“Common sense is not so common.”
― Voltaire, A Pocket Philosophical Dictionary
A little bed time story to help kick start your weekend.
The Big Bad Wolf huffed and puffed as he approached the house of the First Little Pig.
“Little Pig, Little Pig please fix my house?”
“No problem wolf but our agreement with you only lets me build you a straw house. I can’t build a super nice one like you had. It’s the EQC way, ok?
Disgruntled the Big Bad Wolf shuffled along to the house of the 2nd Little Pig. Attempting to hold back his frustration he huffed and he puffed as nicely as he could.
“Little Pig, Little Pig please fix my house like it was. The First Little Pig will only build me a straw house”.
“No problem Wolf but our policies only let us fix your house if the First Little Pig says its ok. And even if the First Little Pig lets us fix your house you know we can only build you a wooden house coz the building guidelines say PVA glue will fix your house as good as new.”
By now the Wolf was running out of huff and puff and instead of going back to the First Little Pig to see if he would allow the 2nd Little Pig to fix his house, the wolf trundles along to the house of the Third Little Pig.
“Little Pig, Little Pig please talk to your brothers so that I can get my house fixed like it was?”
The 3rd Little Pig scrambled around searching for something to help solve this problem. He searched high. He searched low. He looked in, beside and under his Cabinet that was carefully positioned in the centre of his little brick hive.
“Where is that ‘common sense’ he said to himself “I know I put it somewhere…
Many months later the wolf returned to his broken house. The First and 2nd Little Pigs stayed in their houses re-interpreting their policies and the Third Little Pig, as far as we know, is still looking for his paper on ‘Common Sense’.
A lot of news this week everyone so our apologies for the length.
Just a wee note to members who take parts from the CanCERN newsletter to use in their own communications with residents – if it’s come from our newsletter, please add a note identifying that.
Leanne and Brian
Restore and Rebuild – Focusing on Community Revitalisation Conference
After two days of intensively exploring the ‘post disaster environment’ at this well attended conference, the last thing we needed was a 5.5 earthquake in Kaiapoi to remind us that there is nothing ‘post disaster’ about this environment!
Day one of the conference was essentially hearing experiences of disasters in their towns – how the community did things and what they learned. It wasn’t an easy day and we were certainly reminded that tragedy is often all around us and that responses tend to follow pretty similar patterns. It was an affirming day (not necessarily in a good way) as we found that our sense of frustration is no different to others, Canterbury is not getting it any more wrong than others have done, our people are not any less resilient. However, what was important to hold onto was the fact that communities all over, whatever the disaster have and will continue to do what they do best – respond with common sense and care and that was what day two was all about.
Day two focused on the opportunities for communities to really lead their recovery and the role of community leadership. We were reminded of simple strategies which engage more people and were challenged to inspire ideas and solutions that are right outside of the square.
As is normal after any good conference, we probably came away with more questions than answers but this is the springboard we need to keep the community recovery alive. How do we up-skill and strengthen our community leaders? What resources and connections are already out there? How do we engage the very tired and disconnected residents? How do we create pathways for community development to occur? How do we rekindle the sense of connection and collective responsibility we had immediately after the quakes. Of course was my final question for the day was how do I get out of this building and onto still ground so that really put paid to me seeking the answers to the questions above from the experts at the conference!
As we receive information, powerpoints or useful websites to go to from the organisers of this conference we will pass them on to you. A big thank you to the organisers and sponsors of this conference./************ get tags and categories ****************/ ?>
Below is a quick summary of some of the issues within our communities raised at the last meeting. Port Hills leaders were attending a local meeting so their issues were not represented at the meeting.
- Parklands – Green zone meetings. Looking for assurance around safety. Supporting CERA Expo idea over two days. Still doing café conversations with elderly on Tuesday. Successful public appeal against the dumping of asbestos in Parklands.
- Spencerville – Recovery of the community and TC3 issues/flood zone issues a priority
- Third Age Forum and Hornby – Influx of people creating housing issues in Hornby
- Travis – psychological issues – people walking away from sections. Survey showing large numbers of over-cap people not paid out.
- Riverside – Issues were predominantly red zone – transitioning to TC3 focus as people relocate. Bordering on Red Zone – lack of information re demolitions and future use of land and TC3 issues
- Richmond North West – joint rejuvenation meeting with neighbouring Riverside group (geotechs for beginners). Delivering 2500 flyers to increase the network and advertise meeting.
- Cowpats (Upper Avonside) – 90% red. Security issues. Rebuild to repair issues – potential for some legal support being explored. Seeking new leadership within remaining green residents.
- Avondale – TC3 issues – CCC responsibility re dredging of river and disposal. Submitted to CCC draft annual plan. Want CERA green zone meeting. Questions regarding potential financial implications for TC3 residents. Looking at community facility needs.
- St Albans – TC3 issues – want CERA meeting. Community bbq on trailer acquired for community use. Surveying area re community development initiatives.
- Inner City East – changes in the inner city – commercial using residential housing stock. Somewhat isolated from the suburbs. 60% of local shops demolished – projected 5-7 yr replacement so lack of infrastructure. Housing work – working with Anglican Care re extent of damage to firm up advocacy needs. Have catalogued whole neighbourhood – evidence of significant rough living. Had Neighbourhood Day – highlighted number of people who don’t understood EQC process and how to advance it.
- Edgeware – TC3 issues
- Packe St Park – volunteers and residents turning up at their group to look for information on being TC3.
- Avonside – Working with bordering communities to have Medway Bridge removed and stored for future memorial.
All apologies to firstname.lastname@example.org if you can’t make it./************ get tags and categories ****************/ ?>
Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch
We attended the launch of the Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch yesterday. It is a very high level document and therefore difficult to see the fruits of the communities’ ideas which were gathered long ago. It is essentially a policy document and should be read as such. The important thing to note is that community are not specifically named as partners in the monitoring and review of the recovery. We believe we have a role in this – the recovery is ours, not the governments – and will be advocating for pathways that ensure the community can monitor this recovery against the guiding principles and engagement strategy in the document.
Click here to read or download the Recovery Strategy for Greater Christchurch.
Rotary and CanCERN
– Rotary have agreed to support the community with noticeboards which will help those who do not have access to computers. These noticeboards will be a great asset to the community – a focal point for information owned by the people who live there. Thanks to the Rotary for getting on board with this idea. We are also looking at ways Rotary members can share their expertise for various community projects. Again, this shared knowledge, skill and energy will provide the support projects need to come to fruition. As an example, Lindsay from Rotary (retired engineer) is putting together safety and tool information which can be utilised by groups involved with salvage and community builds./************ get tags and categories ****************/ ?>
CCC Rates Relief
A motion was passed to receive a report on the issue of 100% rates relief for those homeowners in uninhabitable houses for discussion/debate at council on 7th June. Well done to this team of people for keeping the pressure on. Please turn up and show your support./************ get tags and categories ****************/ ?>
Southern Response / Arrow International Meeting – 4 May 2012
Arrow International Meeting – 4 May 2012
The purpose of this meeting was to view and understand the maps that Southern Response and Arrow International use to plan their work programmes. The discussion went from there to prioritisation and communicating with homeowners.
At this stage, some of the information regarding TC3 areas that is necessary to complete the risk profile maps is still outstanding. This is information regarding flood zones (CCC responsibility) and land remediation options (EQC responsibility). This means that full settlement and repair strategies for houses in these areas which require this information cannot rely on the maps entirely. Certainly there has been some confusion as to why some TC3 properties have begun work and others appear to be ‘on hold’. It is the required information that is missing that is causing the delay. Added to this is the status of the claim as it relates to the EQC/insurer liability (apportionment and assessment issues).
Essentially the maps provide a more specific understanding of the land quality based on criteria which includes land condition, lateral spread58, proximity to water/wetlands, flood plain levels and possible land remediation measures. Overlaying this information are the individual claims – the status of the claim and other site specific information such. Together, this information allows Arrow to see where there are obvious areas to begin work based on the fact that all of the necessary information has been collected and the customer has made their settlement election and are signed off as settled and ready to begin the repair/rebuild process. It is in essence a coordination tool which allows Southern Response and Arrow to visualise where the claims are – both out of scope and over cap and identifies gaps and clusters of obvious areas for coordinated work to proceed.
Based on the fact that work on a house can only begin when all of the necessary information has been gathered AND EQC has signed off the claim ie – resolution of liability has been reached, Arrow’s work programme will generally start with the presently low risk and simple properties (ie. one quake damage only). There are less information needs for TC1 and TC2 because there generally won’t be land remediation implications or geotechnical assessments needed. However, there is not a blanket hold on progressing TC3 claims. As Southern Response customers will be aware, each customer is allocated to a pod of which there are 8 across Canterbury. These pods each use the maps to plan and prioritise the work programme within their area. This means that some TC3 homeowners will have their repair/rebuild started before others depending on the geographic make-up of the pod’s area. It stands to reason that if one pod is essentially made up of TC3 properties and another with mainly TC2, some TC3 homeowners will have their work beginning earlier than others.
Customer plight ie. the individual circumstances of the family such as age and health issues that make them more vulnerable than others, is to a certain extent factored into prioritisation. However, these circumstances can only be taken into account after all other aspects of the claim have fallen into place ie. all necessary information gathered and EQC sign off of the claim.
The Port Hills
There are other factors to take into account when looking at the Port Hills. After speaking to a pod leader, it became apparent that EQC had not put a process in place to share retaining wall information with the appropriate Project Management staff. Since this meeting, EQC, Southern Response and Arrow have now put a process in place so we should now begin to see movement in this area.
There is ‘good’ TC3 land and ‘bad’ TC3 land and as we are aware, there are properties within the TC3 zones which after further geotechnical investigation will be found to be more equivalent to TC1 and TC2. Although Arrow will use the data gathered from EQC’s drilling programme, their work programme will not be determined by EQC’s as they are also progressing with their own geotechnical assessments. Every property with foundation damage will have a geotechnical assessment. Again, this work is beginning in those areas where the other necessary information has already been gathered, the customer has made their settlement election and there are signs that the land is less compromised. It is likely that work will begin in this area earlier than areas which are more compromised.
Should I get my own geotech assessment?
Homeowners can get their own geotechnical assessments and if Arrow can use the information ie. the assessment gives them all the necessary information needed to progress the repair/rebuild strategy and gain building consents, the cost of the assessment will be covered. However, if the assessment does not provide the necessary data or the claim still relies on outstanding information from external sources, the costs of the assessment may or may not be covered and will be negotiated on a case by case basis. Those who are in the ‘bad’ TC3 areas may be best not to employ their own geotechnical assessment. It’s recommended that you discuss this with the project manager before you make that decision.
Recognising there are some homeowners who are fearful they may have to wait years for a geotechnical assessment to be completed on their property only to be told that the land is uneconomic to rebuild on, we discussed the possibility of completing earlier assessments on those properties so the homeowners can know earlier what their options may be. This concept has now been floated and will need more discussion about whether or not this is possible.
The final discussion we had was about how to communicate time frames to homeowners. In 2011, the Waimakariri District Council established a communication process (before land zoning) which identified areas where area wide land remediation was expected to begin within a 1, 2, 3 and 4 year period. Although it was distressing for those residents who heard that work wouldn’t begin until 2014, most were appreciative of having some indication so they could make plans for their future. CanCERN is hearing from some residents that they would be prepared to wait for their repair/rebuild as long as they have some indication of when that is predicted to happen so it may be that following a similar model may be useful. Southern Response and Arrow are confident that in the near future they will have a clearer idea of where work is predicted to start. Of course everything is subject to change and there will always be exceptions to the rule.
Communicating time frames is obviously something insurers are cautious about because much of their ability to progress claims relies on external factors. However, I got the sense that Southern Response and Arrow were keen to look more closely about how to start communicating time frames based on the information they currently have. We will continue to work with them in this area.
Overall, it was another open and positive meeting. The news for quick progress is not necessarily good and the issues of information sharing between the organisations that are responsible for the different aspects of claim settlement have once again been highlighted as a major reason for delay. This is a leadership issue which CanCERN will continue to highlight so that the residential recovery can be better coordinated./************ get tags and categories ****************/ ?>
Red Cross Outreach programme
an opportunity for someone to come out and give you information and support.
Did you know New Zealand Red Cross
has an Outreach programme designed to
provide information and support for people
who’ve been affected by the earthquakes?
If you would like a visit or to speak
to someone from our Outreach team
0800 4 OUTREACH
(0800 468 873)
There are also a number of Red Cross
grants still open.To apply for a grant or
to see if you qualify, please call
0800 754 726
Or go to www.redcrosseqgrants.org.nz
CONNECT CARE PREPARE/************ get tags and categories ****************/ ?>