The 11 frame cartoon strip tells a story about planning for a new Christchurch city post-earthquake. After filling the plan with every possible thing he can think of the planner puts the artist in an empty corner and the whole thing is delivered into a black hole that represents 'The real world'. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).
A photograph of community members giving feedback on the Sumner master plan.
A photograph of community members at a meeting to discuss the Sumner master plan.
A photograph of community members at a meeting to discuss the Sumner master plan.
The Christchurch City Council is looking to Scandinavia for help with the earthquake re-build. Two Danish based urban design experts are working with the Council over the next four weeks to develop a draft plan for rebuilding the central city.
The New Zealand Kellogg Rural Leaders Programme develops emerging agribusiness leaders to help shape the future of New Zealand agribusiness and rural affairs. Lincoln University has been involved with this leaders programme since 1979 when it was launched with a grant from the Kellogg Foundation, USA.At 4.35am on 4th September 2010, Canterbury was hit by an earthquake measuring 7.1 on the Richter scale. On 22nd February 2011 and 13th June 2011 a separate fault line approximately 35km from the first, ruptured to inflict two further earthquakes measuring 6.3 and 6.0 respectively. As a direct result of the February earthquake, 181 people lost their lives. Some commentators have described this series of earthquakes as the most expensive global insurance event of all time. These earthquakes and the more than 7000 associated aftershocks have had a significant physical impact on parts of Canterbury and virtually none on others. The economic, social and emotional impacts of these quakes spread across Canterbury and beyond. Waimakariri district, north of Christchurch, has reflected a similar pattern, with over 1400 houses requiring rebuild or substantial repair, millions of dollars of damage to infrastructure, and significant social issues as a result. The physical damage in Waimakiriri District was predominately in parts of Kaiapoi, and two small beach settlements, The Pines and Kairaki Beach with pockets elsewhere in the district. While the balance of the district is largely physically untouched, the economic, social, and emotional shockwaves have spread across the district. Waimakariri district consists of two main towns, Rangiora and Kaiapoi, a number of smaller urban areas and a larger rural area. It is considered mid-size in the New Zealand local government landscape. This paper will explore the actions and plans of Waimakiriri District Council (WDC) in the Emergency Management Recovery programme to provide context to allow a more detailed examination of the planning processes prior to, and subsequent to the earthquakes. This study looked at documentation produced by WDC, applicable legislation and New Zealand Emergency Management resources and other sources. Key managers and elected representatives in the WOC were interviewed, along with a selection of governmental and nongovernmental agency representatives. The interview responses enable understanding of how central Government and other local authorities can benefit from these lessons and apply them to their own planning. It is intended that this paper will assist local government organisations in New Zealand to evaluate their planning processes in light of the events of 2010/11 in Canterbury and the lessons from WDC.
The 48hr Design Challenge, run by the Christchurch City Council and held at Lincoln University, provided an opportunity for Council to gain inspiration from the design and architecture industry, while testing the draft Central City Plan currently being developed. The Challenge was a response to the recent earthquakes in Christchurch and brought together local and international talent. A total of 15 teams took part in the Challenge, with seven people in each including engineers, planners, urban designers, architects and landscape architects, as well as one student on each team. The four sites within the Red Zone included the Cathedral Square and BNZ Building; 160 Gloucester Street; the Orion NZ Building at 203 Gloucester Street; and 90 Armagh Street, including the Avon River and Victoria Square. The fifth site, which sits outside the Red Zone, is the former Christchurch Women’s Hospital at 885 Colombo Street. This is team SoLA's entry for 160 Gloucester Street.
Earthquakes and other major disasters present communities and their authorities with an extraordinary challenge. While a lot can be done to prepare a city’s response in the event of a disaster, few cities are truly prepared for the initial impact, devastation, grief, and the seemingly formidable challenge of recovery. Many people find themselves overwhelmed with facing critical problems; ones which they have often never had experience with before. While the simple part is agreeing on a desired outcome for recovery, it appears the argument that exists between stakeholders is the conflicting ideas of How To effectively achieve the main objective. What I have identified as an important step toward collaborating on the How To of recovery is to identify the ways in which each discipline can most effectively contribute to the recovery. Landscape architecture is just one of the many disciplines (that should be) invovled in the How To of earthquake recovery. Canterbury has an incredible opportunity to set the benchmark for good practice in earthquake recovery. To make the most of this opportuntiy, it is critical that landscape architects are more effectively engaged in roles of recovery across a much broader spectrum of recovery activities. The overarching purpose of this research is to explore and provide insight to the current and potential of landscape architects in the earthquake recovery period in Canterbury, using international good practice as a benchmark. The research is aimed at stimulating and guiding landscape architects dealing with the earthquake recovery in Canterbury, while informing stakeholders: emergency managers, authorities, other disciplines and the wider community of themost effective role(s) for landscape architects in the recovery period.
The aftermath of three earthquakes has forced Christchurch to re-plan and rebuild. New perspectives of a sustainable city have arisen granting Christchurch the chance of becoming an example to the world. This work is centred on bioclimatic landscape design as a base for greening strategies. It deals with strategic landscape design adapted to a specific climate, from a user’s perspective. The investigation will be applied to Christchurch’s urban centres, assessing cultural adaptability to the local climate and implications for landscape design. Climatic data shows that humidity is not a local problem. However, the wind is the determinant. In Christchurch the solar radiation and the prevailing winds are the most important microclimatic variables, the latter intensifying the loss of surface heat, decreasing the radiant temperature and affecting thermal sensation. The research objective is to explore design parameters at the street-scale and identify ways to maximise thermal comfort in outdoor spaces through design-based strategies. The investigation will apply methods of participant observation, depth interviews, climatic data collection and design experimentation based on thermal comfort models and computer simulation tools. Case study sites chosen for investigation are places with current levels of activity that may be anticipated in the rebuild of the central city. The research will have two main outcomes: improved understanding of local urban culture adaptation to microclimate, and a demonstration of how design can enhance adaption. These outcomes will inform designers and city managers about good design practices and strategies that can be used to ensure a long term liveable city.
There is a critical strand of literature suggesting that there are no ‘natural’ disasters (Abramovitz, 2001; Anderson and Woodrow, 1998; Clarke, 2008; Hinchliffe, 2004). There are only those that leave us – the people - more or less shaken and disturbed. There may be some substance to this; for example, how many readers recall the 7.8 magnitude earthquake centred in Fiordland in July 2009? Because it was so far away from a major centre and very few people suffered any consequences, the number is likely to be far fewer than those who remember (all too vividly) the relatively smaller 7.1 magnitude Canterbury quake of September 4th 2010 and the more recent 6.3 magnitude February 22nd 2011 event. One implication of this construction of disasters is that seismic events, like those in Canterbury, are as much socio-political as they are geological. Yet, as this paper shows, the temptation in recovery is to tick boxes and rebuild rather than recover, and to focus on hard infrastructure rather than civic expertise and community involvement. In this paper I draw upon different models of community engagement and use Putnam’s (1995) notion of ‘social capital’ to frame the argument that ‘building bridges’ after a disaster is a complex blend of engineering, communication and collaboration. I then present the results of a qualitative research project undertaken after the September 4th earthquake. This research helps to illustrate the important connections between technical rebuilding, social capital, recovery processes and overall urban resilience.
At 4.35am on Saturday 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake struck near the township of Darfield in Canterbury leading to widespread damage in Christchurch and the wider central Canterbury region. Though it was reported no lives were lost, that was not entirely correct. Over 3,000 animals perished as a result of the earthquake and 99% of these deaths would have been avoidable if appropriate mitigation measures had been in place. Deaths were predominantly due to zoological vulnerability of birds in captive production farms. Other problems included lack of provision of animal welfare at evacuation centres, issues associated with multiple lost and found pet services, evacuation failure due to pet separation and stress impact on dairy herds and associated milk production. The Canterbury Earthquake has highlighted concerns over a lack of animal emergency welfare planning and capacity in New Zealand, an issue that is being progressed by the National Animal Welfare Emergency Management Group. As animal emergency management becomes better understood by emergency management and veterinary professionals, it is more likely that both sectors will have greater demands placed upon them by national guidelines and community expectations to ensure provisions are made to afford protection of animals in times of disaster. A subsequent and more devastating earthquake struck the region on Monday 22 February 2011; this article however is primarily focused on the events pertaining to the September 4 event.
The extent of liquefaction in the eastern suburbs of Christchurch (Aranui, Bexley, Avonside, Avonhead and Dallington) from the February 22 2011 Earthquake resulted in extensive damage to in-ground waste water pipe systems. This caused a huge demand for portable toilets (or port-a-loos) and companies were importing them from outside Canterbury and in some instances from Australia. However, because they were deemed “assets of importance” under legislation, their allocation had to be coordinated by Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM). Consequently, companies supplying them had to ignore requests from residents, businesses and rest homes; and commitments to large events outside of the city such as the Hamilton 400 V8 Supercars and the Pasifika Festival in Auckland were impacted. Frustrations started to show as neighbourhoods questioned the equity of the port-a-loos distribution. The Prime Minister was reported as reassuring citizens in the eastern suburbs in the first week of March that1 “a report about the distribution of port-a-loos and chemical toilets shows allocation has been fair. Key said he has asked Civil Defence about the distribution process and where the toilets been sent. He said there aren’t enough for the scale of the event but that is quickly being rectified and the need for toilets is being reassessed all the time.” Nonetheless, there still remained a deep sense of frustration and exclusion over the equity of the port-a-loos distribution. This study took the simple approach of mapping where those port-a-loos were on 11-12 March for several areas in the eastern suburbs and this suggested that their distribution was not equitable and was not well done. It reviews the predictive tools available for estimating damage to waste water pipes and asks the question could this situation have been better planned so that pot-a-loo locations could have been better prioritised? And finally it reviews the integral roles of communication and monitoring as part of disaster management strategy. The impression from this study is that other New Zealand urban centres could or would also be at risk and that work is need to developed more rational management approaches for disaster planning.
Questions to Ministers 1. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: How many claims does the Earthquake Commission expect to receive as a result of the earthquakes in Canterbury since 4 September 2010? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "rebuilding Christchurch is a key priority for the Government this year"; if so, what rebuilding plans are currently in place? 3. METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her statement that state support is for "people to fall back on when they really need it"? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that New Zealanders were "more than compensated" for last year's increase in GST? 5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How is her Ministry responding to support the Christchurch recovery following last month's earthquake? 6. JACINDA ARDERN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answers to Oral Question number one on 8 March 2011; if not, why not? 7. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Corrections: What support has the Department of Corrections provided to the people of Christchurch following last month's earthquake? 8. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister of Finance: How much has he budgeted to raise from the Christchurch Earthquake Appeal and has this figure been revised in light of the Japanese earthquake? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What work will the New Zealand Urban Search and Rescue team be carrying out in Japan? 10. Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement that the $300 million bill for restoring the Christchurch road network won't be causing any "dramatic issues" and what is his timeframe for the completion of this work? 11. COLIN KING to the Minister of Transport: What work has been done to repair and reopen Christchurch's roads and highways following the 22 February earthquake? 12. Hon STEVE CHADWICK to the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: Has he had any discussions with the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery about heritage buildings or recovering cultural artefacts from buildings damaged by the earthquake on 22 February; if so, what did he say to the Minister?
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?