Home > Polls > Should Christchurch, New Zealand be Relocated?

Should Christchurch, New Zealand be Relocated?

As you might have heard Christchurch suffered another largish earthquake (Magnitude 6.3 but shallow). Given the previous earthquake on 4 September 2010 (Magnitude 7.1) plus scores of nasty aftershocks and its location near major and active geological faults, someone has to ask an unpleasant question-

Can the city survive another major magnitude 7.5+, or worse, earthquake? Is it not time to consider relocating it?

I am not suggesting that such relocation can be done within a few months or even a couple of years, but it would be possible to build a city of similar size at a safer nearby location within a few years.


Categories: Polls
  1. almost 40 yoV
    February 22, 2011 at 12:26 am

    After taking a peek at the Christchurch Wiki I´m doubting they´ll relocate, unless a really big one flattens the whole area. 2nd biggest city of NZ after all.

    Hopefully they´ll really start reinforcing their building codes now.

    • March 27, 2011 at 10:06 pm

      Our building codes [in NZ ] are word leading as a matter of fact and all buildings built in the last 40 years actually exceed the parameters of both quakes. Unfortunately the city is ruled by a post colonial oligarchy who have insisted on retaining it’s “Englishness” (ie Victorian fire traps built from brick and other antiquated materials). Apart from the two commercial buildings, the collapse of which and subsequent loss of life are still pending investigation, the majority of CBD damage was from these archaic edifices collapse.

      • P Ray
        February 13, 2015 at 6:36 pm

        You left out an entrenched “whites-only” mentality that allowed (patently) unqualified people like Gerald Shirtcliff to put their hand towards buildings.
        Also, Brownlee is said to be an incompetent buffoon.
        And with the special deals that Fletcher and (the now wound-up)Mainzeal have in place,
        it’s remarkable that for a “testament to English colonialism”, for so many years and probably for the forseeable future, Christchurch will not be rebuilt.

  2. w
    February 22, 2011 at 7:58 am

    I think the “increase” in these types of natural disasters is just really the result of people building cities where they shouldn’t be. so yes they should try to move.

  3. February 22, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    New Zealand building codes are already very strict with an eye to surviving earthquakes. The majority of the fallen structures are those that are older.

    Considering the way the New Zealand land mass is created by the rubbing of the Tasman and the Pacific plate, there’s honestly not many places that can really be consider eartquake proof in New Zealand anyway. Wellington is on major fault lines as is Napier and Hastings. Auckland is built on top of seven dead volcanos. Rotorua is actively geothermal as well. The middle of the North Island has two currently active volcanos as well.

    Considering Christchurch is a city of about 350,000 and it just got a serious smack down at lunch time on a week day when everyone is out and about, even if the death toll rises from 65 up into a couple hundred, that’s still an excellent survival percentage for such an event.

    Christchurch is where it is because of the natural harbor. That, um… can’t be moved.

    Why not move Florida? That place gets torn apart by hurrianes every year it seems. Everywhere has it’s natural disaster waiting to happen.

  4. March 27, 2011 at 9:52 pm

    It’s a question many people have been to scared to ask (and answer). Ideally the bloody place should never have been built but I’m of the mind that it will move and rebuild in a more organic sense. There will be a gradual diaspora of business and industry westward anyway due to the forced displacement from all the destruction and demolition of buildings, people will follow out of necessity to remain in work.Obviously the interests of commerce will move to more stable ground to remain profitable and in doing so the old city will become exactly that. Bulldoze the whole lot for all I care, it’s a crass testament to English colonialism and ergo,the oppression and disenfranchisement of an entire planet’s people.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: