The Manchester Courts building was a heritage building located in central Christchurch (New Zealand) that was damaged in the Mw 7.1 Darfield earthquake on 4 September 2010 and subsequently demolished as a risk reduction exercise. Because the building was heritage listed, the decision to demolish the building resulted in strong objections from heritage supporters who were of the opinion that the building had sufficient residual strength to survive possible aftershock earthquakes. On 22 February 2011 Christchurch was struck by a severe aftershock, leading to the question of whether building demolition had proven to be the correct risk reduction strategy. Finite element analysis was used to undertake a performance-based assessment, validating the accuracy of the model using the damage observed in the building before its collapse. In addition, soil-structure interaction was introduced into the research due to the comparatively low shear wave velocity of the soil. The demolition of a landmark heritage building was a tragedy that Christchurch will never recover from, but the decision was made considering safety, societal, economic and psychological aspects in order to protect the city and its citizens. The analytical results suggest that the Manchester Courts building would have collapsed during the 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and that the collapse of the building would have resulted in significant fatalities.
Churches are an important part of New Zealand's historical and architectural heritage. Various earthquakes around the world have highlighted the significant seismic vulnerability of religious buildings, with the extensive damage that occurred to stone and clay-brick unreinforced masonry churches after the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes emphasising the necessity to better understand this structural type. Consequently, a country-wide inventory of unreinforced masonry churches is here identified. After a bibliographic and archival investigation, and a 10 000 km field trip, it is estimated that currently 297 unreinforced masonry churches are present throughout New Zealand, excluding 12 churches demolished in Christchurch because of heavy damage sustained during the Canterbury earthquake sequence. The compiled database includes general information about the buildings, their architectural features and structural characteristics, and any architectural and structural transformations that have occurred in the past. Statistics about the occurrence of each feature are provided and preliminary interpretations of their role on seismic vulnerability are discussed. The list of identified churches is reported in annexes, supporting their identification and providing their address.
Two days after the 22 February 2011 M6.3 earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, three of the authors conducted a transect of the central city, with the goal of deriving an estimate of building damage levels. Although smaller in magnitude than the M7.1 4 September 2010 Darfield earthquake, the ground accelerations, ground deformation and damage levels in Christchurch central city were more severe in February 2011, and the central city was closed down to the general public. Written and photographic notes of 295 buildings were taken, including construction type, damage level, and whether the building would likely need to be demolished. The results of the transect compared favourably to Civil Defence rapid assessments made over the following month. Now, more than one year and two major aftershocks after the February 2011 earthquake these initial estimates are compared to the current demolition status to provide an updated understanding of the state of central Christchurch.
The 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquakes, which involved widespread damage during the February 2011 event and ongoing aftershocks near the Christchurch Central Business District, left this community with more than $NZD 40 billion in losses (~20 % GDP), demolition of approximately 60 % of multi-storey concrete buildings (3 storeys and up), and closure of the core business district for over 2 years. The aftermath of the earthquake sequence has revealed unique issues and complexities for the owners of commercial and multi-storey residential buildings in relation to unexpected technical, legal, and financial challenges when making decisions regarding the future of their buildings impacted by the earthquakes. The paper presents a framework to understand the factors influencing post-earthquake decisions (repair or demolish) on multi-storey concrete buildings in Christchurch. The study, conducted in 2014, includes in-depth investigations on 15 case-study buildings using 27 semi-structured interviews with various property owners, property managers, insurers, engineers, and government authorities in New Zealand. The interviews revealed insights regarding the multitude of factors influencing post-earthquake decisions and losses. As expected, the level of damage and repairability (cost to repair) generally dictated the course of action. There is strong evidence, however, that other variables have significantly influenced the decision on a number of buildings, such as insurance, business strategies, perception of risks, building regulations (and compliance costs), and government decisions. The decision-making process for each building is complex and unique, not solely driven by structural damage. Furthermore, the findings have put the spotlight on insurance policy wordings and the paradoxical effect of insurance on the recovery of Christchurch, leading to other challenges and issues going forward.
Reinforced concrete buildings that satisfied modern seismic design criteria generally behaved as expected during the recent Canterbury and Kaikoura earthquakes in New Zealand, forming plastic hinges in intended locations. While this meant that life-safety performance objectives were met, widespread demolition and heavy economic losses took place in the aftermath of the earthquakes.The Christchurch central business district was particularly hard hit, with over 60% of the multistorey reinforced concrete buildings being demolished. A lack of knowledge on the post-earthquake residual capacity of reinforced concrete buildings was a contributing factor to the mass demolition.Many aspects related to the assessment of earthquake-damaged reinforced concrete buildings require further research. This thesis focusses on improving the state of knowledge on the post earthquakeresidual capacity and reparability of moderately damaged plastic hinges, with an emphasis on plastic hinges typical of modern moment frame structures. The repair method focussed on is epoxy injection of cracks and patching of spalled concrete. A targeted test program on seventeen nominally identical large-scale ductile reinforced concrete beams, three of which were repaired by epoxy injection following initial damaging loadings, was conducted to support these objectives. Test variables included the loading protocol, the loading rate, and the level of restraint to axial elongation.The information that can be gleaned from post-earthquake damage surveys is investigated. It is shown that residual crack widths are dependent on residual deformations, and are not necessarily indicative of the maximum rotation demands or the plastic hinge residual capacity. The implications of various other types of damage typical of beam and column plastic hinges are also discussed.Experimental data are used to demonstrate that the strength and deformation capacity of plastic hinges with modern seismic detailing are often unreduced as a result of moderate earthquake induced damage, albeit with certain exceptions. Special attention is given to the effects of prior yielding of the longitudinal reinforcement, accounting for the low-cycle fatigue and strain ageing phenomena. A material-level testing program on the low-cycle fatigue behaviour of grade 300E reinforcing steel was conducted to supplement the data available in the literature.A reduction in stiffness, relative to the initial secant stiffness to yield, occurs due to moderate plastic hinging damage. This reduction in stiffness is shown to be correlated with the ductility demand,and a proposed model gives a conservative lower-bound estimate of the residual stiffness following an arbitrary earthquake-type loading. Repair by epoxy injection is shown to be effective in restoring the majority of stiffness to plastic hinges in beams. Epoxy injection is also shown to have implications for the residual strength and elongation characteristics of repaired plastic hinges.
High demolition rates were observed in New Zealand after the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence despite the success of modern seismic design standards to achieve required performance objectives such as life safety and collapse prevention. Approximately 60% of the multi-storey reinforced concrete (RC) buildings in the Christchurch Central Business District were demolished after these earthquakes, even when only minor structural damage was present. Several factors influenced the decision of demolition instead of repair, one of them being the uncertainty of the seismic capacity of a damaged structure. To provide more insight into this topic, the investigation conducted in this thesis evaluated the residual capacity of moderately damaged RC walls and the effectiveness of repair techniques to restore the seismic performance of heavily damaged RC walls. The research outcome provided insights for developing guidelines for post-earthquake assessment of earthquake-damaged RC structures. The methodology used to conduct the investigation was through an experimental program divided into two phases. During the first phase, two walls were subjected to different types of pre-cyclic loading to represent the damaged condition from a prior earthquake, and a third wall represented a repair scenario with the damaged wall being repaired using epoxy injection and repair mortar after the pre-cyclic loading. Comparisons of these test walls to a control undamaged wall identified significant reductions in the stiffness of the damaged walls and a partial recovery in the wall stiffness achieved following epoxy injection. Visual damage that included distributed horizontal and diagonal cracks and spalling of the cover concrete did not affect the residual strength or displacement capacity of the walls. However, evidence of buckling of the longitudinal reinforcement during the pre-cyclic loading resulted in a slight reduction in strength recovery and a significant reduction in the displacement capacity of the damaged walls. Additional experimental programs from the literature were used to provide recommendations for modelling the response of moderately damaged RC walls and to identify a threshold that represented a potential reduction in the residual strength and displacement capacity of damaged RC walls in future earthquakes. The second phase of the experimental program conducted in this thesis addressed the replacement of concrete and reinforcing steel as repair techniques for heavily damaged RC walls. Two walls were repaired by replacing the damaged concrete and using welded connections to connect new reinforcing bars with existing bars. Different locations of the welded connections were investigated in the repaired walls to study the impact of these discontinuities at the critical section. No significant changes were observed in the stiffness, strength, and displacement capacity of the repaired walls compared to the benchmark undamaged wall. Differences in the local behaviour at the critical section were observed in one of the walls but did not impact the global response. The results of these two repaired walls were combined with other experimental programs found in the literature to assemble a database of repaired RC walls. Qualitative and quantitative analyses identified trends across various parameters, including wall types, damage before repair, and repair techniques implemented. The primary outcome of the database analysis was recommendations for concrete and reinforcing steel replacement to restore the strength and displacement capacity of heavily damaged RC walls.
In September 2010 and February 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was struck by two powerful earthquakes, registering magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively on the Richter scale. The second earthquake was centred 10 kilometres south-east of the centre of Christchurch (the region’s capital and New Zealand’s third most populous urban area, with approximately 360,000 residents) at a depth of five kilometres. 185 people were killed, making it the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history. (66 people were killed in the collapse of one building alone, the six-storey Canterbury Television building.) The earthquake occurred during the lunch hour, increasing the number of people killed on footpaths and in buses and cars by falling debris. In addition to the loss of life, the earthquake caused catastrophic damage to both land and buildings in Christchurch, particularly in the central business district. Many commercial and residential buildings collapsed in the tremors; others were damaged through soil liquefaction and surface flooding. Over 1,000 buildings in the central business district were eventually demolished because of safety concerns, and an estimated 70,000 people had to leave the city after the earthquakes because their homes were uninhabitable. The New Zealand Government declared a state of national emergency, which stayed in force for ten weeks. In 2014 the Government estimated that the rebuild process would cost NZ$40 billion (approximately US$27.3 billion, a cost equivalent to 17% of New Zealand’s annual GDP). Economists now estimate it could take the New Zealand economy between 50 and 100 years to recover. The earthquakes generated tens of thousands of insurance claims, both against private home insurance companies and against the New Zealand Earthquake Commission, a government-owned statutory body which provides primary natural disaster insurance to residential property owners in New Zealand. These ranged from claims for hundreds of millions of dollars concerning the local port and university to much smaller claims in respect of the thousands of residential homes damaged. Many of these insurance claims resulted in civil proceedings, caused by disputes about policy cover, the extent of the damage and the cost and/or methodology of repairs, as well as failures in communication and delays caused by the overwhelming number of claims. Disputes were complicated by the fact that the Earthquake Commission provides primary insurance cover up to a monetary cap, with any additional costs to be met by the property owner’s private insurer. Litigation funders and non-lawyer claims advocates who took a percentage of any insurance proceeds also soon became involved. These two factors increased the number of parties involved in any given claim and introduced further obstacles to resolution. Resolving these disputes both efficiently and fairly was (and remains) central to the rebuild process. This created an unprecedented challenge for the justice system in Christchurch (and New Zealand), exacerbated by the fact that the Christchurch High Court building was itself damaged in the earthquakes, with the Court having to relocate to temporary premises. (The High Court hears civil claims exceeding NZ$200,000 in value (approximately US$140,000) or those involving particularly complex issues. Most of the claims fell into this category.) This paper will examine the response of the Christchurch High Court to this extraordinary situation as a case study in innovative judging practices and from a jurisprudential perspective. In 2011, following the earthquakes, the High Court made a commitment that earthquake-related civil claims would be dealt with as swiftly as the Court's resources permitted. In May 2012, it commenced a special “Earthquake List” to manage these cases. The list (which is ongoing) seeks to streamline the trial process, resolve quickly claims with precedent value or involving acute personal hardship or large numbers of people, facilitate settlement and generally work proactively and innovatively with local lawyers, technical experts and other stakeholders. For example, the Court maintains a public list (in spreadsheet format, available online) with details of all active cases before the Court, listing the parties and their lawyers, summarising the facts and identifying the legal issues raised. It identifies cases in which issues of general importance have been or will be decided, with the expressed purpose being to assist earthquake litigants and those contemplating litigation and to facilitate communication among parties and lawyers. This paper will posit the Earthquake List as an attempt to implement innovative judging techniques to provide efficient yet just legal processes, and which can be examined from a variety of jurisprudential perspectives. One of these is as a case study in the well-established debate about the dialogic relationship between public decisions and private settlement in the rule of law. Drawing on the work of scholars such as Hazel Genn, Owen Fiss, David Luban, Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Judith Resnik, it will explore the tension between the need to develop the law through the doctrine of precedent and the need to resolve civil disputes fairly, affordably and expeditiously. It will also be informed by the presenter’s personal experience of the interplay between reported decisions and private settlement in post-earthquake Christchurch through her work mediating insurance disputes. From a methodological perspective, this research project itself gives rise to issues suitable for discussion at the Law and Society Annual Meeting. These include the challenges in empirical study of judges, working with data collected by the courts and statistical analysis of the legal process in reference to settlement. September 2015 marked the five-year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. There remains widespread dissatisfaction amongst Christchurch residents with the ongoing delays in resolving claims, particularly insurers, and the rebuild process. There will continue to be challenges in Christchurch for years to come, both from as-yet unresolved claims but also because of the possibility of a new wave of claims arising from poor quality repairs. Thus, a final purpose of presenting this paper at the 2016 Meeting is to gain the benefit of other scholarly perspectives and experiences of innovative judging best practice, with a view to strengthening and improving the judicial processes in Christchurch. This Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association in New Orleans is a particularly appropriate forum for this paper, given the recent ten year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the plenary session theme of “Natural and Unnatural Disasters – human crises and law’s response.” The presenter has a personal connection with this theme, as she was a Fulbright scholar from New Zealand at New York University in 2005/2006 and participated in the student volunteer cleanup effort in New Orleans following Katrina. http://www.lawandsociety.org/NewOrleans2016/docs/2016_Program.pdf
