# What stood on this ground? The heritage register’s answer within 250m of -43.39791, 172.70132, nothing scheduled in the register here. A register listing is a lead to follow, not by itself a claim. Distances are to each place’s recorded pin, not its boundary. The point falls inside [Brooklands](https://www.chch.live/brooklands) and in the [Coastal ward](https://www.chch.live/wards/coastal), Celeste Donovan's seat, measured against the drawn boundaries, not the side its address is described as. The whole roll is at [/wards](https://www.chch.live/wards). The nearest break GeoNet recorded sits 2.6km from this point, a M3.4 on 18 September 2010, 5 km deep, labelled "10 km north of Christchurch" ([its record at GeoNet](https://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/3373805)). none within a kilometre, 7 within five, the biggest inside five kilometres a M4.2 on 2 January 2012, 7 km deep. An epicentre is where the instruments placed the break, not where the shaking was felt; the whole catalogue is at [sequence](https://www.chch.live/sequence) and the story in plain language is [the earthquakes explainer](https://www.chch.live/how-nz-works/canterbury-earthquakes). The Crown’s 2011 classification drew this point inside the residential red zone, "land repair would be prolonged and uneconomic". A classification is the record of a decision, not a finding about this address today, the whole boundary is at [redzone](https://www.chch.live/redzone). The district plan files this ground as **Specific Purpose (Flat Land Recovery)** (SPLR), the specific purpose family. A zone is a permission, not a description, the whole district’s zoning is at [zones](https://www.chch.live/zones). The 2011 grading never reached this point, the categories ran over the flat residential land. The grades are at [technical-categories](https://www.chch.live/technical-categories). The nearest mapped fault trace sits 17.4km from this point, part of the Ashley Fault Zone. A drawn trace is the record of where the ground broke or deformed, not a prediction for this address, the mapped faults are at [faults](https://www.chch.live/faults). No recorded dump under this point, the council’s landfill layer keeps the old tips on the books and this isn’t one. The ones that are, from 1880 on: [landfills](https://www.chch.live/landfills). No recorded flood patch reaches this point, the layer keeps the water it saw and never drew it here. The ground it did draw: [floods](https://www.chch.live/floods). The plan’s flood map puts this point inside a *high flood hazard* area, the ground it expects to take water deep or fast. It sits inside the *Lower Styx River* flood-management area, the catchment’s own watch. A mapped ponding spot marks this ground too. The waiting water: [flood-hazard](https://www.chch.live/flood-hazard). An esplanade reserve line runs about 65 m away, the plan’s held public edge. The drawn water: [water-margin](https://www.chch.live/water-margin). The rebuild photographed this ground, **24** SCIRT frames within a few hundred metres, stormwater work mostly. The nearest is about 12 m away, an access shot from 2013-10-01, [the frame itself](https://gis.ccc.govt.nz/image/SCIRT/Photos/Manhole_Photos/SWMH11885_SWMH11885B_20131002 094516.jpg). A work log filed as the dig went on, not a survey of what stands today. The whole record: [rebuild](https://www.chch.live/rebuild). The rules on this ground, the dog rules name this ground, Brooklands Red Zone (prohibited/under effective control); Brooklands Red Zone (prohibited/under effective control); inside the takiwā of Te Ngai Tuahuriri Runanga. The bylaw is the instrument, this is the register’s drawing of it, thinned to ~4 m. The whole rulebook: [rules](https://www.chch.live/rules). The plan’s mapped inundation extent covers this point, the sea could reach here in a tsunami, on NIWA’s modelling for Environment Canterbury (ECAN Report R12/38 2012; ECAN Report R14/78 2014). A modelled reach, not a prediction, the plan’s line, not the evacuation map. The whole extent: [tsunami](https://www.chch.live/tsunami). ## The marae and the old grounds The nearest marae on the roll is [Tuahiwi Marae](https://www.chch.live/marae/tuahiwi), wharenui Maahunui II, 8.6km from this point (Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga, the mana whenua of Christchurch). The nearest named ground the plan schedules is **Kaiapohia, Kaiapoi Pā**, north of the Waimakariri, near Waikuku, 3.6km away, the great fortified capital of Ngāi Tahu, Tūrākautahi's pā, sacked by Te Rauparaha in 1832 after a siege of months; its fall is why the rūnanga moved to Tuahiwi. The whole roll: [maraes](https://www.chch.live/maraes), a record of what the file says, not a claim on this point. No graded landscape schedule covers this point, though it sits inside the coastal environment, the plan’s coastal rules reach this far. The kept view: [landscape](https://www.chch.live/landscape). No hazardous-activities listing reaches this point, the register keeps the parcels where contaminating work ran, and this isn’t one. The ones that are: [hazards](https://www.chch.live/hazards). No fill parcel reaches this point, the files keep the ground that was made, and this isn’t filed as made. The parcels that are: [fill](https://www.chch.live/fill). The rockfall survey’s nearest pin sits 17.5km from this point, a rock that came down in the shakes. A pin is where the survey saw the rock, not a promise about the slope, the survey: [boulders](https://www.chch.live/boulders). ## What the model says The 2019 liquefaction vulnerability study draws this ground as **High Liquefaction Vulnerability**, Dune related deposits which are usually well characterised by observed performance, CPT investigations and simplified liquefaction analyses. A district-scale screening read, not a finding about an address, the study itself says site-specific analysis confirms a parcel. The whole study: [vulnerability](https://www.chch.live/vulnerability). ## The armour The nearest engineered defence sits 18.5km away, a mesh drape installed 2011. Nearly all are the emergency works the quake years left standing; the file’s condition rating is its own word, not a fresh inspection. The register: [defences](https://www.chch.live/defences). ## The canopy The register counts **3** notable trees within half a kilometre of this point, 3 carrying a protection, the nearest is **Wellingtonia** (*giganteum*), 13 m tall, a crown 11 m across, carrying a subdivision protection, 460m away. A tree record is the register’s word on what stands, not a fresh survey. The canopy: [trees](https://www.chch.live/trees). No scheduled place sits within 250m of this point. That is a statement about the register, not the ground, unscheduled does not mean unstoried, only that no listing has been made for it. ## How this answer is made The register this asks is the district-plan heritage schedule and the Heritage New Zealand list, scheduled places, not everything that stood here. If the record has this ground wrong, the corrections door is open: https://www.chch.live/corrections --- HTML: https://www.chch.live/before?lat=-43.3979110635754&lon=172.70132169076527&radius=250 Map: https://www.chch.live/map?mode=places#-43.3979110635754,172.70132169076527,18 Data: https://api.chch.live/before?lat=-43.3979110635754&lon=172.70132169076527&radius=250