Christchurch Earthquake Red Zone: Plans To Build Housing On Shaky Ground!

Christchurch Earthquake Red Zone: Plans To Build Housing On Shaky G...

“For properties in the flat land residential red zone areas, being zoned red means that the land has been so badly damaged by the earthquakes it is unlikely that it can be rebuilt on for a prolonged period.”
Red Zone information | Cera [production]

https://cera.govt.nz/land-information/red-zone

https://www.linz.govt.nz/crown-property/types-crown-property/christ...

Got that guys? Here’s more from the Cera (Canterbury earthquake recovery authority) site:

“Key points to note for the flat land residential red zone areas:

It is not feasible to rebuild on this land at the present time
Wide scale land remediation would take a considerable period of time, the social dislocation of such massive works would see homeowners out of their homes for at least three years, and in some cases more than five years
In some areas remediation would require up to three metres of compacted fill to bring the land up to compliant height, along with many kilometres of perimeter treatment
In addition, a complete replacement of essential infrastructure like sewer, water, electricity and roading would be required
Full land repair in these areas may mean that every house would need to be removed, regardless of its degree of present building damage
Even if full land repair was viable, the resulting ongoing social dislocation would have major impacts on schooling, transport and employment for whole communities. “

Red Zone land

For those who don’t know, I live right on the edge of the Christchurch post-quake “Red Zone”, which has mostly reverted to the swamp that existed there before humans built homes on it. After the earthquake of 2011 the home owners in the Red Zone were offered money in exchange for their land, (the speed with which the offer was presented fuels speculation about foreknowledge of the impending quake) and we all were told that this land (now “Crown Owned”) was unsuitable for residential building and would be used for parks, recreation and reservation, in accordance with consultation of the people of Christchurch.

Now, it seems that our government is eyeing up this boggy swampland for housing, in spite of previous claims to the contrary.

All I can say is; Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We had a powerful earthquake in 2010 and were assured it was a “once in 16,000 year event”: Everyone breathed a sigh of relief that no one got hurt and carried on with life. A few months later we had another big quake, followed by many thousands of large aftershocks. This time there were hundreds of casualties and injuries.

And the government wants to build more houses on this quake-ravaged land?

A case of greed over common sense?

Martin

Concerns raised over Chch red zone plans

Proposals to build new homes in an area of Christchurch’s quake-hit red zone isn’t fair to its old occupants, a former resident says.
On Friday the Crown-led agency, Regenerate Christchurch, released ten options for the Avon-Otakaro red zone]. The 602 hectare red zone used to house 9000 people before the Christchurch earthquakes in 2010 and 2011.
Almost every house is now gone.
The 10 options on the table for the area include scenarios such as establishing a lake, a golf course, and cycle trails.
Half of the options include building houses.
David Miller’s family used to live in the red zone, and he said putting in new homes in the area was unfair to its former residents.

“You can hardly take people off the land and then later on, when you have gotten rid off those people, you can hardly go back on what you’ve proposed to do … it doesn’t make sense,” he said.
“It just doesn’t seem fair.”
The 10 options have come out of about 5000 ideas Regenerate Christchurch got from the community.
Ernest Tsao is still living in the red zone, as the government’s offer to buy his property was not enough to cover buying a house elsewhere.
Mr Tsao said he was not against new developments, but he was worried about how he and others may be affected.
“My interests are to preserve my home and my house,” he said.
“It doesn’t matter what [Regenerate Christchurch] decide to in the future, as long as they respect the private property rights and the dignity of those who still live here, we have no problem with what they decide to do.”
The Avon-Otakaro Network is a local group lobbying for more green areas.
Spokesperson Evan Smith said he understood the opposition to rebuilding in the red zone but argued it gave the city an opportunity to test new ways of building houses.
“There’s not a need for housing in Christchurch per se, there is now enough land to meet demand, and probably future demand as well. But there is a need for affordable housing and housing that tests methodology to make them resilient,” he said.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/concerns-raised-over-chch-r...

Views: 78

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ahhhhh-fordable housing ... say no more. What bums.

Hmmmm

A proposal to put housing on a Christchurch park, which is currently used as a golf course, has been called a land grab in the name of earthquake recovery.

The proposal is part of a government plan for the earthquake damaged red zone, but the park is not in the red zone.

Rawhiti Golf course has been around since the 1930s and is part of Rawhiti Domain, over the road from the beach in eastern Christchurch.

Regenerate Christchurch, the government agency tasked with developing a plan for red zone land, has recently put out 10 proposals for public consultation.

The proposals suggest a mix of future land uses, including cycle ways, flood mitigation, recreation areas, and housing.

Five of the ten proposals include what is described as a land swap - two golf courses, Avondale and Rawhiti - would be turned into housing with a total of around 900 homes.

A new golf course would then be created on earthquake damaged land in nearby Bexley.

Cathy Baker is part of a group called Guardians of Rawhiti, which was established three years ago when the council looked at closing the golf course.

She said people were outraged that once again the well-used green space is under threat.

"People are angry.

"They are angry because this is the heart of our community."

Robbie Baigent is part of a group of around 20 locals who sent an open letter to Regenerate Christchurch asking them to hold public meetings to allow people to be better informed, and to extend the consultation period.

Mr Baigent and Mrs Baker said at the moment the proposal felt like a land grab, and people did not feel they have had enough time or information to have their say.

Mr Baigent said the ten proposals had many positive suggestions for the red zone, but including Rawhiti Domain undermined Regenerate's own consultation process.

"When five of their ten options show a land swap with Rawhiti it shifts people's focus to that, so it comes away from the red zone and it's not beneficial to them to get some decent feedback.

"We've had enough asset stripping over here as it is and the golf course is a massive asset to this community."

Mr Baigent said if Regenerate wanted to increase housing in the area they should look to the red zone land.

"When the area was red zoned it was never said it couldn't be put back into housing. It was always on the mandate that it was cheaper to remediate land on a larger scale and then it could go back to housing rather than do it on an individual property by property basis.

"That that mandate still stands, there is no reason it can't be done. It just feels like they are taking an easy out."

Regenerate Christchurch chief executive Ivan Iafeta said in a statement the public and council feedback had encouraged them to look at land outside of the red zone as part of the regeneration plan.

He said east Christchurch had 5442 fewer houses and this had affected the area in many ways, including the local economy, and the membership of various clubs and societies.

However, only about 100 homes in New Brighton were in the red zone.

Mr Iafeta said residential development was one way of increasing the local population and economy.

A report from Regenerate Christchurch also stated that the strongest financial benefits came from the land swap option.

Regenerate said that in response to the request for more community engagement its staff have attended the New Brighton weekend market, and would continue to for the next two weeks.

Mr Iafeta said it already had around 600 submissions, and were not planning to extend the closing date, which ends on Monday 6 November.

Source: Radio NZ via Neighbourly New Brighton

Martin, I thought you subscribed to the theory the earthquakes were man made? If that is the case then  isn't it case of an informed decision rather than 'greed over common sense?

The catch phrase 'make more resilient' or 'build more resilience' always seems to pop up with these (man-made) disaster capitalists...

Hi Clyde

Over the years I've looked at many possibilities. One thing I'm reasonably sure of is that there was foreknowledge of impending seismic activity in Christchurch. Artificially TRIGGERED maybe. here are many ways to trigger an earthquake (as opposed to actually generating one, which isn't the same). I've never actually found the smoking gun, but there's some rather incriminating circumstantial evidence. The phrase "And on cue..." has become our slogan here.

Whatever, you are basically right, Clyde. It's about an agenda based on foreknowledge and a government move to take advantage of that foreknowledge. It is, however, most definitely based on greed. As for "common sense"  guess that depends on your definition. Building housing on land that is basically returning to swamp seems like a plan based on greed over common sense to me!

I publish these articles to show that A: We "conspiracy nuts" were right all along about the agenda behind the earthquake land grab, and B: that the government basically lied to the general public about it's intentions, and that C: where the government realises that the quake damaged land is good for 'nowt', they are quite happy to "swap" the land they purchased for land they didn't purchase to the detriment of we locals.

"resilience" is an Agenda 2030 UN catchphrase which is being use at "Natural" disaster zones around the world (check out Mexico for eg). The master plan is to rebuild these places to NWO spec. Prototype cities of the future. In Christchurch's case however, the rebuild seems to be grinding along at a snail's pace and the "plan" appears to be about wasting money and bankrupting the Council!

Cow fodder 'highest and best' use of cleared suburban Christchurch land

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/98131105/cow-fodder-highest-and-be...

Sure to twist some knickers 

Interestingly Trent, a university study now says that NOTHING should be grown on that land due to potential contamination!

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1710/S00495/researchers-urge-cauti...

(I suspect supermarkets funded the study perhaps?)

Oh yuck, that's disgusting.

Interesting.

" It gave the city an opportunity to test new ways of building houses."

Maybe the swampiest areas could be turned into a mini- " Everglades " ( minus the snakes, alligators and crocodiles,) where people could live cheaply in rental or owned houseboats?

(I'm being facetious, and I know this is no laughing matter for the locals, many of whom have suffered great loss personally, and are still hurting. )

Who will profit most from these red-zoned areas being transformed into something more  " resilient " and " sustainable " than before?

Government to investigate "seizing" all crown-owned or banked land for housing: and they have the legal power to do it!

https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAudj12?m=en-nz

RSS

© 2017   Created by rose.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service