Future Christchurch 4.6 Recovering Community by Studio Christchurch

FUTURE CHRISTCHURCH V4.6 from crisis to opportunity: recovering community on uninhabitable land Joo Eun Kim

FROM CRISIS TO OPPORTUNITY :

Recoverying Community on Uninhabitable Land

Thesis completed in part fulfilment of requirements for the Master of Architecture (Professional) degree at the University of Auckland, 2013

___ acknowledgement

First and Foremost, I would like to thank the almighty God, who has always been with me during the whole thesis journey, and indeed, throughout my life. I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisors Camia Young and Chris Barton, who have supported me through my thesis with their patience, motivation, enthusiasm and immense knowledge. I would like to thank to all Future Christchurch group (Jin Kyung Lee, Mona Ibrahim, Yvonne Mak, Sara Al-Anbuky, Rex Braganza) for their invaluable advice and ideas for the improvement of this study. My sincere thanks also goes to Elizabeth Campbell, Sophia Kim, Ye Jin Yoon, Mary Shin, Rosa Song for their friendship and helping me to accomplish this thesis. I thank all my close friends and fellow architecture students for bring laughter and joy throughout the year. Without their support and encouragement, this study would not be possible. Last but not the least, I would like to thank my family for their continual prayer, support and encouragement throughout my degree.

vii

viii

___abstract

not only aims to repurpose high risk land for the development of community housing integrated with the landscape, it strategically engages with the urban form, revitalizes broken spirits and ultimately redefines the urban fabric of Christchurch’s high risk zones. This thesis proposes an alternative housing solution that claims back both the damaged land and the sense community through designing collections of co-housing dwellings built to withstand future natural disasters such as flooding and which utilise the adjacent red zone damaged land for both recreation and gardens that can provide for the community. This thesis also attempts to rethink possible ways of recovering Christchurch’s urban form that will build community resilience, improve the quality of life for residents and foster resident’s feeling of identity and attachment with the environment in which they live permanently and which shape the visual character of Christchurch.

___contents

_Abstract

VII

_Introduction

_Chapter_01: Christchurch Context

_Chapter_02: Literature Review

_Chapter_03: Christchurch Housing

_Chapter_04: Public Green Space in Christchurch

_Chapter_05: Location Case Study

_Chapter_06: Architectural Design Proposal

121

_Conclusion

159

_Bibliography

162

_List of Figures

171

Since the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes, the city of Christchurch has been left with catastrophic damage. This damage is not only to the built environment but also to the people of Christchurch who have lost their homes, loved ones and large parts of the city they grew up in. Although this tragic event has caused much hardship to the city and its people, Christchurch now has a unique opportunity to rebuild. This thesis aims to take this opportunity and, in particular focuses on an attempt to provide a solution in response to the housing shortage and the damage land in the city. The site for this thesis is in the Eastern Suburbs along the Avon River and leading out to sea. The suburbs of Burwood, Avondale, Richmond, New Brighton and Sumner have suffered extensive damage. The loss of 7,860 houses due to properties deemed uninhabitable and classified as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Residential Red Zoneâ&#x20AC;? are harsh facts that the residents in these areas have become accustomed to.1 Further this land is unlikely to be suitable for continued residential occupation or rebuilt for a considerable period of time.2 This is due to insecure, weak and swampy ground condition. In 2013, the houses xii

in the Residential Red Zone are being demolished and the land transformed into open green space leaving many without homes.3 As well as significant land damage to the Residential Red Zone, much of the adjacent land, classified as Technical Category 3, has also suffered extensive destruction.4 However, these areas remain habitable and are considered to be suitable for residential construction.5 Some of TC3 lands face further hazards due to sitting on flood management areas, which means that these areas are also susceptible to flooding.6 The residents situated in both TC3 and flood management areas have suffered loss of community, infrastructure and quality of life. The earthquakes had severe impacts on residential property in greater Christchurch, affecting many residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; quality of life and causing localised environmental damage. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) has proposed that housing infrastructure will play a significant part in the economic recovery of Christchurch.7 There are not only physical damages in the greater Christchurch

___introduction

region, but there are also on-going problematic issues of loss of community and social cohesion.8 This is due to urban sprawl.9 The rapid expansion of unsustainable urban sprawl led Christchurch to become a low density, car dependent city, which causes not just loss of community, but also loss of farmland, loss of wild habitat, increased air pollution, increased water use and pollution, increased energy consumption and social fragmentation.10 Rather than focusing on the negative of these problems, this thesis aims to turn crisis into opportunity. This thesis aims to generate the following opportunities: (1) Opportunities to enhance the character of the Garden City (2) Opportunities to create alternative housing solutions in high risk areas. Currently there is no solution for this in the wider Christchurch context. (3) Opportunities to solve on-going problems that have been affecting the residents and the urban form of Christchurch.

The research provides a foundation for the proposal of a design solution that claims back both the damaged land and the sense of community in the most high-risk degraded area and incorporates the character of the Garden Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s value. The research is divided into five chapters that contribute the final outcome of design solution discussed in Chapter Six. Chapter One of this thesis discusses the context of Christchurch city as it now stands and the issues designers face when they approach the city for rebuilding. Discussing the terminology involved in land categories provides an in depth understanding of the problems architects, engineers and designers in the building industry face. Further, this chapter also discusses how a loss of community can be addressed when rebuilding. However, the latter half of this chapter reveals opportunity and solutions to crisis. Developing from Chapter One, Chapter Two explains and provides a discourse around the concept of community housing and stilt housing. Through case studies, this chapter seeks to provide a 1

succinct dialogue of what community is, how it assists in the development of communities and neighbourhoods and why this method of design is appropriate for Christchurch. This chapter also presents stilt housing typologies and what stilt housing offers â&#x20AC;&#x201C; which is more than just the protection against flooding. Chapter Three addresses the current condition of Christchurch housing. It also looks at the current and future demographic of Christchurch. As a result of Western society, Christchurch has the typical building method of single detached housing. It is the argument of this thesis that there is a lack of housing choice to meet th changing demographics of Christchurch. This chapter aims to provide an argument that Christchurch needs to achieve varying housing choices for residents to meets demographic demand. Single detached housing, as argued in this thesis, is not conducive in the rebuild of Christchurch. Chapter Four surveys the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Garden Cityâ&#x20AC;? identity of Christchurch. It discusses specifically the relationship between the public open 2

spaces and the residents. This chapter shows that the fabric of green network plays an important part in the greater Christchurch. Therefore, this thesis aims to regenerate urban form with this identity in mind. Chapter Five outlines the urban strategy proposed for this thesis. The urban strategy is to find the possible areas to build the proposed design. These possible sites are situated in the highest risk areas (TC3 + flood management area) with good soil adjacent to the Residential Red Zone. Another urban strategy is the suburban residential intensification on the possible sites, which comprise low density single detached housing. This outline provides a strong foundation for the design proposal in Chapter Six. Chapter Six presents the design strategy. It illustrates design moves and summarises the design solution as a result of the research in the previous five chapters. The design solution aims to embody all aspects of research carried out in this thesis to provide a housing choice to Christchurch residents, assist with the

housing crisis and produce a new way of building communities. Throughout the discourse of these chapters, the focus of this thesis seeks to be on the opportunity to create architecture which enables living to be integrated with the landscape, and landscape with the city. Through a design proposal, this thesis explores the possible ways of repurposing high risk land for the development of community housing. It claims back both the damaged land and the sense of community through designing collections of co-housing dwellings built to withstand future natural disasters such as flooding and which utilise the adjacent red zone damaged land for both recreation and gardens that can provide for the community. This thesis also proposes housing that meets demographic demands to achieve site specific design. This thesis asks how we as architects can provide community-driven solutions to what was is largely an individually focussed response to housing needs, while promoting greater environmental quality and integrating nature into the habitable environment. 3

(Endnotes) 1 “Housing pressures in Christchurch “, Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, accessed 2 July, 2013, http://www.dbh. govt.nz/UserFiles/File/Publications/Sector/pdf/christchurch-housing-report.pdf.

6 Rachel Young, “’Flockton Cluster’ beg council for flood aid,” Stuff.co.nz, accessed 5 October, 2013, http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/news/north-west/9239949/Flockton-Cluster-beg-council-forflood-aid.

2 Gerry Brownlee, “Red Zone offers ‘extremely fair’,” Stuff. co.nz, accessed 12 July, 2013, http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/perspective/5510547/Red-zone-offers-extremely-fair.

7 “Recovery Strategy of Greater Christchurch “, CERA, accessed 10 July, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/ recovery-strategy-for-greater-christchurch.pdf.

3 “SECTION 16: BUILT ENVIRONMENT RECOVERY,” CERA, accessed 17 July, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/recovery-strategy/overview/ read-the-recovery-strategy/section-16-built-environment-recovery.

8 Gary Moody, “Urban sprawl threatens Chch,” Stuff.co.nz, accessed 21 July, 2013, http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/christchurch-mail/8454297/Urban-sprawl-threatens-Chch.

4 Nicole Mathewson, “Most Baker St residents want to see red,” Stuff.co.nz, accessed 18 July, 2013, http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/news/christchurch-earthquake-2011/7125709/Most-Baker-Stresidents-want-to-see-red.

5 “Land zones “, CERA, accessed 12 July, 2013, http://cera. govt.nz/land-information/land-zones.

Ibid.

10 Brittany T. Rueff, “Characterization Study of Urban Cohousing,” UFDC Home, accessed 17 July, 2013, http://ufdc.ufl.edu/ uf00091523/00621.

Approaching the rebuild of Christchurch, the city faces on-going problems among residential properties. This chapter discusses the Eastern Suburbs of the city and outlines two areas of research: 1. The constant issues architects, engineers and designers face when engaging with the built environment and, 2. Finding an opportunity in the crisis.

___Chapter _01 : Christchurch Context

_01.1 Residential Red Zone _01.2 Technical Category 3 +Flood Management Area _01.2.1 Technical Categories _01.2.2 Flood Management Area _01.3 Flood Management Areas _01.4 Rise of Suburbia -Loss of Community _01.5 Garden City _ Summary

_01 Chapter One Figures Fig 1. Residential Red Zone context Image done by author Fig 2. Residential Red Zone map: The residential zone includes 7860 properties over 650 hectares Image done by author Fig 3. Residential Red Zone map: The residential zone turns into open green spaces. Image done by author Fig 4.Technical categories map Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/dbh-residential-foundation-technical-categories-central-area-20111028.pdf Fig 5. TC3 +Flood Management Area Context Image done by author Derived from https://www.facebook.com/rebuildchristchurch/photos_stream Fig 6. Flood Management Area Map Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/Homeliving/buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf Fig 7. Flood Management Area: Floor Levels on Building Heights Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/Homeliving/buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf Fig 8. Aerial View of Christchurch Image done by author Derived from http://www.naturespic.com/NewZealand/image.asp?id=18597 Fig 9. Merivale and St Albans from the spire of the St Albans Methodist Church, Rugby Street running through the center, 1992 Image done by author Derived from Biran He thesis Fig 10. High-fenced Housings in Christchurch Image done by author Photo taken by Elizabeth Cambell Fig 11. Garden City: Avon River Image done by author Photo taken by Janice Lee

Fig 1.

_ 01 .1 : Residential Red Zone

Christchurch has suffered an extensive loss of 7,860 houses due to properties being deemed uninhabitable and classified as ‘Residential Red Zone’.1 The residential properties in this zone are unlikely to be suitable for continued residential occupation or rebuilt for a considerable period of time due to extensive land damage.2 Most of the Residential Red Zone is located in the east of Christchurch along the Avon River and other areas in close proximity to waterways.3 Other Residential Red Zones are situated in the north-east of Christchurch such as Brooklands, the beach area of Waimakariri District (Pine Beach and Kairaki Beach), Kaiapoi and the Port Hills.4 The criteria that define Residential Red Zone are: -There is significant and extensive area wide land damage; -Most buildings are uneconomic to repair; -There is high risk of further damage to land and buildings from low levels of shaking; -The success of engineering solutions would be uncertain and uneconomic; and -Any repair would be disruptive and take a considerable period of time.5 Due to significant and extensive area-wide land damage, the red zone will be more susceptible to further damage due to liquefaction and lateral spreading in the event of a major earthquake.6 Considering this fact, the government made a decision to clear the houses in the Residential Red Zone and return the cleared land to open space.7 This procedure consists of three stages over a period of two to three years.8 The first stage is to remove built structures and services.9 The second will involve

larger-scale land clearance and grassing.10 The final stage will be to liaise with utility providers to remove public infrastructure no longer needed.11 This means that the residents in this area are forced to leave their homes/land and the adjacent land will face lengthy disruption that could go for several years. This process results in on-going social dislocation, which has major impacts on schooling, transport and employment for the local communities.12 To solve this problem, the government has begun purchasing homes so people would be able to move forward with their lives as quickly as possible.13 “Giving people the ability to relocate on land where they can rebuild immediately is the best option we have,” Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee says.14 For people who owned property with insurance in the Residential Red Zone on 3 September 2010, there will be two options: -The Crown makes an offer of purchase for the entire property at current rating value (less any built property insurance payments already made), and assumes all the insurance claims other than contents; or -The Crown makes an offer of purchase for the land only, and homeowners can continue to deal with their own insurer about their homes.15 According to CERA, there are only a minority of residential owners in the Residential Red Zone who decided to stay put while more than 98% of red zone residents accepted the offer and moved on. 16 11

Fig 2.

Fig 3

_01.2 : Technical Category 3 + Flood Management Area As Karen Atkinson states, “the earthquakes were just the start of our trouble.” Karen owns land that has been categorized as Technical category 3 (TC3). “Our land, like a lot of others, has been categorized as Technical Category 3-TC3. This means our land is more susceptible to future movement and liquefaction. Our land has also dropped between 200mm and 300mm and the river has risen.”17 “We are also in the Flood Management Area- we live between the estuary and the beach. Should we get a one in 50 year flood our house will be full of water. Our foundations are considered repairable apart from about 20 percent which will be replaced.”18 Karen Atkinson’s story is one of the many stories heard from Christchurch. There are approximately about 28,000 homes classified as TC3 that need repair or replacement and more than 10,000 properties situated in the flood management areas in Sumner, New Brighton and along the Avon, Heathcote and Styx Mill river catchments.[19][20] Due to the change in land levels caused by the earthquakes, there are nearly 2500 Christchurch properties that are now exposed to new flood risks, particularly around waterways.21 These properties are designated inhabitable, while they are in both flood managements areas and on TC3 designated land, which means they are exposed to the highest risk of damage due to natural events.

Residential Red Zone Technical Category 1 Technical Category 2 Technical Category 3

2.5

kilometres

Fig 4.

_01.2.1 : Technical Categories

Immediately following the earthquakes, CERA designated four residential zones based on the condition of the damage of properties: Red - uninhabitable, unlikely it can be rebuilt orange - engineers needed to undertake further investigation green - inhabitable, considered to be suitable for residential construction white - complex geotechnical issues relating to land slip and rock roll; therefore required further assessment and observation.22 There are no longer any white or orange designations, as all properties have now been rezoned to either red or green.23 Red Zone Areas in the flat land Residential Red Zone have area-wide land and infrastructure damage, and an engineering solution to repair the land would be uncertain, costly, and is likely to be highly disruptive.24 Green Zone Green zone areas are generally considered to be suitable for residential construction.25 What happens next and when will depend on a number of factors including: - the status of the land (TC1, TC2, TC3 or TC N/A-not applicable) - Council consent requirements - on-going seismic activity - foundation guidelines26

Around 100,000 Christchurch properties houses are situated in the green zone and could go ahead with repair or a rebuild process of individual properties.27 The land in green zone is divided into three technical categories.28 The categories undertook areawide assessment of green zoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ground condition such as the susceptibility to liquefaction and the extent of land and building damage caused by the earthquakes.29 These geotechnical investigations and research help in the residential rebuild of Christchurch, providing appropriate different foundation types to withstand future natural disasters.30 As Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee says â&#x20AC;&#x153;experts had undertaken extensive scientific and geotechnical investigation and research into land issues and way to reduce the risk of injury to people and damage to homes in future earthquakesâ&#x20AC;?.31 These technical categories give new residential foundation systems that are most likely to be required in the corresponding area. Technical Category 1 (TC1) - future land damage from liquefaction is unlikely. You can use standard foundations for concrete slabs or timber floors. Technical Category 2 (TC2) - minor to moderate land damage from liquefaction is possible in future significant earthquakes. Technical Category 3 (TC3) - moderate to significant land damage from liquefaction is possible in future large earthquakes. Sitespecific geotechnical investigation and specific engineering foundation design is required.32

Fig 5.

_01.2.2 : Flood Management Area

Since Christchurch is lying in flat and low land, there have always been areas prone to flooding. The earthquakes have caused significant land damage, especially areas closest to riverbank and waterways- the Sumner area, the Avon, Heathcote and Styx Mill river catchments.33 The ground levels across large areas of the city have settled by as much as 200mm to 300mm, and more in some smaller areas.34 As a result of significant land damage due to the earthquakes, some of the boundaries of the flood-prone areas are extended.35 This means that there are an increase number of properties that could suffer from flooding in a major event.36 Of the 160,000 properties in Christchurch, approximately 7000 properties are within the Avon, Styx and Heathcote river catchments and have the potential to flood in a 50 year rainfall event.37 This is an increase of 1268 properties since the earthquakes.38

2.5

kilometres

Fig 6.

Examples of homes in the Flood Management Area and the likely affect of the updated floor levels on building heights:

Interpretation of House Level Raised by

0.27m

PRE-EARTHQUAKE

South New Brighton Home in a Flood Management Area

POST-EARTHQUAKE

South New Brighton Home in a Flood Management Area

Interpretation of House Level Raised by

0.67m

PRE-EARTHQUAKE

Avondale Home in a Flood Management Area

POST-EARTHQUAKE

Avondale Home in a Flood Management Area

Interpretation of House Level Raised by

1.20m

PRE-EARTHQUAKE

Bexley Home in a Flood management Area

POST-EARTHQUAKE

Bexley Home in a Flood management Area

Fig 7.

Fig 8.

_01.4 : Rise of Surburbia -Loss of Community

Fig 9.

There is not only physical damage in the greater Christchurch region, but there are on-going issues of loss of community and social cohesion, which predominantly shaped Christchurch. The prevalence of suburbia leads to urban sprawl, which creates a feeling of isolation and loss of community and sense of place among Christchurch residents.39 The land use patterns that are characteristics of urban sprawl seem more apparent particularly in the eastern suburbs of Christchurch. These patterns include single used zoning, low-density zoning, vehicle-dependent communities, spatial mismatch and housing subdivision. There is a lack of alternative housing where the majority of the housing stock in the eastern suburbs exists as single detached housing on a large amount of individual lots.40 This is unsustainable due to the lack of response to the changing lifestyles and demographic in our contemporary society. There are opportunities to explore new forms of housing development that can provide wider range of choices to just single detached housing. The concept of co-housing is a housing alternative solution that addresses the problem of urban sprawl and encourages living as a community bringing social, environmental and economic benefits. It also offers alternative choices of housing that meet diverse needs and lifestyles for all different users.

Fig 10.

Fig 11.

_01.5 : Garden City

Since Residential Red Zone will turn into green open space, there is an opportunity to regenerate Christchurch’s identity as the Garden City- making landscape/ecology an integral part of its urban development.

wide range of fruits and vegetables have been grown historically and has been one of the supports of horticulture in Canterbury region, especially in Christchurch- Harewood, Papanui, Belfast and Opawa.46

Christchurch has long been known as the “Garden City”. The recovery strategy of greater Christchurch aims to build on Christchurch’s existing “Garden City” identity providing sustainable and green environments that stimulate a creative and innovative city.[41][42]c Also, the city plan encourages residents to enhance the “Garden City” image by retaining existing vegetation and considerately planning more vegetation, particularly in lower density residential areas (Living zone 1 and 2).43

With the respect to the past, the emphasis to continue horticultural innovation throughout the rebuild of Christchurch could be promoted to develop a sustainable and green city which would shape the character and appearance of the Christchurch.

Paul Downton’s Ecopolis theory contributed to TEDxEQCHCH 2012, which was an event focused on the future of Christchurch development. Speaking at TEDxEQCHCH Downton develops vision with the idea of cities as ecological spaces. He stresses the importance of understanding cities as eco-systems and how Christchurch can connect with its landscape/ecology. Understanding cities as eco-system is fundamental to making the new Christchurch a success. Horticultural innovation has always been recognized to be one of the important influential elements on the development of Christchurch as the Garden City.44 Horticulture, primarily orchard cultivation and market gardens has a long standing and has been an important part of the history of Canterbury since 1800s.45 A 25

The research carried out though this chapter aims to review the current condition and procedures undertaken when engaging with Christchurch. This analysis aims to provide a strong foundation for grounding the developing study of Christchurch throughout this thesis. Further this information seeks to provide an understanding of how, where and why a design solution can be proposed. Much of the media surrounding Christchurch is not positive; the latter half of this chapter seeks to reveal opportunity rather than enhancing what has been mostly negative in the city.

(Endnotes) I: 01

“Housing pressures in Christchurch “.

2 Gerry Brownlee, “Latest Christchurch land information released,” beehive.govt.nz, accessed 2 July, 2013, http://beehive.govt. nz/release/latest-christchurch-land-information-released. 3 “Rome wasn’t built in a day: Christchurch Retail, Red Zones and the Rebuild “, Jones Lang LaSalle, accessed 11 July, 2013, http:// www.propertynz.co.nz/files/Events/Justin%20Kean_Jones%20LangLaSalle_Retail%20Conference%202013.pdf.

offer “ TVNZ, accessed 16 October, 0213, http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/majority-red-zoners-accept-compensation-offer-5393143. 17 Karen Atkinson, “Christchurch quakes: Post-quake floodrisk causes stress,” stuff nation, accessed 12 August, 2013, http:// www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/share-your-news-andviews/8653045/Christchurch-quakes-Post-quake-flood-risk-causesstress. 18

Ibid.

4 “Residential Red Zone Fact Sheet,” Tonkin & Taylor, accessed 2 July, 2013, http://www.tonkin.co.nz/canterbury-land-information/ docs/T&T-Red%20Zone%20Factsheet.pdf.

19 “Sales in Christchurch TC3 zones “, Scoop, accessed 18 July, 2013, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1212/S00462/sales-inchristchurch-tc3-zones.htm.

Ibid.

“SECTION 16: BUILT ENVIRONMENT RECOVERY”.

20 Charlie Gates and Marc Greenhill, “Christchurch flood rule changes set to add grief,” suff.co.nz, accessed 1 July, 2013, http:// www.stuff.co.nz/national/7800047/Christchurch-flood-rule-changesset-to-add-grief.

Ibid.

“Residential Red Zone Fact Sheet”.

13 “RESIDENTIAL RED ZONE PROGRAMME,” CERA, accessed 16 July, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/recovery-strategy/social/residential-red-zone-programme. 14 “Residential Land,” Lumley, accessed 30 June, 2013, http:// www.lumley.co.nz/broker/ChristchurchEarthquake/ChristchurchEarthquakeresidential_land. 15

Ibid.

ONE News, “Majority of red zoners accept compensation

Ibid.

“Land zones “.

Ibid.

27 “Residential Green Zone Fact Sheet,” Tonkin & Taylor, accessed 18 July, 2013, http://www.tonkin.co.nz/canterbury-land-information/docs/T&T-Green%20Zone%20Factsheet.pdf. 28 “Overview of TC1, TC2 and TC3 technical categories,” CERA, accessed 17 August, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/residential-green-zone-technical-categories/overview. 29

“6430 orange zone properties turned green,” CERA, accessed 27

14 October, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/news/2011/6430-orange-zoneproperties-turned-green-28-october-2011. 30 “Revised guidance on repairing and rebuilding houses affected by the Canterbury earthquake sequence,” Department of Building and Housing accessed 18 July, 2013, http://www.dbh.govt.nz 31 Design Daily Team, “Canterbury receives three new foundation design categories,” idealog, accessed 13 July, 2013, http://www. idealog.co.nz/blog/2011/11/canterbury-receives-three-new-foundation-design-ca. 32

“Overview of TC1, TC2 and TC3 technical categories”.

33 “Updated residential floor levels for areas throughout Christchurch “, Christchurch City Council, http://resources.ccc.govt. nz/files/Homeliving/buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf. 34

Ibid.

42 “Draft Central City Plan,” Christchurch City Council accessed 1 July, 2013, http://www1.ccc.govt.nz/council/agendas/2011/october/ cncl3-12th/21768.pdf.

43 “Thinking about building a garage?,” Christchurch City Council, http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/GarageGuide-docs.pdf. 44 “Contamination of Horticultural Land in Canterbury- A Scoping Study,” Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, accessed 12 October, 2013, http://ecan.govt.nz/publications/Reports/ScopingStudyU0680_ pt4pt5pt6ConclRefs.pdf. 45

Ibid.

39 “Setting the Scene “, The Department of Internal Affairs, accessed 16 June, 2013, http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/ wpg_URL/Resource-material-Sustainable-Urban-Development-Setting-the-Scene. 40 “Living zones “, Christchurch City Council, accessed 18 August, 2013, http://www.ccc.govt.nz/homeliving/goaheadbuildingplanningS00/resourceconsent-s05/faq-s05-11.aspx. 41 “Christchurch Central Recovery Plan,” Christchurch Central Development Unit, accessed 3 July, 2013, http://www.andersonlloyd. co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Recovery_Plan2012.pdf. 29

This chapter explores the notion of co-housing and stilt housing and presents the key findings from a study of precedents. These precedents analyses the general concept, typology and spatial condition of the built environment. This chapter also examines the appropriate foundation system that can be applied to raised housing typology in Christchurch context. The study of this chapter informs the design principles to generate the community housing development raised up on stilts that withstands flooding.

___Chapter _02 : Community Housing

_02.1 What is Cohousing? _02.1.1 History _02.1.2 Characteristics _02.1.3 Design Principles _02.1.4 Why Cohousing? _0.2.1.5 Precedents _02.2 Stilt Housing _02.2.1 Foundation Systems _02.2.2 Precedents _Summary

_02 Chapter Two Figures Fig 1. Highlands Park Garden Village Derived from http://buildabetterburb.org/highlands-garden-village/ Fig 2. Co-housing Design Principles Image done by author Derived from http://livewellcohousing.ca/discover-cohousing/about-the-money/ http://www.care2.com/greenliving/creating-cohousing-book-giveaway.html https://www.cohousing.org/book/export/html/1109 http://buildabetterburb.org/highlands-garden-village/ Fig 3. Earthsong Cohousing Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig4. Earthsong: Pedestrian Pathway Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig 5. Earthsong: Site and Context Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig 6. Christie Walk Plan Derived from http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton__Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf Fig 7. Christie Walk: Shared Space Derived from http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton__Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf Fig 8. Christie Walk: Intimacy Derived from http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton__Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf Fig 9. Christie Walk Perspective Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig 10. Stilt Housing Typology Derived from http://www.miamitoursattractions.com/stiltsville_cruises.php

_02.1 : What is Cohousing? In our contemporary society, there is lack of consideration given to people’s changing needs. Many people seemed to be living in places that do not fit our basic needs. The prevalence of suburbia leads the trend of suburban sprawl and single-detached houses on large lots, which has fragmented our communities. Responding to these problems, the co-housing concept seems to be an alternative housing solution. Co-housing is a type of “Intentional communities” neighbourhood design.1 In co-housing, individual homes are privately owned or rented and are self-sufficient with complete kitchen, dining area, bedroom, bathrooms etc.2 In addition members enjoy convenient access to shared amenities, including a community-owned club house or Common House.3 It is a way of living that brings more connection to community and more connection to the land while also providing privacy simultaneously.4 This balance between personal privacy and tight knit community of neighbours seems to be an important aspect of living in a co-housing community.5 _02.1.1 History: The first Co-housing development wwas established in Denmark in the 1960s (known as - bofoellesskaber-literally translated ‘living communities’).6 It started when groups of young families were searching into sharing resources to accommodate sense of community other than that offered by suburban subdivisions or apartment complexes.7 Co-housing is now a well-established alternative option in many countries, continuing to build communities, give diversity and choices of lifestyles, which ultimately brings back the sense of belonging and improve quality of life for the residents. 8 Fig 1.

_02.1.2 Characteristics:

_02.1.3 Design Principles:

According to “Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves” by Charles Durrett and Kathryn McCamant, there are key 5 characteristics that define co-housing.

There are several key design issues to achieve a sustainable community. These include separation of the car from private dwellings, pedestrian pathways connecting the dwellings, pedestrian pathways, a well-designed, centrally located common house and design alternative housing types.14

Participatory process: Future residents participate in the planning and design of their community. They are responsible as a group for most of the final design decisions.9 Intentional neighbourhood design: The physical design encourages a strong sense of community. With the central pedestrian walkways or village greens, cars are generally relegated to the edge of the project, and sometimes to underground parking structure.10 Private homes and common facilities: Communities are generally designed to include significant common facilities such as common kitchen, dining area, sitting area, children’s playroom and laundry, and also contain workshop, library, exercise and crafts rooms and/or one or two guest rooms. However, every resident also has their own private home, including kitchens. As an integral part of the community, common areas are designed for daily use, to supplement private living areas.11 Resident management: Unlike a typical condominium homeowner’s association, residents in co-housing usually manage their own community after move-in, making decisions about common concerns at regular community meetings.12 Non-hierarchical structure and decision making: It said that “there are leadership roles, but not leaders in cohousing. “Decisions are made together, as a community, often using decision-making models such as consensus. 13

Fig 2.

Separation of the car Separation of the car from residences is one of the key features in design of co-housing developments.15 By parking the cars away from the private residences people will be encouraged to walk and interact with neighbours.16 These are the following opportunities resulting from separating cars from private dwellings: 1. Greater opportunity to interact with other residents while walking through the community 2. Less space required on your site for cars, allowing more space for gardens and gathering places, as well as open space and the natural environment. 3. Less pavement required for driveways, parking and turnaround areas 4. Increased security due to the increased presence of people on site.17 Pedestrian pathways By separating the vehicles from the private dwellings, there is an opportunity to create pedestrian pathways linking each residence, rather than the enormous streets and driveways of the typical suburban neighbourhoods.18 This results in a safe and friendly environment for everyone. It gives opportunity to create a pleasant place for children to play.19 Also adults will have the opportunity to communicate and interact with neighbours spontaneously.20

Kitchens Facing the Pedestrian Pathways Facing the kitchens towards the pedestrian pathway is also one of the aspects of intentional neighbourhood design.21 Since kitchen is the highest activity area of the house, the location of the kitchen seems to have a significant impact on how the community functions and long-term effects on social sustainability.22 Locating the kitchen so it faces the pedestrian pathways brings many benefits such as it increases oversight and supervision of the public pathways, provides security and safety for the children, as well as sense of connection.23 Optimum community size The optimum community size is between 12 to 40 dwelling units.24 If the community is smaller than 12 units, there are too small a number of people for diversity and sharing and it may feel too intimate.25 It also may have not enough funds for creating and maintaining common facilities.26 On the other hand, if a community is larger than 40 dwellings, the residents will find it difficult to know everybody, and would then loose the sense of community.27 However, communities larger than 36 dwellings may work well in suburban or rural areas where the residents will be more insular.28 Affordability Co-housing provides affordable housing complexes through design. It offers a wider range of income levels through offering diverse sizes of and prices of homes.29 Housing ranges from one bedroom to a four bedrooms, which give choices for residents to choose a home that fits their needs and lifestyles.30 Further, this can add value by sharing resources and use of common areas such as land, community garden, laundry and the Common House.31 Design Alternatives and Housing Types Co-housing considers a wide range of housing needs and the 38

alternatives. The residences in a co-housing neighbourhood may comprise of single-family detached houses, attached houses, town houses and apartments.32 The Common house / Centrally Located Common House The location of common house is an important aspect in designing a co-housing neighbourhood.33 The common house should be centrally located, which allows residents to easily get to from their homes.34 The common includes functions and activities, providing space residents to meet up and use the facilities.35 Almost all co-housing communities choose to include the following basic functions in their common house, in order of priority: -A dining area and gathering space -A common kitchen -A children childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s play area -Mail pick-up location 36 _02.1.4 Why Co-housing? The co-housing concept re-establishes numerous benefits of traditional villages within the context of the twenty-first century.37 There are many reasons why cohousing should be introduced.

Supports aging in place

Support mix of privacy and autonomy as desired

The benefits of co-housing are:

Increased safety and security

Saving money and reducing waste through voluntary sharing38

Help and support from neighbours

Ready access to a network of skills, knowledge & abilities

Opportunities for social interaction and engagement

Shared responsibility for managing the community

Kid-friendly and parent-friendly

With this number of reasons, co-housing development seems a very relevant housing solution for the rebuild of greater Christchurch. Christchurch would benefit from having this type of housing development.

Fig 3.

_0.2.1.5 Precedents _Earthsong, New Zealand

Fig 4.

The Earthsong Eco-Neighbourhood is New Zealand’s first cohousing community, which was created in the mid-1990s by Robin Allison.39 Their vision “is to establish a cohousing neighbourhood based on the principles of permaculture that will serve as a model of a socially and environmentally sustainable community.”40 Within this vision, there were three components: sustainable design and construction, respectful and cooperative community, and education by demonstration.41 Earthsong encourages a diverse community. It is home to nearly 70 residents- including young families, singles and seniors.42 The community is comprised of a total of 32 houses in clusters of two and three story dwellings arranged along common paths and shared courtyards.43 The sizes/types of the dwellings also range from one bedroom studios to four bedroom houses to accommodate diverse age and household types.44 Accessibility for older or less mobile people was one of the factors that were closely considered in the design of the homes and also the site.45 Seven houses were built to accommodate residents with limited mobility and all building has level entry thresholds to their ground floor.46 Earthsong also considered children’s needs by providing young child and teen rooms in the Common House, vehicle free central courtyard with a playhouse, large sandpit, and children’s vegetable gardens. 47

Fig 5.

Sturt Street

_legend H.

G. F.

A. _Community Produce Garden B. _Neem Tree Circle C. _Carport Courtyard D. _Pot Circle Place E. _Sand Pit Corner F. _Carpark Courtyard G. _Carpark Courtyard H. _Story Wall Passage (North) I. _Roof Garden (North) J. _Roof Garden (South)

_gathering space _threshold zones _pedestrian traffic

Russell Street

Fig 7.

N C.

Fig 6.

Fig 8.

_Christie walk, Australia

Christie Walk demonstrates several concepts about facilitating community processes in architecture and urban design. Downton provides various shared spaces and facilities in Christie Walk. These are a community room and library, a community kitchen, laundry, roof garden, community produce garden and courtyards. Christie Walk is high density but it is not high rise.48 There are 27 dwellings, which include four-three storey linked townhouses.49 Each house is laid out around the shared space, which is a provided amenity to every resident.50 It is a meaningful built environment with strong sense of community

Fig 9.

Fig 10.

_02.2 : Stilt Housing

Stilt Housings are built primarily as a protection against flooding.51 It is a very simple architectural intervention; raise the house to a higher level on stilts and leave spaces for flood waters to flow through.52 As well as providing protection from flood prone areas, stilt housing also promotes social interaction. By providing covered space below the residential areas, stilt housing allows for another surface to be occupied in the public domain.

Deep piles

Ground improvements

Light-weight re-levellable platform

Light-weight with underslab

Fig 11.

_02.2.1 Foundation Systems

The repair and rebuild of the foundation for TC3 properties is already underway in the eastern region of Christchurch.53 Building & Housing has proposed several foundation concepts that will help in the major repairs and rebuild of individual properties in TC3 land areas. The foundation concepts differ in the levels of vertical settlement and lateral spreading that they can tolerate.54 They also differ in the type of dwelling that they can support so each one has its own building constraints.55 There is no one size fits all foundation option in TC3. The three recommended foundation concepts are: deep piles, site ground improvements and surface structure with shallow foundations.56 In the area of both TC3 land and flood management area, a deep pile concept seems the most appropriate foundation that is suitable with the raised housing typology. Deep piles â&#x20AC;&#x201C; are already widely used in parts of Christchurch in peaty areas or areas where there is soft ground.57 Deep piles can go down as 20 metres but you would hope to find a solid layer of gravel at 12 to 15metres. Geotechnical information will be crucial to ascertain the extent of stable ground.58

_0.2.2.2 Precedents _Casal building, Spain

The Casal building is one of the proposed buildings of Sociopolis project, which explores the possibility of creating a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;shared habitatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; that would encourage a greater social interaction between its inhabitants.59 The Casal building is comprised of three different functions - a community centre, an ecumenical centre and 24 housing units.60 The building is placed at a height of seven and a half meters from the ground, leaving the ground level as free as possible.61 The idea was to bring as much light as possible to the lower level.62 This space allows public activities to take place and permit maximum availability to the rest of the inhabitants of Sociopolis.63 It establishes a social space where people constantly meet new people and encourages greater social interaction between its inhabitants.

Fig 12.

Fig 13.

_Hurricane Katrina

Hurricane Katrina’s destructive hurricane and storm brought the most devastated damage in the history of United States.64 The hurricane caused major flooding by rising sea levels around these areas.65 After the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina, a strange new kind of house is emerging in these areas.66 The destruction of so many houses in these areas has led to flood-proof designs raising houses above the ground.67 In the article “Stilted Architecture” by Karri Jacobs talks about her recent trip to Mississippi, which is one of the areas that got hit by Hurricane Katrina. He describes “house after house hovered in the air, generally accessible by long sets of stairs, front and back. Underneath, a car or pickup truck might be parked. There were occasional attempts at landscaping below, and tentative arrangements of outdoor furniture.”68

This chapter aims to provide an in-depth study of precedents viewed as highly appropriate to the context of Christchurch. Building on the previous chapter, this research, critique and analysis provides a catalogue of case studies as examples of design methods.

(Endnotes) 1 “Welcome to the UK Cohousing Network,” UK Cohousing Network, accessed 12 August, 2013, http://www.cohousing.org.uk/. 2 “Cohousing fact sheet “, The Cohousing Association of the United States, accessed 18 August, 2013, http://www.cohousing.org/ docs/NatlFactsheet.pdf. 3

Ibid.

The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 127.

Ibid.

4 Chris ScottHanson and Kelly ScottHanson, The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, Rev. ed. (Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2005).

Ibid.

“Cohousing fact sheet “.

Ibid.

The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 2.

24 “Built-in community: Pleasant Hill cohousing demonstrates innovations in sustainability “, The Cohousing Company McCamant & Durrett Architects accessed 12 August, 2013, http://www.cohousingco.com/category/uncategorized/.

7 Kathryn McCamant and Charles Durrett, Creating cohousing : building sustainable communities (Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2011), 5. 8 “Cohousing “, Spatial Agency, accessed 13 August, 2013, http://www.spatialagency.net/database/why/ecological/co-housing.

The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 128.

Ibid.

11 The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 4.

“Cohousing fact sheet “.

Ibid.

9 ScottHanson and ScottHanson, The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 3. 10

Ibid.

The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 125.

32 The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 132.

The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 126.

33 The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 127.

Ibid. 53

34 35 36

The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 138. Ibid. The cohousing handbook : building a place for community, 139.

37 “Pine Street Cohousing “, Communities Directory, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://directory.ic.org/2237/Pine_Street_Cohousing. 38 “Why Cohousing?,” Village Resources Cohousing Consultants, accessed 19 Sept, 2013, http://cohousingconsultants.com/ why-cohousing/. 39 Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world (Newtown, CT: Taunton Press, 2011), 153. 40 “About Earthsong,” Earthsong Eco-Neighbourhood, accessed 17 August, 2013, http://www.earthsong.org.nz/about.html. 41 Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world. 42

Ibid.

48 Paul Downton, “Christie Walk,” City of Charles Sturt, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/ resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton_-_Christie_Walk__ 54

Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_ May_2011.pdf. 49 “Christie Walk “, Urban Ecology, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://www.urbanecology.org.au/eco-cities/christie-walk/. 50 “ChCh Viva Integrated Sustainable Design Workshop,” The Viva Project, accessed 18 August, 2013, http://thevivaproject.org.nz/ wp-content/uploads/2012/07/ChCh-Viva-Integrated-Sustainable-Design-Workshop.pdf. 51 “Stilt house “, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed 2 September, 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilt_house. 52 Weihua Fang, “Stilt House Building Technology for Flood Disaster Reduction “, http://drh.edm.bosai.go.jp/files/36131ddc632b85978c4a1797c231136455c807af/8_TIK4_P.pdf. 53 “TC3 residential rebuild booklet,” CERA, accessed 12 October, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/ tc3-residential-rebuild-booklet-A4-20121204.pdf.

Sociópolis : project for a city of the future ([Barcelona]

[Vienna]: Actar ; Architektur Zentrum, 2004), 133. 62

Ibid.

Sociópolis : project for a city of the future, 129.

64 “Hurricane Katrina “, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed 18 August, 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina. 65 “Storm Surge Overview “, National Hurricane Center accessed 18 August, 2013, http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/surge/. 66 Karrie Jacobs, “Stilted Architecture “ Metropolis Megazine, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://www.metropolismag.com/July-August-2013/Stilted-Architecture/.

Ibid.

67 Craig E. Colten, “Resilience and the City: Katrina and Consequences in New Orleans “, accessed 19 August, 2013, http://www. historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/ october-2012/resilience-and-the-city.2013

Ibid.

Jacobs, “Stilted Architecture “.

59 “Sociopolis,” Guallart Architects, accessed 17 October, 2013, http://www.guallart.com/projects/sociopolis. 60 Vicente Guallart, Actar., and Architektur Zentrum Wien., Sociópolis : project for a city of the future ([Barcelona] [Vienna]: Actar ; Architektur Zentrum, 2004), 129. 55

This chapter presents the condition of housing stock and human demographics in Christchurch. Through the study of current conditions, this chapter seeks to make a further argument as to why the co-housing in the previous chapter is appropriate in the Christchurch context. The city has a high shortage of housing, as discussed in Chapter One, and this thesis argues that single detached housing is not only unsustainable but is not conducive to facilitating a growing community and also no longer meets the demographic demand.

___ Chapter_ 03 : Christchurch Housing

_03.1 Housing Crisis _03.2 Housing Economy _03.3 Timeline of Existing Housing Typologies _03.4 Age of Housing Stock Relative to Age _03.5 Current Housing Stock _03.6 Christchurch Demographics _03.7 Changing Household Composition _03.8 Disparity between Demographics and Housing _03.9 Median House Prices _ Summary

_03 Chapter Three Figures Fig 1. Housing Crisis Image done by author Fig 2. Household Growth by Region 2010-2019 Image done by author Adapted to http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/market-economics-land-and-housing-supply.pdf Fig 3. Christchurch Housing Types Image done by author Adapted to http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/CityLeisure/statsfacts/statistics/OccupiedDwellings-DwellingType-docs.pdf Fig 4. Christchurch Existing Housing Typologies Image done by author Adapted to http://www.beaconpathway.co.nz/further-research/article/housing_typologies_in_your_area Fig 5. Quantify Christchurch Housing Stock Relative to Age Image done by author Adapted to http://www.beaconpathway.co.nz/images/uploads/Final_Report_EN6570(8)_Housing_Typologies_Current_Stock_Prevalence.pdf Fig 6. Post-quake Housing Context Image done by author http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/SpecialIssue/44(4)0342.pdf Fig 7. Estimated of the Total Housing Stock Image done by author Derived from http://www.dbh.govt.nz/UserFiles/File/Publications/Sector/pdf/christchurch-housing-report.pdf Fig 8. Demographic Profile of Christchurch Image done by author Adapted from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/AboutAPlace/SnapShot.aspx?type=ta&ParentID=1000013&tab=Agesex&id=2000060 Fig 9. 2013 population of Christchurch Broken Down by Gender and Five-year Age Groups Image done by author http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/media/44655/chch_city_health_profile_2012.pdf Fig 10. Changing Household Composition 2006-2031 Image done by author http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/improving-the-design-quality-affordability-residential-intensification.pdf Fig 11. Current Households and Housing Size Image done by author Deprived from He, Biran. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution.â&#x20AC;? Thesis (MArch-Prof), University of Auckland, 2012 58

Fig 12. Mean Sale price for Houses Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf Fig 13. Number of Houses Sold Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf Fig 14. Mean Weekly Rent Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf Fig. 15 Percentage of Rental Bonds Lodged Monthly with Weekly Rent Below $300 Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pd

_03.1 : Housing Crisis

Since the February 2011 Earthquake,

the greater Christchurch region suffered a loss of 7,860

houses due to properties being deemed uninhabitable and classified as ‘Residential Red Zone.’ It has also been estimated that a future

9,100 properties were uninhabitable due to requiring major repairs and rebuilds.

According to environment canterbury ‘s draft land-use plan:

It is estimated that Christchurch needs over 36,000 new houses

Fig 1.

17%

Auckland Canterbury

46%

22%

Two or more Flats or Houses Joined Together

Waikato

Private Dwelling Not Futher Defined

Bay of Plenty

74%

Rest of N.Z

9% 12%

Fig 2.

Separate House

Wellington

Fig 3.

Others

_03.2 : Housing Economy

Household Growth by Region 2010-2019

Existing Christchurch Housing Type

There is a high housing demand heavily concentrated in the main urban areas, especially in Auckland and Christchurch. Auckland alone accounts around 46% of total national demand growth over the next decade.1 It will need around 100,000 additional dwellings or about 10,000 dwellings annually. 2Canterbury has the next highest on the housing demand with 12% of the national total. Over the decade, it will need over 26,000 additional dwellings or about 2,600-2,800 per year. Other main areas of demand are Wellington (9%, 200 dwellings a year), Waikato (8.7%, 1,900-2,000 dwellings per year) and Bay of Plenty (7.1%, 1,500-1,600 dwellings per year). These five largest regions account for nearly 83% of total housing demand in New Zealand. 3

According to Statistics New Zealand Census 2006, there were 134,718 dwellings in Christchurch. 4Since 1986, there has been an additional 31,035 occupied, equating to an increase of 30 per cent growth.5 Christchurch is dominated by single detached housings. There were 99,552 separate houses, 74% of total housing in Christchurch.6 The single detached type of housing has been increased by 23,270 between 1986 and 2006, which is an increase of 31%.7 On other hand, multi-unit dwellings are the second largest choice with 22%.8 However, the number of private dwellings that were â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;two or more flats or houses joined togetherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; increased by 4,260, an increase of 16.6%. 9 Overall, Christchurch is dominated by single detached houses, which are designed to focus on the individual. There are limited alternative housing choices for Christchurch residents. This shows that co-housing is a relevant solution for the Christchurch context. Co-housing provides a better foundation for community with shared facilities and offers a wide range of housing choices and living such as the examples in the previous chapter.

_03.3 : Timeline of Existing Housing Typologies Existing housing typologies

Name of Type of Current Suburban House Villa and Bungalows

Artdeco

State House

1960s and Early 1970s Multi-unit Houses

1970s Housing Pre-1978 Insulation

1925-1935

1930-1970

1960 early 1970

1970-1978

1980s Housing

1990s Housing

1978-1989

1990-1996

Last Decade

Dates

Past

1880-1920 1920-1940

1990-1996

Present Fig 4.

Existing Housing Typologies Many Christchurch residents live in poor quality homes. The Christchurchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s housing performance level can be defined in relation to the age of the housing stock because many existing homes were built before insulation was mandatory, which began in 1978.10 The older housing stock are more likely to be cold, damp and mouldy, lack sun and have polluting heating devises and poor insulation.11

_03.4 : Age of Housing Stock 25521

Total Housing Stock 142,714 (to March 2006)

22553

21727

17760

14083 12117

8437

8162 5153

344

4725

2133

2000

1990

1980

1970

1960

1950

1940

1930

1920

1910

1900

Pre 1900

Fig 5.

The graph shows the quantity of Christchurch Housing Stock relative to age (up to March 2006)

Approximately only 34% of housing stock were built after insulation became mandatory.13

The 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s housing has the largest housing stock in Christchurch with approximately 18% of total housing stock. These were built before 1978.12

51% of housing stocks were built between 1940 and 1980.14

Fig 6.

_03.5 : Current Housing Stock

Estimate of the Total Housing Stock for the Greater Christchurch Region Quarter

Housing Stock

Anual Change

2006

176,300

2007

179,900

3,600

2008

182,400

2,500

2009

183,900

1,500

2010

186,200

2,300

2011

176,200

-10,000

2012

174,200

-1,500

After taking into account new houses being built, it has been estimated that the total housing stock has been reduced by a net 11,500, or 6.2% of the previous housing stock, between the fourth quarter of 2010 when earthquake sequence started and the fourth quarter of 2012.15 This estimate assumes that the houses that were uninhabitable because of the earthquakes were not able to be occupied and therefore were no longer â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;housing stockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.16

Fig 7.

48%

52%

Median age is 36 years old for people in Christchurch

Projection shows the increase growth of 65 - 84 age group in 2031.

Fig 8.

_03.6 : Christchurch Demographics

Christchurchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population is slightly older compared to the national average.17 According to Statistics New Zealand, the median age in June 2011 is 38 and projected to rise to 42.3 by 2026.18 The Christchurch residents in working age group of 15-64 years comprised of 68% of the total population.19 Christchurch has a high percentage of people over 65 made up by 14.4% of the population in Christchurch compared with of the total New Zealand population, while 17.5% of Christchurch people were under 15, which is slightly lower than the total New Zealand population.20 Overall, the elderly people are growing both in absolute numbers and as a proportion of the total population over the age of 65, which projected to continue to increase.21

80-84

70-74

60-64

Age Groups

50-54

40-44

30-34

20-24

10-14

0-4 20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

Number of People

Fig 9.

5,000

15,000

10,000

20,000

The following graph shows the 2013 population of Christchurch. This is broken down by gender and five year age group. According to the graph, there is a large proportion of 40-44 age group while there is much smaller group in the age range 60 and above.22 In next twenty years, it is projected that there will be a small group of middle aged people supporting the larger group of elderly people.23 Due to the large number of elderly people, Christchurch has a higher proportion of single person households than the national average. 24

_03.7 : Changing Household Composition

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

Projected demographic data from Statistics New Zealand indicates changing housing needs. By 2041 Christchurch will see more single person household, families will likely become smaller and there will be more couples without children and an increase in â&#x20AC;&#x153;empty-nestersâ&#x20AC;?. 25

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

-10.0%

New Zealand

Auckland

Christchurch

-20.0%

Couple

One Parent

Two Parent

Single Person

Other Multi-Person

Fig 10.

_03.8 : Disparity between Demographics & Housing

+ 22 % Two or more flats or Houses Joined together

74% Separate House

Christchurch Housing Stock 1 bedroom Houses

(5.4%)

2 bedrooms Houses

(23.9%)

3+ bedrooms Houses

(67.7%)

In many countries, the demographic trend is shifting towards an increase of older age, single person households and smaller households .26 These shifts in demographics are affecting the demand of housing for smaller and potentially multi-unit dwelling.27 This demographic trend is emerging in Christchurch. According to Christchurch City Fact Pack 2013, a quarter of the houses are occupied by one person, while over a third contains two people, giving an average of 2.5 people per household..28 This has been projected to reduce down to 2.2 people per household by 2041.29 On other hand, Christchurch housing stock is dominated by large, single detached housings where about two-thirds (67.7%) of housing stock has three or more bedrooms.30 These facts show that there is a mismatch between the smaller households and the large dwelling size of Christchurch housing stock, which leads a significant discrepancy in supply and demand.

Christchurch Housing Households 1 Person

(25.1%)

2 People

(34.5%)

3+ People

(40.4%)

Fig 11.

South

800

East

400 Northeast

800

50 0

Northwest

200 150 100

600 400 Southwest

800

InnerNorth

600

Number of Houses, monthly

Northwest

Southwest

InnerNorth

400 200

Central City

800

Inner South

Central City

Inner South

600 400 Selwyn

50 0

200 150 100

50 0

200 800

200 150 100

Waimakariri

Selwyn

200 150 100

600 400

Waimakariri

Jan 13

Jul 12

Jan 12

Jul 11

Jan 11

Jul 10

Jan 10

Jan 13

Jul 12

Jan 12

Jul 11

Jan 11

Jan 13

Jul 12

Jan 12

Jul 11

Jan 11

Jul 10

Jan 10

Jan 13

Jul 12

Jan 12

Jul 11

Jan 11

Jul 10

Jan 10

Fig 12.

Jul 10

50 0

200

Jan 10

Median Sale Price (,000),monthly

Northeast

50 0

200

East

200 150 100

600

200

South

Fig 13.

_03.9 : Median House Prices

Since the earthquakes, both housing prices and rent costs have increased in the greater Christchurch region.31 The loss of houses caused problems of housing affordability due to high demand and a shortage of housing. According to CERA, the average price of Christchurch properties rose 6.6% between January 2010 to January 2013.32 Table 1 shows that some areas have had significant increases, while other have decreased. Between February 2010 and February 2013, housing prices have been rising in the West (North West and South West) and South (Inner South and South).33 Also, Selwyn and Waimakariri Districts have experienced large price increases as people move from Christchurch city.34 However, the rate of increase in average house prices are slightly lower and static in the East (East and North East) and Inner North compared to other areas of Christchurch.35 This is probably due to the significant damage of the land.

Figure 2 shows that the number of monthly house sales has doubled in Waimakariri in the year after the February 2011 earthquake.36 Also, the number of sales in the Selwyn District increase by 38 percent.37 There was also rapid increase in number of sales in North West, South West in the year after the February 2011 earthquake.38

South

East

Northeast

Northwest

450

400 350 300 250 450

400 350 300 250

InnerNorth Percentage of Rentals

Southwest

Median Rent, weekly

450

400 350 300 250

Central City

Inner South

450

400 350 300 250

2008

Selwyn

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Waimakariri

450

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

400 350 300 250

Fig 14.

Fig 15.

The rental prices have risen more sharply than house prices and at a faster rate than the national rental average.39 There is significant increase in median rental prices following the September 2010 and February 2011 earthquakes. This is due to a shortage of rent units.40 Between February 2010 and February 2013, the median rent prices have increased by 25 percent, which equates to an extra $74.41 The biggest increases have occurred in Selwyn District (36 percent), Waimakariri District (35 percent) and the Inner North and North West of Christchurch (34 percent). The East has the lowest median rents of $309 per week, with a mean increase of $51 per week (19.8 percent). 42

Overall, these indicate that house sales and rent prices have increased following the earthquakes. There was higher demand in Selwyn, Waimakariri and the North West and South West of Christchurch.43 Therefore, those areas have experienced large increased mean prices in 2012. 44 Despite a subdued market in the East, North East and Inner South, the median house and rent prices in greater Christchurch have increase at a slightly faster rate than other regions in New Zealand.45

The gathered demographic information of Christchurch has identified several key findings to inform the design proposal. These are: -

Christchurch has a high housing demand

Majority of Christchurch residents live in poor quality homes

Limited availability of housing choices in Christchurchdominated by single detached housing

Decrease in average household size -There will be more increase in older age â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;empty-nestersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, single person households and families will likely become smaller

Problem of housing affordability- Rapid increase in housing prices and rent fees

The following findings show that the lack of housing choices with single detached housing can no longer continue in the Christchurch context. It no longer meets demographic demand; the single detached housing is not as conducive to facilitate community and also will increase the problem of affordability. By providing co-housing, it can be economically beneficial for residents to be in a shared facility and live in affordable homes that address their needs and lifestyles.

(Endnotes) 1 Douglas Fairgray, “Land and Housing Supply,” Chranz, accessed 20 August, 2013, http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/market-economics-land-and-housing-supply.pdf. 2

Ibid.

4 “Christchurch dwelling type, 1981 - 2006,” Christchurch City Council, accessed 9 July, 2013, http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/ files/CityLeisure/statsfacts/statistics/OccupiedDwellings-DwellingType-docs.pdf.

Ibid.

17 “Christchurch City Health & Wellbeing Profile 2012,” Healthy Christchurch, accessed 13 August, 2013, http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/media/44655/chch_city_health_profile_2012.pdf. 18 “Subnational ethnic population projections,” Statistics New Zealand, accessed 14 October, 2013, http://www.stats.govt.nz/ browse_for_stats/population/estimates_and_projections/subnational-ethnic-population-projections/age.aspx. 19

“Christchurch City Health & Wellbeing Profile 2012”.

Ibid.

22 “Age and ethnicity “, Christchurch City Council, accessed 1 December, 2013, http://www.ccc.govt.nz/cityleisure/statsfacts/census/agegenderethnicity.aspx.

Ibid.

10 “Housing Typologies-Current Stock Prevalence “, Beacon Pathway, accessed 9 July, 2013, http://www.beaconpathway.co.nz/ images/uploads/Final_Report_EN6570(8)_Housing_Typologies_Current_Stock_Prevalence.pdf. 11 “Auckland Sustainable Homes Assessment Part 1: Insulation and Clean Heat Appliances,” Auckland Regional Council, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/unitaryplan/Documents/Section32report/Appendices/Appendix%203.8.14.pdf. 12

“Housing Typologies-Current Stock Prevalence “.

Ibid.

“Housing pressures in Christchurch “.

“Christchurch City Health & Wellbeing Profile 2012”.

24 “A demographic profile of Christchurch “, Healthy Christchurch accessed 7 July, 2013, http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/ city-health-profile/who-lives-here.aspx. 25 CityScope Consultants, “Improving the Design, Quality and Affordability of Residential Intensification in New Zealand,” Chranz, accessed 18 August, 2013, http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/improving-the-design-quality-affordability-residential-intensification.pdf. 26 Biran He, “Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution” (Thesis (MArch-Prof), University of Auckland, 2012., 2012). 27 “Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution” (Thesis (MArch-Prof), University of Auckland, 2012., 2012), 83. 28 “Christchurch City Fact Pack 2013,” Christchurch City Council accessed 1 December, 2013, http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/ CityLeisure/statsfacts/FactPack2013.pdf. 77

Ibid.

30 “Village Life,” Information Booklet, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://www.villagelife.co.nz/media/uploads/2012_06/info-pack.pdf. 31

“Housing pressures in Christchurch “.

32 “Housing affordability and availability,” CERA, accessed 19 August, 2013, http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf. 33

Ibid.

“Housing pressures in Christchurch “.

“Housing affordability and availability”.

“Housing pressures in Christchurch “.

“Housing affordability and availability”.

Ibid.

The Public Green Space in Christchurch case study explores the identity and the framework of Christchurch as a “Garden City” through the surveys conducted within existing public open spaces. These surveys were conducted before the earthquake by Christchurch City Council, which highlight four prominent attributes of open public spaces from the perspective of Christchurch residents. The accessibility of open spaces, the percentage of open space within neighbourhoods, the level of satisfaction towards Christchurch’s public open space, and lastly, horticulture in Christchurch. These points are further discussed throughout the chapter. Together, the feedback points towards the need for green networks in the suburbs, to provide spaces for leisure, recreation activities and allows a mixed variety of programmes.

___Chapter _04 : Public Green Space in Christchurch

_04.1 Chistchurch Identity Garden City _04.2 Accessible Green Space _04.3 Percent Open Space within Neighborhoods _04.4 Green space Typologies _04.5 Satisfaction with Public Open Space _04.6 Horticulture in Christchurch _Summary

_04 Chapter Four Figures Fig 1. “Garden City” Images Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/PublicOpenSpaceStrategy.pdf. Fig 2. Christchurch City Usable and Non-usable Green Space Image done by author http://www.geohealth.canterbury.ac.nz/news/archive6.shtml Fig 3. Residents Living within 400 Metres of Areas of Public Open Space and Conservation Zones, 2009 Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1357_AccessibilityOpenSpace&ConservationZonesMap-docs.pdf Fig 4. Location and Area of Parks by Type, 2009 Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_2192_ParkType&AreaMap-docs.pdf Fig 5. Satisfaction with Christchurch’s Parks, 2007-2009 Image done by author derived from http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1871_SatisfactionWithPublicParks-docs.pdf. Fig 6. Horticultural Crops in Canterbury Image done by author adapted to http://ecan.govt.nz/publications/Reports/contamination_horticultural_land_scoping_study_U0680.pdf

Boating on the Avon Spring Time

Harper Avenue Cherries are Iconic Feature of Christchurch

Mona Vale Historic Garden Park

Avon River, Autumn

Fig 1.

_04.1 : Christchurch Identity Garden City

Christchurch is well known as Garden City for its gorgeous parks, reserves and gardens and an extensive system of rivers, streams and wetlands.1 These inherent features helped lead Christchurch win an international â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Garden Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; award.2 About one third of public open spaces are devoted parks and reserves, ranging from small playgrounds for children to larger regional parks.3

Usable Green Space Non-usable Green Space

2.5

kilometres

Fig 2.

_04.2 : Accessible Green Space

The map shows the usable and non-usable green spaces. The usable space is defined as open public spaces which the residents can use such as cemetery, garden and Heritage Park, local/ community park, regional Park, riverbank and Conservation Park, and sports park.4 Whereas, the non-usable green areas are defined as agricultural land and commercial forestry.5 Therefore these areas cannot be used by the residents.6 -

Only 12% of green open space is provided as public space that all Christchurchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s resident can use. 7

88% of green open space is cannot be used for Christchurch residents. 8

This suggests that there are relatively small proportions of the green spaces for public use while the rest of the space is used for agricultural land and commercial forestry which cannot be accessed by the residents.

Public Open Space 400m Distance

2.5 kilometres

Fig 3.

_04.3 : Percent Open Space within Neighbourhoods

The map shows accessibility to open public space for Christchurch residents. It shows 400 metre buffers around areas of public open space, which is considered to be within easy walking distance. [9] [10] -

The majority of Christchurch Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s residents live within 400 metre walking distance from a public open space. 11

However, there are small pockets of areas of high density residential areas that are not within 400metres of public open space. These are mainly located north of the Central City, along, Cranford Street, Papanui Road and Innes Road.12

Other urban areas where there is a lack of open space accessibility are: to west of the Central City, along Blenheim Road; to the east along Fitzgerald Avenue and to the south along Ensors Road; and Barrington Street. 13

The majority of residents live within walking distance. This suggests that these open public spaces were equitably spread across the city, readily accessible to the public. It also means that there are equitable provision of outdoor recreation opportunities for residents.

Cemetery (26) Garden &Heritage Park (47) Local/Community Park (621) Regional Park(84) Riverbank &Conservation Park (86) Sports Park (109)

2.5 kilometres

Fig 4.

_04.4 : Green Space Typologies

The map shows the location of public spaces within Christchurch, which have all been owned and/or administered by Christchurch City Council. These public spaces are divided into 6 typologies; Cemetery, Garden and heritage Park, Local/Community Park, Regional Park, Riverbank and Conservation Park, and Sports Park.14 -

In 2009, Christchurch City owned/administered 973 parks, covering an area of 7,831 hectares. 15

Nearly two thirds of the city parks (621) were local community parks. However these parks covered only 493 hectares (6.3%) of all park area.16

Sports parks were the second most common type of park in Christchurch. There were 109 sports parks, covering 1,200 hectares, 15.4% of all park area. 17

There were 84 Regional Parks comprised with largest percentage of area with 5,707 hectares (73% of all park area).18

There are only 47 Garden and Heritage parks (5% of all parks), covering 1 % of all park area. 19

Other types of parks in Christchurch include Cemeteries and Riverbank and Conservation parks. 20

There is diversity in the type and size of open public spaces and recreational facilities equitably distributed and conveniently located throughout Christchurch. However, not all population groupsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs may be being met.21 It seems that older adultsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; recreational needs were not well catered.22 There is only 5% of Garden and Heritage, which is one of

92 Local and district park The Botanic Gardens

2007 2008

Don't know

dissatisfied

Very

Dissatisfied

Neither

Satisfied

satisfied

Very

Don't know

dissatisfied

Very

Dissatisfied

Neither

Satisfied

satisfied

Very

Don't know

dissatisfied

Very

Dissatisfied

Neither

Satisfied

satisfied

Very

Larger Reserves Bottle Lake Forest Park or Port Hill 2009

Fig 5.

_04.5 : Satisfaction with Public Open Space

the open public spaces that provide opportunities for older and young people to integrate.This graph shows the levels of satisfaction with Christchurch’s open public spaces. This survey question was “Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with; the Botanic Gardens, local or district parks; and larger reserves or open spaces used for outdoor recreation.23 -

In 2009, levels of satisfaction with Christchurch’s parks were high, with average of 88% of residents being very satisfied or satisfied. 24

Levels of satisfaction were highest with the Botanic Gardens, with 92% of respondents being either satisfied or very satisfied in 2009. Local or district parks had 88% satisfaction rates and larger reserves had 83%.25

In 2009, 4% of residents were dissatisfied with Christchurch’s local and district parks. Only 1% of residents were dissatisfied with the Botanic Gardens and 2% of residents dissatisfied with larger reserves. 26

In 2009, 2% of residents were very dissatisfied with Christchurch’s parks. In 2007 and 2008, no respondents were very dissatisfied with any of the three types of parks in Christchurch. 27

This indicates that public perception on the quality of parks within Christchurch. Overall, the majority of residents seem to be happy with Christchurch’s open public spaces, which means that current provision of parks are generally good and well maintained. This survey shows that local residents are strongly tied to the public open spaces and Christchurch is committed to protect, enhance and maintain the public open space network of Christchurch District for residents.

Vegetables Vegetables

Potatoes

Potatoes Carrots

Asparagus

Beans

Beetroot

Cabbage

Peas

Beans

Onion

Celery

Fruits

Carrots

Fruits

Pears

Cherries

Apples

Berries

Apricots

Plums

Peaches

Onion

Celery

Beetroot Cauliflower

Cauliflower

Cabbage Sweetcorn

Sweetcorn

Peas

Fig 6.

_04.6 : Horticulture in Christchurch

Christchurch has abundant water, arable land, fertile soil and a moderate climate conducive to growing fruit and vegetables.28 The fertile soil and a moderate climate mitigates much of the insect and disease pressure.29 A wide variety of fruit and vegetable crops have been grown historically in the Canterbury Region. The following tables give a general indication as to the main crops that have been grown around Canterbury since the 19th Century.30

In conclusion, the four points summarise the community pride in maintaining this image of Christchurch as the Garden City. The green spaces are evenly distributed throughout Christchurch, playing an important role in people’s quality of living by proving open spaces for leisure, recreation activities and enjoyment. The residents are satisfied with Christchurch’s open public spaces. The feedback provides a premise for my design that supports green networks that are well integrated into urban fabric. By incorporating ‘Garden City’ values into a housing development, it provides the residents the choice to enjoy the recreational amenities and gardens for leisure while protecting, maintaining and enhancing the image of the Garden City.

(Endnotes) 1 “Garden & Heritage Parks “, Christchurch City Council, accessed 12 October, 2013, http://www.christchurch.org.nz/publications/GardenAndHeritageParks.pdf. 2 “Living,” Christchurch.org.nz, accessed 16 October, 2013, http://www.christchurch.org.nz/living/. 3 “Christchurch & Canterbury,” whytewaters, accessed 16 August, 2013, http://activitiesnow.com/162Kings/pages/CHCH.pdf. 4 “Public Open Space Strategy 2010-2040,” Christchurch City Council, accessed 18 October, 2013, http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/ files/PublicOpenSpaceStrategy.pdf. 5 “GeoHealth Lab News- Archive Apr- Nov 2009,” University of Canterbury, accessed 15 July, 2013, http://www.geohealth.canterbury.ac.nz/news/archive6.shtml. 6

Ibid.

7 “Eco-belt,” scribd, http://www.scribd.com/ fullscreen/65232918?access_key=key-5t50qqgeqcez8wzkj2e.http:// www.scribd.com/fullscreen/65232918? 8

Ibid.

9 “Residents Living within 400 Metres of Areas of Public Open Space and Conservation Zones “, Christchurch City Council, accessed 3 July, 2013, http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1357_AccessibilityOpenSpace&ConservationZonesMap-docs.pdf. 10 “Neighbourhood Structure “, Parameters of the New Urbanism, accessed 16 October,2013, http://www.eng.mcmaster.ca/civil/ sustain/designparam/dparameters1.htm. 11 “Residents Living within 400 Metres of Areas of Public Open Space and Conservation Zones “.

14 “Location and Area of Parks by Park Type 2009,” Christchurch City Council, accessed 3 July, 2013, http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/ files/14_AER2_2192_ParkType&AreaMap-docs.pdf. 15

Ibid.

“Public Open Space Strategy 2010-2040”.

“Location and Area of Parks by Park Type 2009”.

21 “Christchurch City Health and Wellbeing Profile 2012,” Healthy Christchurch, accessed 10 July,2013, http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/media/44655/chch_city_health_profile_2012.pdf. 22

Ibid.

23 “Satisfaction with Christchurch’s Parks, 2007–2009,” Christchurch City Council, accessed 3 July, 2013, http://resources.ccc.govt. nz/files/14_AER2_1871_SatisfactionWithPublicParks-docs.pdf. 24

Ibid.

28 Camia Young, Christopher Andrew Barton, and National Institute of Creative Arts and Industries (University of Auckland). School of Architecture and Planning., Prototype city : future Christchurch V3.0 (Christchurch, N.Z.: : Studio Christchurch).

Ibid.

29 “Contamination of Horticultural Land in Canterbury- A Scoping Study”.

Ibid.

Ibid. 97

When approaching a context such as Christchurch, the need to assess how, where and why to articulate a design proposal is important. This chapter presents the urban strategy of the desired site and how the designs will be integrated into the Christchurch context.

___Chapter05 : Location Case Study

_05.1 Urban Strategy for Location(Where to build?) _05.1.1 Residential Red Zone _05.1.2 Technical Categories _05.1.3 Flood Hazards _05.1.4 Soil conditions _05.1.5 Possible Sites _05.1.6 Chosen Site _05.2 Living Zone Density _05.3 Housing Density _05.4 Economic Viable Model _05.5 Site and Context

100

_05 Chapter Five Figures Fig 1.Four Variables for Location Selection Image done by author

Fig 15. Site Images Image done by author

Fig 2. Overlays of Four Variables Image done by author Fig 3. Where to Build- Residential Red Zone Image done by author Fig 4. Where to Build- Technical Categories Image done by author Fig 5. Where to Build- Flood Management Area Image done by author Fig 6. Where to Build- Soil Type Image done by author Fig 7. Where to Build- Possible Sites Image done by author Fig 8. Where to Build- Chosen Site Image done by author Fig 9.Chosen Site Christchurch Image done by author Fig 10. Area of Site Image done by author Fig 11.Christchurch Living Zones Density Image done by author Derived from Biran He Thesis Fig 12. Dwelling Density of Christchurch Living Zones Image done by author Derived from Biran He Thesis Fig 13. Proposed Dwelling Density Image done by author Fig 14. Economic Viable Model Image done by author 101

Residential Red Zone

Flood Management Area

Technial Categories

Soil Type Map

Fig 1.

102

_05.1 : Urban Strategy for Location (Where to Build?) Large tracts of land and many homes have been badly damaged especially in the eastern region of Christchurch.1 This gives an opportunity to think about how and where to build new housing. Many houses are situated on TC3 land, which remains habitable but is likely exposed to moderate to significant land damage from liquefaction in future large earthquakes.2 Further some of these houses are also situated in flood management areas.3 This means that those who reside in both TC3 land and the flood management area may suffer numerous on-going problems and be exposed to the highest risk of future natural disasters. Rather than choosing a safe vacant site, the aim of this thesisâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; urban strategy is to find areas that are situated in both flood management area and on TC3 designated land adjacent to the Residential Red Zone with good soil types to grow vegetation. On these sites, a long term solution will be provided. The solution is to claim back the damaged land and replace the existing housing in high risk land with better housing solutions that will withstand future natural disasters and utilise the adjacent red zone damaged land for both recreation and gardens for the community.

Fig 2.

The following graphs illustrate of 4 different variables- residential red zone, technical categories, flood management areas and soil type. These 4 variables are overlaid to highlight the highest risk areas with good soil adjacent to the Residential Red Zone.

103

_05.1.1 : Residential Red Zone Residential Red Zone

2.5

kilometres

Fig 3.

104

_05.1.2 : Technical Categories Residential Red Zone Technical Category 1 Technical Category 2 Technical Category 3

2.5

kilometres

Fig 4.

105

_05.1.3 : Flood Management Area Residential Red Zone Technical Category 1 Technical Category 2 Technical Category 3 Flood Management Area

2.5

kilometres

Fig 5.

106

_05.1.4 : Soil Type

2.5

kilometres

Fig 6.

107

_05.1.5 : Possible Sites

2.5

kilometres

Fig 7.

108

_05.1.6 : Chosen Site

Chosen Site

2.5

kilometres

Fig 8.

109

Chosen Site

2.5 kilometres

110

Fig 9.

142 m

Emlyn Place

140m

Pembroke Street

1.9 HECTARES

Avonside Drive

Fig 10.

111

Christchurch City Net Density (2001) = 26.6 pp/ha Increase in Density (1991-2001) = 2.3 pp/ha

LEGEND Living 1 Living 2 Living 3 Living 4 Living H Commercial and Business Zones Urban Boundary Residential Red Zone

Chosen Site

Fig 11.

112

_05.2 : Living Zone Density

Christchurch City has divided into four specific living zones according to the City Plan. Each zone has different dwelling densities and types of dwellings that can be constructed. These are categorised into the following: Living Zone 1 – This zone is mostly located in the outer suburban area with a low dwelling density of 13 dwellings per hectare.4 A feature of this zone includes a large amount of open spacemaximum 35 per cent or 40 per cent depending on the building height. 5 Living Zone 2 – This zone is low to medium density with one unit/dwelling on a minimum land area of 330m2.6 It has a lesser amount of open space required than Living 1.7 Living Zone 3- This zone allows for medium density, where the multi-unit/town house type of development can be built.8 Living Zone 4- This zone allows for high density. Mostly, located mainly within the ‘four avenues’, close to the central city area. Mostly, this zone is comprised of high density multi-units of about 45 dwellings per hectare.9

suffering from high demand and a shortage of housing, there are opportunities for suburban residential intensification on the possible sites (FIG 7) and to rejuvenate the eastern suburbs of Christchurch. Therefore, the urban strategy of this thesis aims to increase housing density from Living Zone 1 to Living Zone 4. Further this thesis argues to bring different types of housing that can provide diversity and seeks to offer alternative choices to the New Zealand norm of single detached housing. 650 hectares of Residential Red Zone/ 7,860 houses home lost 103 hectares of TC3+Flood Management Area +Good soil adjacent to Residential Red Zone IF LIVING ZONE 1=103 x 13= 1339 IF LIVING ZONE 2=103 x 18=1854 IF LIVING ZONE 3=103 x 33=3399 *IF LIVING ZONE 4=103 x 40=4120 This suggests that 103 hectares of possible sites can recover approximately 52% of loss of houses in Residential Red Zone. 11

The map highlights the density patterns throughout the Christchurch. It shows that the density of the dwellings increases as you get closer to the central city area. Most of the houses in the eastern region are categorised as Living Zone 1, which is comprised of low density single detached housing of approximately 13 dwellings per hectare.10 Since Christchurch is 113

_05.3 : Housing Density LIVING 1

LIVING 2

18 Dwellings Per Hectare

Living 2 Net Density (2001) = 32.3 pp/ha Increase in Density (1991-2001) = 2.0 pp/ha

100m

33 Dwellings Per Hectare

Living 3 Net Density (2001) = 38.1 pp/ha Increase in Density (1991-2001) = 2.6 pp/ha

100m

Living 1 Net Density (2001) = 26.1 pp/ha Increase in Density (1991-2001) = 2.2 pp/ha

100m

13 Dwellings Per Hectare

100m

LIVING 4

100m

LIVING 3

100m

40+ Dwellings Per Hectare

Living 4 Net Density (2001) = 45.1 pp/ha Increase in Density (1991-2001) = 7.4 pp/ha

Fig 12.

114

Existing 22 Dwellings / 1.9 hectare

Proposed 72-80 Dwellings / 1.9 hectare

Fig 13.

115

_05.4 : Economic Viable Model 650 hectares of Residential Red Zone/ 7,860 houses home lost _103 hectares of TC3+Flood Management Area +Good soil adjacent to Residential Red Zone IF LIVING ZONE 1=103 x 13= 1339 IF LIVING ZONE 2=103 x 18=1854 IF LIVING ZONE 3=103 x 33=3399 *IF LIVING ZONE 4=103 x 40=4120

2.5

kilometres

Fig 14.

116

_05.5 : Site and Context

Fig 15.

117

(Endnotes) 1 “2011 Christchurch earthquake,” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed 18 October, 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/2011_Christchurch_earthquake. 2

“Overview of TC1, TC2 and TC3 technical categories”.

3 stress”.

Atkinson, “Christchurch quakes: Post-quake flood-risk causes

4 94.

He, “Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution,”

“Living zones “.

Ibid.

8 “Frequently asked questions,” Christchurch City Council accessed 6 July, 2013, http://www.ccc.govt.nz/thecouncil/policiesreportsstrategies/faqs.aspx.2013, http://www.ccc.govt.nz/thecouncil/ policiesreportsstrategies/ 9

Ibid.

“Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution,” 95.

118

119

Chapter Six presents the design strategy. It illustrates design moves and summarises the design solution as a result of the research in the previous five chapters. The design solution aims to embody all aspects of research carried out in this thesis to provide a housing choice to Christchurch residents, assist with the housing crisis and produce a new way of building communities.

_06 Chapter Six Figures Image done by author Except Fig 1. Formal Inspiration Derived from http://groupnameforgrapejuice.blogspot.co.nz/2013_07_01_archive.html

120

___Part _06 : Architectural Design Proposal

121

Rhizomes

Stolons

None

122

Bulbils

Bulbs

Turions

Tubers

Vegetative Spread

The intention of the design proposal is to represent a divorce from typical existing, rigid and static suburban housing arrangements. The formal inspiration came from research into different forms of vegetative propagation. The creeping underground rootstocks of the rhizome provided a structure that related to the notion of a resilient community network and the way it develops. The rhizome allows for lateral spread by sending out roots and shoots from its nodes.1 As well as having the ability to allow new shoots to grow upwards.2 If a rhizome is separated into pieces, each piece may be able to give rise to a new plant.3 The following image on the next page became the formal inspiration.

123

124

Formal Inspiration

Fig 1.

125

126

Trace lines of existing boundaries between green and grey

Defining green and grey for the new design

3. Raising terrain by up to 1000mm (gardens) and 500mm (car parks)

Green VS Grey SPATIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OPEN (GREEN) SPACE AND BUILT (GREY) FORM This section examines the design moves to create a set of design criteria and strategies that could be used for any other possible site in similar condition. The design concept identifies architectural strategies which produce a community housing development integrated with landscape. This is done by understanding the spatial relationship between open spaces (coloured green on the plan) and built form (coloured grey) of the existing site. The design methodology identifies programmes in relation to ‘green’ and ‘grey’ components on the site.

The design process, shown in the following diagram, involved tracing what existed, mediating the boundary of green and grey, the provision of community facilities that fitted with the ecological aims of the project. The design proposes car parks on existing ‘grey’ form and community gardens on ‘green’ spaces. These areas are raised to mitigate against flooding. Design process 1. Trace lines of existing boundaries between green and grey 2. Defining green and grey for the new design 3.

Raising terrain by up to 1000mm (gardens) and 500mm (car parks)

127

Pocket Neighbourhoods sited divides into four pocket neighbourhoods

128

Communal Space centrally located communal facilities

Semi Public Space four semi public areas located between communal space and private space

Concept Diagram

SPATIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE This section also examines the design moves to create a set of design and strategies consistent with the cohousing principles discussed in chapter 2. The design methodology identifies the arrangement of spaces by integrating public, semi-public and private spaces. The intention is to mediate the boundary between public spaces and private spaces by integrating semipublic spaces. The following diagram shows the design principles to generate spatial arrangement of community housing development: Concept 1. Pocket Neighbourhoods â&#x20AC;&#x201C; sited divides into four pocket neighbourhoods 2. Communal Space - centrally located communal facilities 3. Semi Public Space â&#x20AC;&#x201C; four semi-public areas located between communal space and private space

129

Ground Plan

Emlyn P lace

Pembroke Street

Avonside Drive

130

1st floor Plan

Pembroke Street Apartment

Communal spac 3 bed rooms 2 bed rooms

Emlyn

Place

1 bed rooms

Avonside Drive

131

132

Close-up View

Pembroke Street Apartment Communal space 3 bed rooms 2 bed rooms

Emlyn

Place

1 bed rooms

Avonside Drive

133

Elderly Couples (Empty nesters)

Couples

Single Occupants

Small families

Usergroup

Apartment Studio Multi-unit house 1 bedroom

Types of Housing

Size of Housing (# of rooms)

Community Housing

Single dwelling

2 bedrooms

3 bedrooms Laundry facilities Playground

Communal dining

(Public) Communal Space

Common house

Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s play area

Parking

134

BBQ area

Rooftop

Semi-public Space Leisure Area

Community garden

Community orchard

Meeting Area

Proposed Programs The community housing design provides more alternative choices in the housing market for different user groups that meets their needs and life styles ___User Group

_ Single occupants

___# of Rooms

_ Studio

_ 1 Bedroom

___Types of Housing

_ Apartment

_ Single dwelling

___Semi Public Space

_ Leisure area

___Communal Spaces

_ Playground

_ Children play area

_ Parking

_Communal dining

_ BBQ area

_ Couples

_ Laundary Facilities

_ 2 Bedrooms _ Small families

_ Multi-unit dwelling

_ Meeting area _ Community Garden + orchard

_ Elderly Couples (Empty Nesters)

_ 3 Bedrooms

_Common house

_Rooftop

_Waste and Recycle Area

_Library

135

Circulation Diagram Pembroke Street Apartment

Communal space 3 bed rooms 2 bed rooms

Emlyn

Place

1 bed rooms

Avonside Drive

136

Axonometric View Communal Space

Dwellings

Platform

Stilts

Raised Terrain

137

Fruits and Vegetables to Grow These are the fruits and vegetables that will grow in the community gardens through out the whole year

Vegetables

Potatoes

Asparagus

Beans

Beetroot

Cabbage

Peas

138

Fruits

Carrots

Pears

Cherries

Apples

Berries

Apricots

Plums

Onion

Celery

Cauliflower

Sweetcorn

Peaches

Potatoes Carrots Onions Asparagus Beans Celery Beetroot Cauliflower Sweetcorn

Cabbage

Peas

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Cherries Pears Apples Berries Apricots

Peaches Plums

139

Colours

Types of Timber 140

Facade System

The residents will have choices for their shingle facade .There are variety of different types, colours and patterns.

Details

Patterns 141

142

143

144

Communal Space

145

146

Semi Public Space

Fig 20.

147

148

Section AA

Fig 21.

149

Community Garden

150

Carpark

151

Playground

152

Semi public area

153

Recycle and Waste rea

154

Laundry

155

156

(Endnotes) 1 â&#x20AC;&#x153;Rhizome,â&#x20AC;? Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed 15 September, 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhizome. 2

Ibid.

157

Throughout the course of this thesis many questions have been raised, researched and attempted to be answered. The significant damage of the land provides opportunities to propose solutions to the current problematic condition of Christchurch. Christchurch city provides a rich and unique context for architects to study, develop ideas and engage with the community. The design proposal of this thesis aims to provide a small solution to housing typologies in the city. The importance of choosing the Eastern Suburbs for this proposal lies in the loss that this area has encountered. The land categorization of this area also is very relevant. The design aims to closely engage with what needs to be solved, bring resilience of living into inhabitable degraded land and mitigate hazards and risks such as flooding and liquefaction. While the design is formally simple, the aim was not to propose a complex architecture, but rather set a framework for the facilitation of complex human relationships. Through this aim, it is hoped that Christchurch will find further solutions to the problematic issues of urban sprawl such as housing subdivision, lack of housing alternatives, lack of consideration given to 158

people’s changing needs and the shifting demographic, which has resulted the isolated individualistic urban form of the greater Christchurch. Further, this design intends to help residents find some comfort knowing they are part of a wider community that have been through the same long stresses of the on-going earthquakes. Through the integration of green spaces; gardens and the river, the design aims to be sustainable while enhancing Christchurch’s projected identity of “The Garden City”. The research in Chapter One of this thesis highlightened the constraints, restrictions and challenges designers face when they engage with the rebuild in Christchurch. While the city seeks the rebuild at some pace, designs need to be well researched, articulated and developed to sustain future events. This chapter also discussed what the residents of Christchurch have endured that is loss of community, as Christchurch was originally developed through urban and suburban sprawl. From the tragedy of the earthquakes, the opportunity to provide community based solutions which enhance the Garden City image was taken.

___Conclusion

Chapter Two provides context for this concept. Through the case studies, community housing has been discussed as being hugely appropriate for Christchurch and the rebuild. Also, stilt housing typologies seemed to be a relevant approach, since Christchurch is suffering from extensive flooding. The research shows stilt housing allows the residents a closer connection to the ground through increased social interaction between residents from the covered space below. Since this thesis is dealing with areas susceptible to future movement, the study of foundation was fundamental. This research led to the conclusion that deep pile foundation types seem to be work best on raised housing typology. These studies provided a foundation for design method to design. Chapter Three outlines the current housing condition in Christchurch and seeks to build upon the discourse of Chapters One and Two. The current housing situation in Christchurch leads to many issues of urban sprawl and it has been argued through this thesis that single detached housing is not conducive to

enhancing human relationships. While this is common in much of Western society, the design proposal challenges the notion that this is the “best” way to build or if this method is simply what New Zealand residents are accustomed to. This chapter also highlights that there is a lack of housing choice to meet the changing demographics in Christchurch. The chapter takes into consideration current and future demographic needs to provide more housing choices in the proposed design solution. The identity of “The Garden City” discussed in Chapter Four reveals that the green space in Christchurch is regarded by residents in a highly positive manner. The green network in the suburbs play import role in people’s quality of living by proving open spaces for leisure, recreation activities and enjoyment. Bringing out this quality is one of the important principles throughout the thesis. This chapter also reveals what historically was grown in Christchurch. This research provided a foundation for edible vegetation to be integrated into the design proposal in Chapter Six. 159

Chapter Five’s urban strategy provided the research for which areas were suitable for the co-housing design proposal. While the area chosen is a high risk site, the design seeks to accommodate this while providing alternative solutions to housing discussed in Chapter Six. The suburban residential intensification on the possible sites demonstrates a relevant urban strategy along the eastern Christchurch to deal with problem of urban sprawl.

•

generating site response - tracing the existing site, tracing what is green and what is built environment, acknowledging the existing site

•

closely engaging with the hazards and risks - not just raised housing, but also raised up terrain for gardens and car parks

Chapter six proposes an alternative solution to housing. This chapter critically outlines design strategies and summarises design solutions. This proposed design is a case study, which can be applied in other possible areas of Christchurch that are suffering from a similar condition.

•

the co-housing concept - a design solution relevant in the context of Christchurch housing needs.

•

consideration of demographics - assessment of current and projected future demographics, to provide alternative housings types for all users.

The following are the key considerations and principles defining the design strategies: •

160

rhizomatic structure – organic growth rather than rigid static growth

This research has provided the author with a deeper understanding of how architects cannot design to satisfy everyone - to cater for all wants. Architects do, however, have the ability to design to allow people to choose outcomes that meet their life style needs.

While architects and designers cannot cater for every variable in a given context, they can, however, provide alternative solutions and give people opportunities to make choices. In response to the housing crisis following the earthquakes, this thesis proposes a housing typology that hasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t been deployed in Christchurch - one that could change the urban form of greater Christchurch. Co-housing and stilt housing are not new concepts, but together provide a new type of architectural intervention that aims to solve on-going problems in Christchurch related to building on compromised land. This research begins with the premise that typical suburban housing development is no longer suitable in Christchurch and provides an alternative housing solution in response to the Christchurch condition. The proposed design aims to encourage new housing developments on high risk sites that are integrated with the adjacent open space of the Residential Red Zone. By raising the housing and selected terrain, above the floodplain, such developments have the potential to withstand future

environmental disasters and repair the sense of community that was so damaged by the earthquakes. By allowing residents to have a custodial presence beside the newly created public open space of the Residential Red Zone, the thesis demonstrates the opportunity that can emerge from crisis â&#x20AC;&#x201C; in this case an opportunity to rebuild resilient communities that enhance Christchurchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Garden City identity.

161

(Bibliography) “2011 Christchurch earthquake.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Accessed 18 October, 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Christchurch_ earthquake “6430 orange zone properties turned green.” CERA, Accessed 14 October, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/news/2011/6430-orange-zone-properties-turnedgreen-28-october-2011 “About Earthsong.” Earthsong Eco-Neighbourhood, Accessed 17 August, 2013. http://www.earthsong.org.nz/about.html “Age and ethnicity “. Christchurch City Council, Accessed 1 December, 2013. http://www.ccc.govt.nz/cityleisure/statsfacts/census/agegenderethnicity. aspx “Auckland Sustainable Homes Assessment Part 1: Insulation and Clean Heat Appliances.” Auckland Regional Council, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http:// www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/unitaryplan/Documents/Section32report/Appendices/Appendix%20 3.8.14.pdf “Built-in community: Pleasant Hill cohousing demonstrates innovations in sustainability “. The Cohousing Company McCamant & Durrett Architects Accessed 12 August, 2013. http://www.cohousingco.com/category/uncategorized/ “ChCh Viva Integrated Sustainable Design Workshop.” The Viva Project, Accessed 18 August, 2013. http://thevivaproject.org.nz/wp-content/ uploads/2012/07/ChCh-Viva-Integrated-Sustainable-Design-Workshop.pdf “Christchurch & Canterbury.” whytewaters, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http://activitiesnow.com/162Kings/pages/CHCH.pdf “Christchurch Central Recovery Plan.” Christchurch Central Development Unit, Accessed 3 July, 2013. http://www.andersonlloyd.co.nz/wp-content/ uploads/2012/12/Recovery_Plan2012.pdf “Christchurch City Fact Pack 2013.” Christchurch City Council Accessed 1 December, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/CityLeisure/statsfacts/ FactPack2013.pdf “Christchurch City Health & Wellbeing Profile 2012.” Healthy Christchurch, Accessed 13 August, 2013. http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/ media/44655/chch_city_health_profile_2012.pdf “Christchurch City Health and Wellbeing Profile 2012.” Healthy Christchurch, Accessed 10 July,2013. http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/ media/44655/chch_city_health_profile_2012.pdf “Christchurch dwelling type, 1981 - 2006.” Christchurch City Council, Accessed 9 July, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/CityLeisure/statsfacts/ statistics/OccupiedDwellings-DwellingType-docs.pdf

162

“Christie Walk “. Urban Ecology, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http://www.urbanecology.org.au/eco-cities/christie-walk/ “Cohousing “. Spatial Agency, Accessed 13 August, 2013. http://www.spatialagency.net/database/why/ecological/co-housing “Cohousing fact sheet “. The Cohousing Association of the United States, Accessed 18 August, 2013. http://www.cohousing.org/docs/NatlFactsheet.pdf “Contamination of Horticultural Land in Canterbury- A Scoping Study.” Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, Accessed 12 October, 2013. http://ecan.govt.nz/ publications/Reports/ScopingStudyU0680_pt4pt5pt6ConclRefs.pdf “A demographic profile of Christchurch “. Healthy Christchurch Accessed 7 July, 2013. http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/city-health-profile/wholives-here.aspx “Demographic Trends: 2011.” Statistics New Zealand, Accessed 12 April, 2013. http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/estimates_and_ projections/demographic-trends-2011/national%20demographic%20projections.aspx “Draft Central City Plan.” Christchurch City Council Accessed 1 July, 2013. http://www1.ccc.govt.nz/council/agendas/2011/october/cncl3-12th/21768.pdf “Draft Recovery Strategy for greater Christchurch.” CERA, Accessed 16 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/draft-recoverystrategy-for-greater-christchurch.pdf “Eco-belt.” scribd. http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/65232918?access_key=key-5t50qqgeqcez8wzkj2e “Floor Levels in Residential Homes in Christchurch “. Christchurch City Council, Accessed 2 August, 2013. http://www.ccc.govt.nz/homeliving/ goaheadbuildingplannings00/buildingandplanningprojects-s02/property-s02s0305/floorlevels-s02s0305-08.aspx “Frequently asked questions.” Christchurch City Council Accessed 6 July, 2013. http://www.ccc.govt.nz/thecouncil/policiesreportsstrategies/faqs.aspx “Future of Christchurch Land.” REBUILDCHRISTCHURCH, Accessed 2 July, 2013. http://www.rebuildchristchurch.co.nz/blog/2011/6/future-ofchristchurch-land “Garden & Heritage Parks “. Christchurch City Council, Accessed 12 October, 2013. http://www.christchurch.org.nz/publications/ GardenAndHeritageParks.pdf “GeoHealth Lab News- Archive Apr- Nov 2009.” University of Canterbury, Accessed 15 July, 2013. http://www.geohealth.canterbury.ac.nz/news/archive6. shtml “Historical Overview of Horticulture in Canterbury.” Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd Accessed 30 June, 2013. http://ecan.govt.nz/publications/Reports/ ScopingStudyU0680_pt4pt5pt6ConclRefs.pdf “Housing affordability and availability.” CERA, Accessed 19 August, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterburywellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf “Housing pressures in Christchurch “. Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, Accessed 2 July, 2013. http://www.dbh.govt.nz/UserFiles/File/

163

Publications/Sector/pdf/christchurch-housing-report.pdf “Housing Typologies-Current Stock Prevalence “. Beacon Pathway, Accessed 9 July, 2013. http://www.beaconpathway.co.nz/images/uploads/Final_ Report_EN6570(8)_Housing_Typologies_Current_Stock_Prevalence.pdf “Hurricane Katrina “. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Accessed 18 August, 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina “Key Canterbury Indicators.” Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, Accessed 16 August, 2013. www.dbh.govt.nz/UserFiles/File/Sector%20info/ key-indicator-reports/kir-canterbury-february2013.pdf “Land zones “. CERA, Accessed 12 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/land-information/land-zones “Latest Christchurch Land Information Released.” CERA, Accessed 14 November,2013. http://cera.govt.nz/news/latest-christchurch-land-informationreleased-23-june-2011 “Living.” Christchurch.org.nz, Accessed 16 October, 2013. http://www.christchurch.org.nz/living/ “Living zones “. Christchurch City Council, Accessed 18 August, 2013. http://www.ccc.govt.nz/homeliving/goaheadbuildingplanningS00/ resourceconsent-s05/faq-s05-11.aspx “Location and Area of Parks by Park Type 2009.” Christchurch City Council, Accessed 3 July, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_2192_ ParkType&AreaMap-docs.pdf “Making Sense of Our City Today.” Christchurch City Council, Accessed 3 July, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/MakingSenseOfOurCityTodayLivea ble-christchurchourcity.pdf “Neighbourhood Structure “. Parameters of the New Urbanism, Accessed 16 October,2013. http://www.eng.mcmaster.ca/civil/sustain/designparam/ dparameters1.htm “Overview of TC1, TC2 and TC3 technical categories.” CERA, Accessed 17 August, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/residential-green-zone-technical-categories/ overview “Pine Street Cohousing “. Communities Directory, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http://directory.ic.org/2237/Pine_Street_Cohousing “The process to clear the residential red zone - flat lands.” Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority Accessed 2 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/ residential-red-zone/property-clearances “Public Open Space Strategy 2010-2040.” Christchurch City Council, Accessed 18 October, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/ PublicOpenSpaceStrategy.pdf

164

“Questions and answers- Green TC3 (blue).” CERA, Accessed 12 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/faq/green-tc3-blue “Quick Stats About Christchurch City “. Statistics New Zealand http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/AboutAPlace/ SnapShot.aspx?type=ta&ParentID=1000013&tab=Agesex&id=2000060 “Recovery Stategy for Greater Christchurch “. CERA, Accessed 14 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/recovery-strategy-forgreater-christchurch.pdf “Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch.” CERA, Accessed 10 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/recovery-strategy-forgreater-christchurch.pdf “Recovery Strategy of Greater Christchurch “. CERA, Accessed 10 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/recovery-strategy-forgreater-christchurch.pdf “Residential Green Zone Fact Sheet.” Tonkin & Taylor, Accessed 18 July, 2013. http://www.tonkin.co.nz/canterbury-land-information/docs/T&TGreen%20Zone%20Factsheet.pdf “Residential Land.” Lumley, Accessed 30 June, 2013. http://www.lumley.co.nz/broker/ChristchurchEarthquake/ChristchurchEarthquakeresidential_land “Residential Red Zone Fact Sheet.” Tonkin & Taylor, Accessed 2 July, 2013. http://www.tonkin.co.nz/canterbury-land-information/docs/T&T-Red%20 Zone%20Factsheet.pdf “RESIDENTIAL RED ZONE PROGRAMME.” CERA, Accessed 16 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/recovery-strategy/social/residential-red-zone-programme “Residents Living within 400 Metres of Areas of Public Open Space and Conservation Zones “. Christchurch City Council, Accessed 3 July, 2013. http:// resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1357_AccessibilityOpenSpace&ConservationZonesMap-docs.pdf “Revised guidance on repairing and rebuilding houses affected by the Canterbury earthquake sequence.” Department of Building and Housing Accessed 18 July, 2013. http://www.dbh.govt.nz/UserFiles/File/Publications/Building/Guidance-information/pdf/guide-canterbury-earthquake-revised. pdf “Rhizome.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Accessed 15 September, 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhizome “Rome wasn’t built in a day: Christchurch Retail, Red Zones and the Rebuild “. Jones Lang LaSalle, Accessed 11 July, 2013. http://www.propertynz.co.nz/ files/Events/Justin%20Kean_Jones%20LangLaSalle_Retail%20Conference%202013.pdf “Sales in Christchurch TC3 zones “. Scoop, Accessed 18 July, 2013. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1212/S00462/sales-in-christchurch-tc3-zones.htm “Satisfaction with Christchurch’s Parks, 2007–2009.” Christchurch City Council, Accessed 3 July, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1871_ SatisfactionWithPublicParks-docs.pdf

165

“SECTION 16: BUILT ENVIRONMENT RECOVERY.” CERA, Accessed 17 July, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/recovery-strategy/overview/read-the-recoverystrategy/section-16-built-environment-recovery “Setting the Scene “. The Department of Internal Affairs, Accessed 16 June, 2013. http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Resource-materialSustainable-Urban-Development-Setting-the-Scene “Sociopolis.” Guallart Architects, Accessed 17 October, 2013. http://www.guallart.com/projects/sociopolis “Stilt house “. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Accessed 2 September, 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilt_house “Stiltsville Cruises “. Miami Tours & Attractions. http://www.miamitoursattractions.com/stiltsville_cruises.php “Storm Surge Overview “. National Hurricane Center Accessed 18 August, 2013. http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/surge/ “Structural Earthquake Damage Report “. Christchurch City Council Accessed 18 July, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/TheCouncil/ councilfacilities/NewBrightonCommunityCentreAssessment.pdf “Subnational ethnic population projections.” Statistics New Zealand, Accessed 14 October, 2013. http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/ estimates_and_projections/subnational-ethnic-population-projections/age.aspx “TC3 residential rebuild booklet.” CERA, Accessed 12 October, 2013. http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/tc3-residential-rebuildbooklet-A4-20121204.pdf “Technical Categories Map “. Cantebury Earthquake Recovery Authority. “Thinking about building a garage?”. Christchurch City Council. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/GarageGuide-docs.pdf “Updated residential floor levels for areas throughout Christchurch “. Christchurch City Council. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/Homeliving/ buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf “Updated residential floor levels for areas throughout Christchurch.” Christchurch City Council, Accessed 16 July, 2013. http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/ Homeliving/buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf “Village Life.” Information Booklet, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http://www.villagelife.co.nz/media/uploads/2012_06/info-pack.pdf “Welcome to the UK Cohousing Network.” UK Cohousing Network, Accessed 12 August, 2013. http://www.cohousing.org.uk/ “Why Cohousing?”. Village Resources Cohousing Consultants, Accessed 19 Sept, 2013. http://cohousingconsultants.com/why-cohousing/ Amitai, Reuven, and Michal Biran. Mongols, Turks, and others : Eurasian nomads and the sedentary world. Brill’s Inner Asian library. Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 2005.

166

Amitai, Reuven, Michal Biran, and ebrary Inc. Mongols, Turks, and others Eurasian nomads and the sedentary world. Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 2005. http:// site.ebrary.com/lib/auckland/Doc?id=10171573. Atkinson, Karen. “Christchurch quakes: Post-quake flood-risk causes stress.” stuff nation, Accessed 12 August, 2013. http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/ assignments/share-your-news-and-views/8653045/Christchurch-quakes-Post-quake-flood-risk-causes-stress Biran, Adrian. Ship hydrostatics and stability. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780750649889. ———. What every engineer should know about MATLAB and Simulink. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press, 2011. Biran, Adrian, and Moshe Breiner. MATLAB for engineers. Wokingham, England ; Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1995. Biran, Adrian, and ebrary Inc. Ship hydrostatics and stability. Amsterdam ; London: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/auckland/ Doc?id=10169861. Biran, Adrian, and ScienceDirect (Online service). Ship hydrostatics and stability. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003. http://www.engineeringvillage. com/controller/servlet/OpenURL?genre=book&isbn=9780750649889. Biran, Michal. The empire of the Qara Khitai in Eurasian history : between China and the Islamic World. Cambridge studies in Islamic civilization. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Biran, Misbach Y. Keadjaiban di pasar senen. [Djakarta]: Pustaka Jaya, 1971. ———. Oh, film. Cet. 1. ed. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya, 1973. Biran, Paul, O. Cornea, François Lalonde, and SpringerLink (Online service). Morse theoretic methods in nonlinear analysis and in symplectic topology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4266-3 http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0663/2006382646-d.html. Brownlee, Gerry. “Latest Christchurch land information released.” beehive.govt.nz, Accessed 2 July, 2013. http://beehive.govt.nz/release/latestchristchurch-land-information-released ———. “Red Zone offers ‘extremely fair’.” Stuff.co.nz, Accessed 12 July, 2013. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/perspective/5510547/Red-zoneoffers-extremely-fair Chapin, F. Stuart, P. A. Matson, Peter Morrison Vitousek, Melissa C. Chapin, and SpringerLink (Online service). Principles of terrestrial ecosystem ecology. New York: Springer, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9504-9. Chapin, June R. Elementary social studies : a practical guide. 8th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2013.

167

Chapin, Ross. Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world. Newtown, CT: Taunton Press, 2011. ———. Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world. Newtown, CT: Taunton Press, 2011. Chapin, Timothy Stewart, and Christopher Coutts. Growth management and public land acquisition : balancing conservation and development. Farnham ; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011. Colten, Craig E. “Resilience and the City: Katrina and Consequences in New Orleans “ Accessed 19 August, 2013. http://www.historians.org/ publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/october-2012/resilience-and-the-city Consultants, CityScope. “Improving the Design, Quality and Affordability of Residential Intensification in New Zealand.” Chranz, Accessed 18 August, 2013. http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/improving-the-design-quality-affordability-residential-intensification.pdf Downton, Paul. “Christie Walk “. ———. “Christie Walk.” City of Charles Sturt, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_ Paul_Downton_-_Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf ———. “Paul Donwton.” TEDxChristchurch, Accessed 23 June, 2013. http://tedxeqchch.com/speakers/paul-downton Downton, Paul F. Ecopolis : architecture and cities for a changing climate. Collingwood, Vic.: CSIRO Publishing, 2008. Downton, Paul F., D. Munn, and Centre for Urban Ecology (Adelaide S. Aust.). Urban ecology : annotated bibliography. 1st ed. Adelaide, S.A.: Centre for Urban Ecology Australia, 1993. Downton, Paul F., and SpringerLink (Online service). Ecopolis architecture and cities for a changing climate. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009. http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8496-6. Durrett, Charles, William H. Thomas, and ebrary Inc. Senior cohousing handbook a community approach to independent living. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers, 2009. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/auckland/Doc?id=10314750. Fairgray, Douglas. “Land and Housing Supply.” Chranz, Accessed 20 August, 2013. http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/market-economics-land-and-housingsupply.pdf Fang, Weihua. “Stilt House Building Technology for Flood Disaster Reduction “. http://drh.edm.bosai.go.jp/ files/36131ddc632b85978c4a1797c231136455c807af/8_TIK4_P.pdf Gates, Charlie. “Resigned red zoners take the money and run.” stuff.co.nz. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurchearthquake-2011/8446696/Resigned-red-zoners-take-the-money-and-run Greenhill, Charlie Gates and Marc. “Christchurch flood rule changes set to add grief.” suff.co.nz, Accessed 1 July, 2013. http://www.stuff.co.nz/ national/7800047/Christchurch-flood-rule-changes-set-to-add-grief

168

Guallart, Vicente, Actar., and Architektur Zentrum Wien. Sociópolis : project for a city of the future. [Barcelona] [Vienna]: Actar ; Architektur Zentrum, 2004. ———. Sociópolis : project for a city of the future. [Barcelona] [Vienna]: Actar ; Architektur Zentrum, 2004. He, Biran. “Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution.” Thesis (MArch-Prof), University of Auckland, 2012., 2012. ———. “Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution.” Thesis (MArch-Prof), University of Auckland, 2012., 2012. Jacobs, Karrie. “Stilted Architecture “ Metropolis Megazine, Accessed 16 August, 2013. http://www.metropolismag.com/July-August-2013/StiltedArchitecture/ Lucas, Di. “River of Life Otakaro Avon River Park Potential “ Lucas Associates, Accessed 3 August, 2013. http://www.lucas-associates.co.nz/assets/ROCPresentations/Avon-River-Park-Presentation-download.pdf Maine, Biran. De la surtaxe qu’éprouve, en matière d’impot foncier, le département de la Dordogne. Paris: De l’Imprimerie de P. Dupont, 1822. http:// galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/MOME?af=RN&ae=U104467687&srchtp=a&ste=14&locID=learn. Maine de Biran, Pierre, François Azouvi, and Bernard Baertschi. Oeuvres. Bibliothèque des textes philosophiques. Paris: J. Vrin, 1984. Mathewson, Nicole. “Most Baker St residents want to see red.” Stuff.co.nz, Accessed 18 July, 2013. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurchearthquake-2011/7125709/Most-Baker-St-residents-want-to-see-red McCamant, Kathryn, and Charles Durrett. Creating cohousing : building sustainable communities. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2011. Moody, Gary. “Urban sprawl threatens Chch.” Stuff.co.nz, Accessed 21 July, 2013. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/christchurch-mail/8454297/Urbansprawl-threatens-Chch News, ONE. “Majority of red zoners accept compensation offer.” TVNZ, Accessed 7 November, 2013. http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/majority-redzoners-accept-compensation-offer-5393143 ———. “Majority of red zoners accept compensation offer “ TVNZ, Accessed 16 October, 0213. http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/majority-red-zonersaccept-compensation-offer-5393143 Rueff, Brittany T. “Characterization Study of Urban Cohousing.” UFDC Home, Accessed 17 July, 2013. http://ufdc.ufl.edu/uf00091523/00621 Russell-Chapin, Lori A., and Ted Chapin. Clinical supervision : theory and practice. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning, 2012. Scott-Hansen, Chris, Kelly Scott-Hansen, and ebrary Inc. The cohousing handbook building a place for community. Philadelphia, Pa. ; [Great Britain]: New

169

Society, 2005. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/auckland/Doc?id=10085546. ScottHanson, Chris, and Kelly ScottHanson. The cohousing handbook : building a place for community. Rev. ed. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2005. Team, Design Daily. “Canterbury receives three new foundation design categories.” idealog, Accessed 13 July, 2013. http://www.idealog.co.nz/ blog/2011/11/canterbury-receives-three-new-foundation-design-ca Young, Camia, Christopher Andrew Barton, and National Institute of Creative Arts and Industries (University of Auckland). School of Architecture and Planning. Prototype city : future Christchurch V3.0. Christchurch, N.Z.: : Studio Christchurch. Young, Camia, and Derek Kawiti. Future Christchurch. v. 1. Auckland, N.Z.: Camia Young and Derek Kawiti, 2011. Young, Rachel. “’Flockton Cluster’ beg council for flood aid.” Stuff.co.nz, Accessed 5 October, 2013. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/northwest/9239949/Flockton-Cluster-beg-council-for-flood-aid

170

(List of Figures) _01 Chapter One Fig 1. Residential Red Zone context Image done by author Fig 2. Residential Red Zone map: The residential zone includes 7860 properties over 650 hectares Image done by author Fig 3. Residential Red Zone map: The residential zone turns into open green spaces. Image done by author Fig 4.Technical categories map Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/dbh-residential-foundation-technical-categories-central-area-20111028.pdf Fig 5. TC3 +Flood Management Area Context Image done by author Derived from https://www.facebook.com/rebuildchristchurch/photos_stream Fig 6. Flood Management Area Map Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/Homeliving/buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf Fig 7. Flood Management Area: Floor Levels on building heights Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/Homeliving/buildingplanning/floorlevels/FloorLevelsUpdateOct2012web.pdf Fig 8. Aerial View of Christchurch Image done by author Derived from http://www.naturespic.com/NewZealand/image.asp?id=18597 Fig 9. Merivale and St Albans from the spire of the St Albans Methodist Church, Rugby Street running through the center, 1992 Image done by author Derived from Biran He thesis Fig 10. High-fenced Housings in Christchurch Image done by author Photo taken by Elizabeth Cambell Fig 11. Garden City: Avon River Image done by author Photo taken by Janice Lee 171

_________________________________________________________ _02 Chapter Two Fig 1. Highlands Park Garden Village Derived from http://buildabetterburb.org/highlands-garden-village/ Fig 2. Co-housing Design Principles Image done by author Derived from http://livewellcohousing.ca/discover-cohousing/about-the-money/ http://www.care2.com/greenliving/creating-cohousing-book-giveaway.html https://www.cohousing.org/book/export/html/1109 http://buildabetterburb.org/highlands-garden-village/ Fig 3. Earthsong Cohousing Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig4. Earthsong: Pedestrian Pathway Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig 5. Earthsong: Site and Context Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig 6. Christie Walk Plan Derived from http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton__Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf Fig 7. Christie Walk: Shared Space Derived from http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton__Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf Fig 8. Christie Walk: Intimacy Derived from http://www.charlessturt.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Presentation_by_Paul_Downton__Christie_Walk__Overview_of_the_Development_to_Elected_Member_Workshop_7_May_2011.pdf Fig 9. Christie Walk Perspective Derived from Ross Chapin, Pocket neighborhoods : creating small-scale community in a large-scale world Fig 10. Stilt Housing Typology Derived from http://www.miamitoursattractions.com/stiltsville_cruises.php

172

Fig 11. Foundation System Image done by author Derived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/tc3-residential-rebuild-booklet-A4-20121204.pdf Fig 12. Casal Building Derived from Sociopolis,â&#x20AC;? Guallart Architects Fig 13. Hurricane Katrina Stilt Housing Image done by author Derived from http://lifewithoutbuildings.net/2008/09/brad-pitts-make-it-right-homes-now-under-construction.html http://www.flickr.com/photos/sjb4photos/4415153013/ http://www.weather.com/weather/hurricanecentral/isaac-slideshow www.makeitrightnola.org. http://joyceholmes.wordpress.com/tag/industrial-canal/ ________________________________________________________________ _03 Chapter Three Fig 1. Housing Crisis Image done by author Fig 2. Household Growth by Region 2010-2019 Image done by author Adapted to http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/market-economics-land-and-housing-supply.pdf Fig 3. Christchurch Housing Types Image done by author Adapted to http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/CityLeisure/statsfacts/statistics/OccupiedDwellings-DwellingType-docs.pdf Fig 4. Christchurch Existing Housing Typologies Image done by author Adapted to http://www.beaconpathway.co.nz/further-research/article/housing_typologies_in_your_area Fig 5. Quantify Christchurch Housing Stock Relative to Age Image done by author Adapted to http://www.beaconpathway.co.nz/images/uploads/Final_Report_EN6570(8)_Housing_Typologies_Current_Stock_Prevalence.pdf Fig 6. Post-quake Housing Context Image done by author 173

http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/SpecialIssue/44(4)0342.pdf Fig 7. Estimated of the Total Housing Stock Image done by author Derived from http://www.dbh.govt.nz/UserFiles/File/Publications/Sector/pdf/christchurch-housing-report.pdf Fig 8. Demographic Profile of Christchurch Image done by author Adapted from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/AboutAPlace/SnapShot.aspx?type=ta&ParentID=1000013&tab=Agesex&id=2000060 Fig 9. 2013 Population of Christchurch Broken Down by Gender and Five-year Age Groups Image done by author http://www.healthychristchurch.org.nz/media/44655/chch_city_health_profile_2012.pdf Fig 10. Changing Household Composition 2006-2031 Image done by author http://www.chranz.co.nz/pdfs/improving-the-design-quality-affordability-residential-intensification.pdf Fig 11. Current Households and Housing Size Image done by author Deprived from He, Biran. “Future Christchurch : an adaptable housing solution.” Thesis (MArch-Prof), University of Auckland, 2012 Fig 12. Mean Sale Price for Houses Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf Fig 13. Number of Houses Sold Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf Fig 14. Mean Weekly Rent Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pdf Fig. 15 Percentage of Rental Bonds Lodged Monthly with Weekly Rent Below $300 Image done by author Deprived from http://cera.govt.nz/sites/cera.govt.nz/files/common/2013-06-26-canterbury-wellbeing-index-05-housing.pd ________________________________________________________________ _04 Chapter Four Fig 1. “Garden City” Images Image done by author 174

http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/PublicOpenSpaceStrategy.pdf. Fig 2. Christchurch City Usable and Non-usable Green Space Image done by author http://www.geohealth.canterbury.ac.nz/news/archive6.shtml Fig 3. Residents Living within 400 Metres of Areas of Public Open Space and Conservation Zones, 2009 Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1357_AccessibilityOpenSpace&ConservationZonesMap-docs.pdf Fig 4. Location and Area of Parks by Type, 2009 Image done by author http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_2192_ParkType&AreaMap-docs.pdf Fig 5. Satisfaction with Christchurchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Parks, 2007-2009 Image done by author derived from http://resources.ccc.govt.nz/files/14_AER2_1871_SatisfactionWithPublicParks-docs.pdf. Fig 6. Horticultural Crops in Canterbury Image done by author adapted to http://ecan.govt.nz/publications/Reports/contamination_horticultural_land_scoping_study_U0680.pdf ________________________________________________________________ _05 Chapter Five Fig 1.Four Variables for Location Selection Image done by author Fig 2. Overlays of Four Variables Image done by author Fig 3. Where to Build- Residential Red Zone Image done by author Fig 4. Where to Build- Technical Categories Image done by author Fig 5. Where to Build- Flood Management Area Image done by author Fig 6. Where to Build- Soil Type Image done by author Fig 7. Where to Build- Possible Sites 175

176

Image done by author Fig 8. Where to Build- Chosen Site Image done by author Fig 9.Chosen Site Christchurch Image done by author Fig 10. Area of Site Image done by author Fig 11.Christchurch Living Zones Density Image done by author Derived from Biran He Thesis Fig 12. Dwelling Density of Christchurch Living Zones Image done by author Derived from Biran He Thesis Fig 13. Proposed Dwelling Density Image done by author Fig 14. Economic Viable Model Image done by author Fig 15. Site Images Image done by author _________________________________________________________ _06 Chapter Six Image done by author Except Fig 1. Formal Inspiration Derived from http://groupnameforgrapejuice.blogspot.co.nz/2013_07_01_archive.html

177

Since the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes, large portions of Christchurch suffered a significant loss and large numbers of houses were deemed uninhabitable and the land under them classified as “Residential Red Zone”. In 2013, demolition of houses in the Red Zone began with the land redeveloped into open green space leaving many Christchurch residents without homes. Areas of land adjacent to the Residential Red Zone, classified as Technical Category 3 (TC3), are also badly damaged but remain habitable despite inherent construction difficulties. This land is significantly susceptible to future movement, liquefaction and other problems such as flooding. Local residents, especially those in the TC3 zone have suffered the loss of their community, infrastructure and overall quality of life. Through designing collections of co-housing dwellings built to withstand future natural disasters, this thesis aims to find opportunity in the crisis. Also, through the investigation of context and demographics of Christchurch, this thesis demonstrates site specific solutions for an on-going problem. Therefore, this thesis not only aims to repurpose high risk land for the development of community housing integrated with the landscape, it strategically engages with the urban form, revitalizes broken spirits and ultimately redefines the urban fabric of Christchurch’s high risk zones. This thesis proposes an alternative housing solution that claims back both the damaged land and the sense community through designing collections of co-housing dwellings built to withstand future natural disasters such as flooding and which utilise the adjacent red zone damaged land for both recreation and gardens that can provide for the community. This thesis also attempts to rethink possible ways of recovering Christchurch’s urban form that will build community resilience, improve the quality of life for residents and foster resident’s feeling of identity and attachment with the environment in which they live permanently and which shape the visual character of Christchurch.