# What stood on this ground? The heritage register’s answer within 2000m of -43.52859, 172.63344, 5 places on record, nearest first. 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 [Christchurch Central](https://www.chch.live/christchurch-central-city) and in the [Central ward](https://www.chch.live/wards/central), Jake McLellan'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 663m from this point, a M4.6 on 26 December 2010, 7 km deep, labelled "Within 5 km of Christchurch" ([its record at GeoNet](https://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/3436956)). 8 magnitude-3+ epicentres sit within a kilometre, the biggest inside five kilometres a M4.7 on 26 December 2010, 5 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 left this point outside the residential red zone. The whole boundary is at [redzone](https://www.chch.live/redzone). The district plan files this ground as **City centre zone** (CCZ), the mixed use 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 21.4km from this point, part of the Greendale Fault. 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). No air-noise contour covers this point The ground is zoned *Category 3, Lower Noise Level Area*, the central city’s graded night. The quiet lines: [noise](https://www.chch.live/noise). The central-city walking catchment reaches this far, the ten-minute city the plan draws. The allowed shape: [density](https://www.chch.live/density). The rebuild photographed this ground, **1392** SCIRT frames within a few hundred metres, 2011–2015, stormwater work mostly. The nearest is about 9 m away from 2012-05-23, [the frame itself](https://gis.ccc.govt.nz/image/SCIRT/Photos/Site_Photos/10844_2_20120524 111822.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 cycleway layer files a **cycle lane** about **15 m** from this point. Within a short walk the layer files 7.2 km of network, 0.2 km of it separated from the traffic. The books' record, not today’s cones, the whole network: [cycleways](https://www.chch.live/cycleways). The plaque register puts a dedication about **108 m** from this point, it reads “PROVINCIAL COUNCIL BUILDING 1865 — Canterbury Centenary plaque”, standing on Canterbury Provincial Council, commissioned 2009. 64 inscribed plaques stand within a short walk, across 12 named grounds. The whole roll: [plaques](https://www.chch.live/plaques). The rules on this ground, no alcohol here (Central City, Central City), in force around the clock; the dog rules name this ground, Central City (leashed); Central City (leashed); Central City (leashed); Central City (leashed); freedom camping is managed here, Christchurch Urban Restricted Area, Christchurch Urban Restricted Area, Christchurch Urban Restricted Area; 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 marae and the old grounds The nearest marae on the roll is [Rehua Marae](https://www.chch.live/marae/rehua), wharenui Te Whatu Manawa Māoritanga o Rehua, 1.3km from this point (the city's urban Māori community, under the korowai of mana whenua Ngāi Tūāhuriri). The nearest named ground the plan schedules is **Puāri Pā**, Victoria Square and north along the river, 278m away, the Waitaha settlement on the Ōtākaro bank, the oldest village the city centre covers, and later the market where Ngāi Tūāhuriri sold produce. The whole roll: [maraes](https://www.chch.live/maraes), a record of what the file says, not a claim on this point. 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 4.0km 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**, River plain and channel deposits, observed performance variable and uncertainty in liquefaction performance due to effects of layered silty soil profiles. 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 5.1km away, a rock anchor 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 **164** notable trees within half a kilometre of this point, **41** veterans, 127 carrying a protection, the nearest is **Japanese maple** (*palmatum*), 8 m tall, 0.6 m through, a crown 11 m across, a veteran, 60m away. A tree record is the register’s word on what stands, not a fresh survey. The canopy: [trees](https://www.chch.live/trees). ## What the record says ### [Armagh Street Kerbstones and Setting](https://www.chch.live/place/303) 60m from your point 23 unread leads ### [Former Magistrates Court and Setting](https://www.chch.live/place/8) 64m from your point 26 unread leads ## On the register nearby - [Armagh Street Kerbstones and Setting](https://www.chch.live/place/303), 60m · 280A Durham Street North - [Former Magistrates Court and Setting](https://www.chch.live/place/8), 64m · 85 Armagh Street - [Canterbury Provincial Council Buildings Former Land Transfer Office](https://www.chch.live/place/458), 84m · 86 Armagh Street - [Canterbury Provincial Council Buildings](https://www.chch.live/place/60), 88m · 280 Durham Street North - [Canterbury Provincial Council Buildings Courtyard/Grounds](https://www.chch.live/place/316), 98m · 280 Durham Street North ## 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=-43.5285917&lon=172.6334383&radius=2000 Map: https://www.chch.live/map?mode=places#-43.5285917,172.6334383,18 Data: https://api.chch.live/before?lat=-43.5285917&lon=172.6334383&radius=2000