. This process enabled a very complex document with wide-ranging implications to be broken down, enabling many groups, individuals and organisations to have their say in the recovery process. There is also a range of important lessons for recovery that can be applied to other projects and actions in a disaster recovery situation.
A video of a presentation by Richard Conlin during the Community Resilience Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Resilience, Poverty, and Seismic Culture".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: A strategy of resilience is built around the recognition that effective emergency response requires community involvement and mobilization. It further recognizes that many of the characteristics that equip communities to respond most effectively to short term emergencies are also characteristics that build strong communities over the long term. Building resilient communities means integrating our approaches to poverty, community engagement, economic development, and housing into a coherent strategy that empowers community members to engage with each other and with other communities. In this way, resilience becomes a complementary concept to sustainability. This requires an asset-based change strategy where external agencies meet communities where they are, in their own space, and use collective impact approaches to work in partnership. This also requires understanding and assessing poverty, including physical, financial, and social capital in their myriad manifestations. Poverty is not exclusively a matter of class. It is a complex subject, and different communities manifest multiple versions of poverty, which must be respected and understood through the asset-based lens. Resilience is a quality of a community and a system, and develops over time as a result of careful analysis of strengths and vulnerabilities and taking actions to increase competencies and reduce risk situations. Resilience requires maintenance and must be developed in a way that includes practicing continuous improvement and adaptation. The characteristics of a resilient community include both physical qualities and 'soft infrastructure', such as community knowledge, resourcefulness, and overall health. This presentation reviews the experience of some earlier disasters, outlines a working model of how emergency response, resilience, and poverty interact and can be addressed in concert, and concludes with a summary of what the 2010 Chilean earthquake tells us about how a 'seismic culture' can function effectively in communities even when government suffers from unexpected shortcomings.
The Canterbury Earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 and subsequent re-organisation and rebuilding of schools in the region is initiating a rapid transitioning from traditional classrooms and individual teaching to flexible learning spaces (FLS’s) and co-teaching. This transition is driven by the Ministry of Education property division who have specific guidelines for designing new schools, re-builds and the five and ten year property plan requirements. Boards of Trustees, school leaders and teachers are faced with the challenge of reconceptualising teaching and learning from private autonomous learning environments to co-teaching in Flexible Learning Spaces provisioned for 50 to 180 children and two to six teachers in a single space. This process involves risks and opportunities especially for teachers and children. This research project investigates the key components necessary to create effective co-teaching relationships and environments. It explores the lessons learnt from the 1970’s open plan era and the views of 40 experienced practitioners and leaders with two or more years’ experience working in collaborative teaching and learning environments in sixteen New Zealand and Australian schools. The research also considers teacher collaboration and co-teaching as evidenced in literature. The findings lead to the identification of eight key components required to create effective collaborative teaching and learning environments which are discussed using three themes of student centeredness, effective pedagogy and collaboration. Six key recommendations are provided to support the effective co-teaching in a flexible learning space: 1. Situate learners at the centre 2. Develop shared understanding about effective pedagogy in a FLS 3. Develop skills of collaboration 4. Implement specific co-teaching strategies 5. Analyse the impact of co-teaching strategies 6. Strategically prepare for change and the future