Tag Archives: Liquefaction

ORC, DCC continuing Deceptions : Natural Hazards for #SouthDunedin

W H A T ● P L A N ?

ORC stakeholder engagement director Caroline Rowe said the sessions were part of a wider “South Dunedin community engagement plan”.

### ODT Online Tue, 9 Aug 2016
Sessions on natural hazards
By John Gibb
South Dunedin residents will be able to learn more about natural hazards facing the area through drop-in sessions to be held at the Dunedin Gasworks Museum early next month.
The Otago Regional Council is organising the September 1 and 2 sessions, in collaboration with the Dunedin City Council. The drop-in session on the first day will run from 1.30pm to 7pm, and on the second day from 10am to 2.30pm.
Last month the ORC released a report titled “Natural Hazards of South Dunedin”. This report consolidated information and analysis gathered over the past seven years on the natural hazards facing the area, particularly the “increased likelihood of surface flooding associated with rising sea level”.
Read more

W H A T ● R I S K S ?
Answer ……. M I S I N F O R M A T I O N via ORC Hazard Plans and Maps

F I G H T >>> To Protect Your Property Values

“In a report to be tabled at the ORC’s technical committee tomorrow, Ms Rowe said South Dunedin was “an integral part of the wider Dunedin community” and many people and groups had an interest in how its risks would be managed. The report said the ORC also planned several other communication activities over the hazards plan, this month and next.” –ODT

ORC : Combined Council Agenda 10 August – Public.pdf
● Go to Agenda Item 5 (pp 34-35)
2016/0988 South Dunedin Community Engagement Report
The report outlines the approach management is taking to the community engagement as was verbally communicated at the Technical Committee meeting held on 20 July 2016 where Council received the report entitled “The Natural Hazards of South Dunedin” and made the decision to “endorse further community and stakeholder engagement within a timely manner”.

[screenshot – click to enlarge]
ORC Report 4.8.16 South Dunedin Engagement Plan [ID- A924516]

General reading (Otago including Dunedin City District)
ORC : Natural Hazards

● Information coming to this ORC webpage: ORC committee report – natural hazards of the Dunedin district: technical documents

Natural Hazards of South Dunedin – July 2016

● See also, the DCC second generation district plan (2GP) hazard zone information and maps based on ORC data, via the 2GP Index page.

Related Post and Comments:
6.8.16 LGOIMA trials and tribulations with peer reviews #SouthDunedinflood

█ For more, enter the terms *flood*, *hazard*, *south dunedin* and *southdunedinflood* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Election Year. This post is offered in the public interest.

10 Comments

Filed under Baloney, Business, Climate change, Construction, Corruption, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Finance, Geography, Health, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Media, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, ORC, People, Perversion, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Travesty, Urban design, What stadium

DCC: Natural Hazards

Abbotsford landslide 1979 (GNS Science, Dunedin) via ORCMass movement (landslide) hazard, Abbotsford 1979 (GNS Science, Dunedin)

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Natural Hazards Approach Being Revised

This item was published on 10 Apr 2015

The Dunedin City Council is responding to community concerns and revising its planned approach to managing natural hazards such as landslides, flooding and sea level rise.

Following public feedback from consultation carried out from June to September last year, the planned approach now has greater provision for flexible case-by-case assessment. This would apply where the level of risk is more uncertain or variable. In areas where risk is lower, there would also be opportunities to manage risk through measures such as minimum floor levels.

A technical assessment of the risks posed by natural hazards was prepared by the Otago Regional Council. DCC staff used this to develop a proposed approach for managing land use and development in at-risk areas. This approach, or preferred option, sees natural hazards managed through a set of hazard overlay zones.

Rules attached to the hazard overlays set out what activities and development would be permitted, the standards for some types of development and what may be assessed on a case-by-case basis through resource consent. Under the original proposal, approximately 8600 of Dunedin’s about 46,600 houses in residential zones were affected in one way or another by the proposed overlay zones.

DCC City Development Policy Planner Sally Dicey says the preferred option is still to manage natural hazards through hazard overlay zones. However, following submissions from 184 individuals and organisations, a peer review of a flood risk assessment and discussions with experts in the natural hazards and risk management fields, a revised approach is being developed.

Feedback highlighted the difficulties in limiting development where there was uncertainty around assessments of natural hazard risk, due to limited data, variations in and changes to topography, and site specific factors.

“Allowing for more case-by-case assessment provides greater opportunities to take site specific factors into account. Where the risk from a natural hazard is lower, mitigation measures will be required. These are likely to include higher floor levels for houses or requiring homes to be relocatable.”
–Sally Dicey, City Development Policy Planner

Developed areas within dune systems have been removed from what was originally proposed to be the extreme hazard overlay. This is because there is a lack of information about how erosion might occur over the next 100 years along our coastline. These areas are likely to be the subject of future studies and may be included in mapped hazard areas in the future. A strict management approach has been limited to areas where there is a high degree of certainty about the risk from natural hazards. Prohibited areas are no longer proposed.

“This is a sensible and practical response to balancing the known risks we all face and the concerns of the community. Staff should be congratulated both for the thorough way they have researched and prepared these documents and for responding in this way to the matters raised at public meetings and in submissions.”
–Cr David Benson-Pope, Planning and Regulatory Committee

Ms Dicey says it’s important to remember the proposed changes mainly affect new development. In general, existing activities will carry on as usual.

Hazard overlay zones are proposed for floodplains, low-lying coastal communities and hills prone to landslides. This includes areas such as Brighton, Karitane, Macandrew Bay, Waikouaiti, Waitati and parts of the Taieri Plain.

The Dunedin City Council is preparing a new District Plan, the second generation District Plan (2GP). The ultimate goal of the Plan is the sustainable management of Dunedin’s natural and physical resources. Under the Resource Management Act, the DCC is responsible for managing land use to avoid or mitigate the effects of natural hazards. The DCC is also required to consider the effects of climate change and keep a record of natural hazards. The District Plan is scheduled to be publicly notified in September. The revised approach to natural hazards will be released as part of that consultation process. That will give people an opportunity to raise any remaining issues or concerns on the revised approach.

█ A report summarising the feedback received last year on the preferred approach to natural hazards is available at http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp

Contact Sally Dicey, Policy Planner on 03 477 4000. DCC Link

Related Post and Comments:
10.12.13 ORC restructures directorates
30.7.12 ORC on hazard risks and land use controls
24.8.09 1. STS response – appeal. 2. Coastal protection – comments

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

14 Comments

Filed under #eqnz, Architecture, Business, Construction, DCC, Design, Economics, Geography, New Zealand, ORC, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

RMA and Key’s right-wing slashers

BACKWARD STEP: Our environment is at risk if the Resource Management act is watered down.Anton Oliver [stuff.co.nz]

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00 21/07/2013
Gutting the RMA – it’s time to be concerned
By Anton Oliver
Source: Sunday Star-Times
OPINION | The Resource Management Act (RMA) has sadly become a much maligned and misunderstood piece of legislation: a kind of universal public punching bag – if mentioned in conversation, it is almost obligatory to put the slipper in. To most Kiwis it represents bureaucracy and inefficiency – pen-pushing do-gooders and paper shufflers who engage us in excessively long and costly processes that get in the way of us Kiwis doing stuff.
In fact the RMA – passed in 1991 – was a means of rectifying mistakes and providing at least some environmental and social integrity to development and planning process. It was recognised by legal minds to be a world-leading piece of legislation. It protected our environment and our economy based on the premise of sustainable resource management. What’s more, it was politically robust in that it received the blessing of both major parties.
It also gave New Zealanders a chance to be heard and it facilitated local decisions made by local people. While the country’s environmental indicators such as water quality and biodiversity loss have still gone backwards – the RMA has stemmed what would otherwise have been fatal haemorrhaging.
Similarly, the RMA has protected a set of fundamental Kiwi values: the notion of fairness and equity in regard to everyone having a right to their say; industry and other activities being required to take responsibility for avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse environmental impacts; and developments being required to have regard to effects on such things as recreation, scenic values, private property rights, and the public’s access to rivers, lakes and beaches.
That’s all about to change.
The Government plans to alter the Act to give greater weight to economic development over environmental considerations, granting to itself the right to veto any issue. You don’t have to be legal-minded to see the impact of subtle word changes. While the consideration for the “benefits” of a project remains, gone are any references to the “costs”, making a cost-benefit analysis redundant because environmental “cost” is out of the equation.
Gone, too, are the words: “maintenance and enhancement of amenity values”. That’s basically any recreational activity – walking, running, swimming, fishing, kayaking. Who likes doing that stuff anyway? Thankfully the “importance and value of historic heritage” stays. But its cobber, “protection from inappropriate subdivision and development” gets the boot – making the first clause meaningless. And my personal favourite, “maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment” has been politely asked to leave. Clearly such an unruly clause has no place in a legal act that’s trying to protect the environment.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Jan Wright, has a different interpretation. She thinks the changes “muddy the overwhelming focus of the RMA, to protect the environment, and risk turning it into an Economic Development Act”. Similarly alarmed, the architect of the RMA, Sir Geoffrey Palmer, concludes: “The [proposed changes] will significantly and seriously weaken the ability of the RMA to protect the natural environment and its recreational enjoyment by all New Zealanders.”

The changes also grant considerable new powers to central government, giving it the ability to take individual consent decisions away from local councils and place them in a new national body. The changes go further still, by allowing government the right to insert provisions in local council plans without any consultation.
Read more

● Former All Black Anton Oliver is an ambassador for Water Conservation Order NZ.

Related Posts and Comments:
21.4.13 *fashionable* Heritage Dunedin and the RMA holocaust
17.3.13 RMA Bill: Public meeting 21 March
6.7.12 Recommended changes to RMA explode environmental protection

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: stuff.co.nz – Anton Oliver

12 Comments

Filed under Business, Democracy, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Media, Name, New Zealand, People, Pics, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Stadiums, Tourism, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

Recommended changes to RMA explode environmental protection

Technical advisory group’s report recommends significant changes to section 6 of the RMA…the proposal to drop the requirement for decision makers to provide for the preservation and protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats as matters of national importance ignores Environment Court case law built up over the last 20 years.

### ODT Online Thu, 5 Jul 2012
Proposed changes reduce RMA protection
By Adam Bennett – New Zealand Herald
A Government-appointed advisory group has recommended a significant rewrite of the Resource Management Act removing references to the protection of coastal areas, wetlands, lakes and rivers and indigenous flora and fauna. Environment Minister Amy Adams released the report from a technical advisory group established after the Canterbury earthquakes with the primary task of looking at natural hazard issues relevant to the RMA arising from the quakes. “After the Canterbury earthquakes, it became clear that consents for subdivisions had been granted without any consideration of the risk of liquefaction,” Ms Adams said in a statement. However, the group’s report addresses much wider issues and recommends significant changes to section 6 of the RMA.

As it stands [section 6] instructs local authorities to recognise and provide for the protection or preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment, wetlands, lakes and rivers when considering RMA applications. They must also provide for the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes and areas of significant indigenous vegetation or wildlife. Protection must also be provided for historic heritage and protected customary rights while public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers must be maintained. However the group’s recommendation proposes removing the words “protection” and “preservation” from the section entirely.
Read more

****

### radionz.co.nz Friday 6 July 2012
Morning Report with Geoff Robinson & Simon Mercep
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport

08:13 Independent report a major assault on the RMA – Opposition
Opposition parties say recommended changes to the Resource Management Act by independent advisory group are a major assault on the sustainable management of the environment. (3′57″)
Audio | Download: Ogg Vorbis MP3 | Embed

More reading via Scoop
Greens – Report ‘Major Assault On The RMA’
NZ Govt – Report on Resource Management Act principles released
Labour – RMA changes risk more litigation
ACT – RMA Principles Report Encouraging But More Boldness Required
Maori Party – Māori Party comfortable with direction of RMA report
Fish and Game NZ – RMA rejig a disaster for the environment

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

5 Comments

Filed under #eqnz, Geography, Heritage, Hot air, Media, Name, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Town planning, Urban design

Where to share ideas for Christchurch and Canterbury

Rebuilding Christchurch | one brick, one word, one city:
http://rebuildingchristchurch.wordpress.com/ (James Dann) launched in September 2010.

Rebuild Christchurch Ideas Lounge | One Brick At A Time:
http://rebuildchristchurch.co.nz/rebuild-christchurch-ideas-lounge (Deon Swiggs) launched 4 September 2010.

Before After http://www.beforeafter.co.nz/ (New Zealand Institute of Architects) a discussion series launched along with an exhibition at Christchurch Art Gallery (12 February – 20 March) – this closed early due to the 22 February earthquake. Explores the built environment and seeks to engage the public in identifying opportunities to create a better and more liveable region after the Canterbury Earthquake.

Urban Design Forum | Members Only Discussion Board
http://www.urbandesignforum.org.nz/
Urban design needs to be at the core of the re-building of Christchurch. While at the scale of the city, urban design ideas are likely to shape larger interventions, it is the site-by-site process of rebuilding where urban design principles could have their most lasting impact on the quality of the city that will emerge from the rebuilding process, particularly the quality of its streets, public spaces and neighbourhoods.

Other Links:
Canterbury Heritage http://canterburyheritage.blogspot.com/
Christchurch Modern http://www.christchurchmodern.co.nz/

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

3 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Construction, Design, Economics, Geography, Heritage, Inspiration, People, Project management, Site, Town planning, Urban design

Dunedin earthquake proneness

### ODT Online Wed, 9 Mar 2011
Dunedin residents ‘should not be complacent’
By Ellie Constantine
While the chance of a serious earthquake hitting Dunedin is one in 1000, the odds are better than winning Lotto and citizens “should not be complacent”, geologist Prof Richard Norris says. Should such a quake occur, parts of South Dunedin, Mosgiel and the Taieri would “inevitably” be engulfed in liquefaction, the hill suburbs would suffer landslips and rockfalls and many heritage buildings would be reduced to rubble.

Image by Paul Le Comte (via Twitpic). Source: ODT
Link to original tweet here

Christchurch’s “seismic hazard” was “about double” Dunedin’s, but should one occur, the impact would be similar, but of a different nature.
Read more

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

8 Comments

Filed under #eqnz, Architecture, Construction, Design, Economics, Geography, Heritage, People, Site, Town planning, Urban design

LIM “site hazards”

POST UPDATED

The LIM included a short statement under the “hazards” section, subtitled “site hazards”. It read: “This property is within an area that may be subject to increased seismic movement. The land at this address may be at risk of liquefaction in a severe earthquake. A site-specific foundation design may be required for this site.” Without a change, every home on reclaimed land in the city could find the wording on their LIMs.

### ODT Online Sat, 27 Nov 2010
Threat to property insurance
By David Loughrey
A significant tract of Dunedin’s flat land has been declared at risk of liquefaction, with the potential to jeopardise insurance cover in the area. The issue could affect home owners from Andersons Bay to North Dunedin, but Dunedin City Council officials yesterday promised to look into the matter immediately, after it was brought to their attention by the Otago Daily Times.
Read more

****

Dunedin City Council – Media release
DCC Explains Stance on Liquefaction

2 December 2010

Following the Canterbury earthquake earlier this year, the DCC’s consulting engineers, MWH Ltd, suggested it would be prudent to give greater prominence to cautionary advice on Land Information Memoranda (LIMs) issued by the DCC for any property where there was a risk of liquefaction as a result of seismic activity.

Acting on this advice, the DCC believed it would be prudent to change the wording on LIMs and, accordingly, did so.

The message now reads:

* “This area has been identified as lying within a zone susceptible to amplified shaking in an earthquake and potential liquefaction during a severe earthquake event. The Dunedin City Council will require a site specific design for any new building foundation construction in this area.”

Such a change does not indicate any increase in risk but rather the public’s growing awareness, and interest in, the prospect of liquefaction in certain areas and under certain circumstances.

In Dunedin, there are significant areas of population living on reclaimed land or close to estuaries or rivers – as they have safely done for generations – where it is sensible to draw attention to such a risk, however slight. Indeed DCC Building Control has always required building foundation construction to take into account such conditions.

The DCC is of the view that its first responsibility is to property owners and buyers and it believes that the change in the way this cautionary information is offered suggests no increased level of risk, and should give no cause for a change in the way insurers or lending institutions provide services as they have done in the past.

Contact DCC on 477 4000.
DCC Link

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

7 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Construction, Design, Economics, Site

Earthquake

Dunedin’s Russell Garbutt contacted What if? this morning after news of the disaster in Canterbury. He says:

At the beginning of the year I wrote a piece for publication and sent it to the Listener, North and South and New Zealand Geographic. The subject was earthquakes and what was likely to happen in the event of a major movement on the Alpine Fault. As it happens, I was talking to a member of the Geology Department on Friday and he had just returned from Christchurch and the Coast working on exactly that – he said on Wednesday that a major movement was due “now”.

The recent earthquakes in Haiti, Samoa and Chile, and the continuing relatively small earthquakes in and around New Zealand should remind us all of our own vulnerability when it comes to the “big one”. Perhaps more importantly, these events should determine what actions we collectively should be taking to minimise the after-effects of the inevitable major damage that will be caused when it arrives. It certainly should cause us to examine what those public bodies that are responsible for dealing with the after effects of “the big one” have planned, and what influences that man-made structures on our waterways have had in modifying the natural ebb and flow of the effects of erosion and aggradation of our high country. Continues after the break

Some facts that we should all be aware of:
• The New Zealand Alpine Fault is one of the world’s most prominent and active fault lines
• The East Coast of the South Island is part of one of the earth’s tectonic plates
• The West Coast of the South Island is part of another plate
• The Southern Alps have grown 20,000 metres over the last 25 million years, but have eroded most of this growth away
• Much of the erosion of the high country ends up on the beaches of our coasts
• The Alpine Fault is due to move in a major way
• All of the above will impact upon us, or our children, and how will we continue to live in the “shaky isles”.

The New Zealand Alpine Fault is part of the “Ring of Fire” surrounding the Pacific Ocean. This “Ring of Fire” is the perimeter of the huge Pacific tectonic plate that extends from New Zealand across the eastern Pacific to the western coast of the USA, Alaska, across to the eastern Japanese coast, down through Indonesia and then back to New Zealand via some of the Pacific Islands. There are 15 major plates that cover the surface of the earth and they float on the earth’s mantle, much like the skin on a pot of simmering jam. The plates are in fairly constant movement and this movement leads to tectonic activity where plates collide or move in respect to each other. The activity can be volcanic, seismic, or both. Countries that are in the middle of these plates, such as Australia, are largely isolated from earthquakes or volcanic activity. The number of earthquakes that New Zealand experience in a year as a result of being on the junction of two major plates may come as some surprise, but the norm is about 15,000 with about 250 of them large enough to be felt. They are all recorded by GeoNet and can be viewed on their website – usually within an hour of the event.

Follow latest New Zealand quakes at www.geonet.nz and Twitter @geonet

Christchurch Quake Map www.christchurchquakemap

The East Coast of the South Island sits on the Pacific tectonic plate and is dominated by large rivers that drain the inner Alpine regions and associated large alluvial plains. Nowhere else on earth are so many large braided rivers. These rivers transport vast quantities of rock, gravel, sand and clay to the East Coast and after heavy storms in the high country the amount of debris that is transported by each river is vast. Rocks get tumbled down the river, are reduced to stones then to gravel and finally to sand or clay and are transported out to sea with some of the debris coming back to land to form beaches and sand dunes. The other huge contributor to this debris is land-slips and erosion. But for the most part, the eastern side of the Alps has a much lower rainfall than the west and this fact can lead to some serious consequences after a major seismic event.

The West Coast of the South Island, which sits on the Australian Plate, has two distinctive features that separate it from the East. The first is the huge difference in rainfall. On the Coast, annual rainfall is measured in metres of rainfall per year, and when you consider that a metre of rain over a hectare weighs some 10,000 tonnes, some idea of how much rain falls in a year can be imagined. Parts of the Coast receive over 10 metres of rain per year equating to 100,000 tonnes of water per hectare, while the average towards the Tasman may be a third of this figure. This prodigious rainfall has rivers flowing regularly at high rates. There is little opportunity for rocks or sand to hang around for any long periods of time. The other distinctive feature is that the landscape is largely bush covered and there is little distance between the mountains and the Tasman Sea. Rivers are consequently steep and there is much less braiding in the shorter distance between mountains and the Tasman Sea.

The Southern Alps seem a fairly constant part of our landscape, but in reality, they are prodigious growers. As the Pacific Plate collides with its neighbouring Australian Plate the boundary between the two plates is thickened, crumpled and forced upwards. The amount of uplift is huge, and was perhaps best described by Abel Tasman’s description of the South Island as “a great land uplifted high”. Over the last 25 million years the Southern Alps have been pushed up well over 60,000 feet or 20,000 metres. Unless erosion at a similar rate to the amount of uplift had been occurring over this period, New Zealand would have also been home to the world’s highest mountains. Over this period of time all of this uplifted material has, for the most part, been carried down to the sea by the waterways on either coast. What must be appreciated is that while erosion is sometimes a gradual and constant process, the main erosion occurs in spurts of intense activity. This is where the New Zealand Alpine Fault comes in.

The New Zealand Alpine fault which stretches 650km from Fiordland to North Westland, is known to have been the host of five events of about Force 8 magnitude where the effects have either been observed or can be measured geologically. The dates that can be provided for past events are circa 1350, 1475, 1615, 1725 and 1826. Using these dates, published in the recent “Hostile Shores” by Dr Bruce McFadgen, the interval between major movements coming forward in time, has been 125 years, 140 years, 110 years, and 101 years. The average gap between major movements over these 660 years has been 119 years. Using this average, another major Alpine Fault movement could have been anticipated in 1945. In other words, we are overdue by some 65 years, although if the longest gap of 140 years is used, we are overdue by only 44 years. Other scientists may put these average gaps slightly higher, but the broad acceptance is that major movements on the Alpine Fault are both regular and of high magnitude. The message should be that while major movements cannot be accurately predicted, history shows that they occur moderately regularly and the current gap of 184 years is larger than any other gap in our recorded past. All present research shows that the tension along the Alpine Fault is reaching a point where the rocks along a very significant part of the fault will suddenly fracture and a major seismic event will occur. It is not a case of “if”, it is a case of “when”.

When the Alpine Fault moves it not only causes the above-mentioned crumpling and uplifting at the boundary, but the West Coast also slides northeast relative to the East Coast. The amount of this movement is also prodigious. It wasn’t until 1952, when Harold Wellman’s map showed for the first time that there was a match between rocks in Marlborough on the western side of the fault, and rocks in Otago on the eastern side of the fault, that proved that the land either side of the fault had shifted almost 500km over 25 million years – a movement about the same rate as your finger nails grow. But as has been pointed out, the movement is not continual or gradual – little or nothing happens for many years, and then there is a big and sudden movement.

So, how big a movement could be expected?

It is generally agreed between geologists from all round New Zealand that a Force 8 event would result in an 8 metre horizontal displacement and a 4 metre vertical displacement along the fault. Previous major events of this magnitude have resulted in movements of this degree. To put this into perspective, the 1968 Inangahua earthquake was a magnitude 7, but a magnitude 8 quake will release 30 times more energy. The immediate effects of this type of movement will be catastrophic the closer to the fracture area of the fault. Structures such as bridges, communications and roads and railways will be severely affected many hundreds of kilometres distant from the fault. It is likely that despite strong earthquake codes, that there will be significant loss of life if buildings collapse during the violent shaking. But the biggest effect will be landslips and other earth movements such as liquefaction. Countless millions of cubic metres of mountain sides will fall into valleys and waterways. On the West Coast, this debris will be rapidly swept to the sea by means of the huge rainfall. On the eastern side of the Alps it is possible or likely that the displaced debris will be stored in the high country until there is sufficient rainfall to start to carry it down the braided rivers to the Pacific Ocean. A magnitude 7 earthquake in Peru in 1970 killed about 80,000 people when a major landslip occurred that sent millions of cubic metres of rock, ice, water rushing at over 100mph down over towns on the side of the collapsed mountain, but the many millions of cubic metres of landslip debris didn’t get washed to the Coast until the El Nino storms of 1972. Within a further two years this debris was evident along the adjacent coastlines as newly formed sand dunes.

Liquefaction occurs in areas where the underlying land can be likened to a freshly lain pile of wet concrete. Wet concrete will stay as it is until it is shaken and then it will settle quickly with water rising to the surface and heavy objects settling into the now liquid goop. Many of the alluvial plains of the east coast such as the Canterbury Plains will, when violently shaken with a strong earthquake, undergo such liquefaction. The effects of shaking are amplified through such underlying geology and buildings and underground utilities such as sewers and water piping can either rapidly sink underground or, in some circumstances be forced out of the ground.

With all this background, it is worthwhile to examine what effects we have made on our landscape that has modified this natural sequence of events. There are four factors that immediately spring to mind:
• Firstly, the immediate area around the Alpine Fault continues to be sparsely populated,
• Some pockets of areas close to the Alpine Fault are densely populated,
• We have a major city on an area which will be subject to liquefaction,
• We have put artificial barriers across waterways which have already affected our natural landscape along our coastline.

Unlike areas such as Peru or Haiti, New Zealand does not have major cities or towns on the Alpine Fault. Much of Fiordland and Westland is relatively sparsely populated, but the effects of a Magnitude 8 earthquake along the fault will not be confined to the valleys and peaks of the high country. Such an earthquake will be felt over the entire South Island and will cause damage over many areas a long way from the long epicentre. It is anticipated that structural damage would occur as far away as Dunedin. It is also true that while the Alpine Fault ends in the north of the South Island, Wellington sits across the Wellington Fault which is a major splinter fault of the Alpine Fault. It would be hard to believe that Wellington would be insulated from a magnitude 8 event on the Alpine Fault and in reality, it should be expected that considerable damage would also result in our capital city.

Some areas such as Queenstown, Te Anau, and Wanaka on the eastern side of the fault, and the towns of the West Coast on the western side of the fault would be severely shaken. Structures on hillsides could fail, and there seems to be no doubt that infrastructure such as bridges, roads and railways would be severely damaged or destroyed. Cellphone towers and power to them would be compromised or destroyed and power and telephone lines would be bought down over very wide areas.

Christchurch lies on an alluvial plain which could undergo amplification of the effects of a major earthquake with liquefaction affecting many major structures.

Rivers in the South Island act as huge flushing agents for the debris created by such events as a major earthquake on the Alpine Fault and largely have been left unhindered by man. But there are some notable exceptions. The biggest of these would be the Clutha River which is fed by two major river systems. Lake Wanaka is drained by the Clutha and is joined at Cromwell by the Kawarau which drains both Lake Wakatipu and the waters of the Shotover River. It is this latter river which is responsible for much of the debris that comes from the Otago hinterland.

The Shotover has its headwaters deep within the area most likely to be severely affected by landslips. This river or its many contributories would be filled with debris from countless landslips and the immediate effect of this will be the damming of sections of the river, new watercourses being formed, and a large amount of debris entering the waterway. The Kawarau will transport this debris down to the confluence with the Clutha, and as soon as the waterflow speed reduces at the start of Lake Dunstan, the debris will start to fall out of suspension in the water and will start to fill the lake. This will happen because of the hydro-electric dam at Clyde.

But this is not the only dam on the Clutha.

Before the Clyde dam was constructed, the dam at Roxburgh acted in a similar way and over the 37 years between the completion of the Roxburgh dam and the Clyde dam was completed, sand and gravel that would have normally been carried down to the East Coast was trapped behind the Roxburgh dam – mainly where the water speed dropped to a point where it could no longer support the sediment. Residents of Alexandra will no doubt be aware of the creation of such sand bars near the confluence of the Manuherika just below Alexandra. It is also interesting to note where these vast quantities of sand from perhaps a series of landslips far up Skippers Creek would have ended up prior to the construction of the dams on the Clutha.

The geological records from previous major aggradation caused by previous Alpine Fault movements show that a lot of the sand ended up on the beaches of Coastal Otago north of the mouth of the Clutha. A short time after each big earthquake in the past, the debris was carried down the Shotover and Kawarau rivers into the Clutha and what did not get washed out to sea was carried north along the coast line by the coastal current and washed up on the beaches. The lovely white sands of St Clair and the beaches north round into Blueskin Bay have, for their most part, their origins in the quartz of the rocks of Central Otago.

This natural draining of the hinterland, and the consequent replenishment of the coastal sands was effectively bought to a halt when the Roxburgh dam was built in 1956, and it should not be a surprise that the beaches of Coastal Otago have since that time undergone some change with much concern being expressed about possible sea incursions near Middle Beach. But this change is minimal compared to what will happen when the major event on the Alpine Fault occurs in the future. The relatively small amounts of debris now coming down behind Lake Dunstan will be dwarfed by what will flow into the lake after that event. Already the lake has shallowed dramatically where the Kawarau enters the lake and it can only be imagined what the lake will look like when countless cubic metres of gravel, sand and clay comes down the river in the first storm after the big event.

It is not at all clear just who has the responsibility for dealing with the consequences of the next major Alpine Fault event. Government will be responsible for many remedial works through national agencies, but it will also be up to local and regional Councils to deal with local emergencies and remedial works. What interests me is who will be responsible for ensuring that the mighty waterways of our region are able to handle transporting the vast quantities of sand to the sea. Initial indications are that it seems that it will be up to the dam operators who have this responsibility but it is hard to see how they are equipped to do so, or what plans they, or the Regional Council have, to dispose of these millions of cubic metres of gravel, sand and clay.

One thing is for sure – collectively we should be aware of the inevitability of the next Alpine Fault movement and what we need to do to be prepared for it.

[ends]

Related Posts and Comments:
15.3.11 Christchurch heritage buildings approved for demolition #eqnz
10.3.11 ‘Owners of older buildings warned’ – ODT
9.3.11 Dunedin earthquake proneness
8.3.11 Prophetic 1996 #EQNZ ChCh Doco
5.3.11 Large aftershock hits CHCH #eqnz
4.3.11 Reaction to another instance of unthinking ad-hocism from City Hall
22.2.11 Earthquake, Christchurch #eqnz Day 1
21.2.11 The proactive heritage development lobby EXISTS in Dunedin
19.2.11 Dunedin, are you ‘of a mind’ to protect Historic Heritage?
14.2.11 Earthquake proneness

Post by Elizabeth Kerr

83 Comments

Filed under Construction, Economics, Geography, Heritage, People, Politics, Project management, Town planning, Urban design