# What stood on this ground? The heritage register’s answer within 250m of -43.55968, 172.73754, 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 [Redcliffs](https://www.chch.live/redcliffs) and in the [Heathcote ward](https://www.chch.live/wards/heathcote), Nathaniel Herz Jardine'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 281m from this point, a M3.9 on 13 June 2011, 7 km deep, labelled "5 km east of Christchurch" ([its record at GeoNet](https://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/3602969)). 29 magnitude-3+ epicentres sit within a kilometre, the biggest inside five kilometres a M6.0 on 13 June 2011, 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 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 **Residential Suburban** (RS), the residential 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 filed this point **TC3**, technical category 3, blue. A category is the verdict for a patch of ground, not a finding about this address, the grades are at [technical-categories](https://www.chch.live/technical-categories). The nearest mapped fault trace sits 29.2km 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 high-hazard flood area covers this point It sits inside the *Moncks Redcliffs* flood-management area, the catchment’s own watch. The waiting water: [flood-hazard](https://www.chch.live/flood-hazard). An esplanade reserve line runs about 80 m away, the plan’s held public edge. The drawn water: [water-margin](https://www.chch.live/water-margin). The rebuild photographed this ground, **724** SCIRT frames within a few hundred metres, 2012–2016, stormwater work mostly. The nearest is about 17 m away from 2012-12-03, [the frame itself](https://gis.ccc.govt.nz/image/SCIRT/Photos/Site_Photos/10824_3_20121203 144458.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 **87 m** from this point. Within a short walk the layer files 5.2 km of network. The books' record, not today’s cones, the whole network: [cycleways](https://www.chch.live/cycleways). The plaque register puts a dedication about **196 m** from this point, it reads “These swings are a gift from Reuben, for everyone to enjoy. / Reuben Murray Smith / 24.1.2019 - 17.12.2020”, standing on Te Papa Kura Redcliffs Park, commissioned 1899. 5 inscribed plaques stand within a short walk, across 2 named grounds. The whole roll: [plaques](https://www.chch.live/plaques). The rules on this ground, 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). This point sits inside a scheduled area of significance to Ngāi Tahu, *Raekura ki Matuku Takotako* (Ngā Tūranga Tūpuna). The plan formally recognises this ground in the mana whenua cultural landscape, earthworks and works on the water carry extra care here. The whole schedule: [cultural](https://www.chch.live/cultural). ## The marae and the old grounds The nearest marae on the roll is [Ngā Hau e Whā National Marae](https://www.chch.live/marae/nga-hau-e-wha), wharenui Aoraki, 5.2km from this point (Te Rūnanga o Ngā Maata Waka, whose national marae is open to Māori of every iwi). The nearest named ground the plan schedules is **Ōtautahi, Tautahi's kāinga**, the Avon Loop, near Oxford Terrace and Barbadoes Street, 8.6km away, the seasonal camp of Tautahi, the chief the city is named for and son of Huikai of Koukourārata, on the Avon Loop. 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 340m 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 **Medium Liquefaction Vulnerability**, River flood basin and estuary plain 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 1.1km 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 **5** notable trees within half a kilometre of this point, 5 carrying a protection, the nearest is **Ash** (*excelsior*), 7 m tall, a crown 7 m across, carrying a subdivision protection, on private land, 5m 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. Widened to 2 km, the nearest on record is [Commercial Building and Setting](https://www.chch.live/place/9), 279m away, 186 Main Road. 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=-43.55967903971663&lon=172.73754422939862&radius=250 Map: https://www.chch.live/map?mode=places#-43.55967903971663,172.73754422939862,18 Data: https://api.chch.live/before?lat=-43.55967903971663&lon=172.73754422939862&radius=250