Strenghts and weeknesses for these ideas (rebuilding christchurch)?

Question

Tell me one strength and one weakness for each of these:
A. They should relocate the CBD of christchurch to a 'safer location' , leaving things as they are- rebuild the broken buildings and develop a tourist attraction.
B. Completely demolish the city center and build a modern 21st century CBD that has high rise buildings able to with stand earthquakes.
C. Restore all key heritage buildings and all other buildings should be built to modern 21st century style.

Answer 1

A. They should relocate the CBD of christchurch to a 'safer location' , leaving things as they are- rebuild the broken buildings and develop a tourist attraction.



My Opinion: No, I don't think so. I think that's a weak idea. I would not re-build Christchurch again. I would take my residents outside Christchurch to another town where they could live.



B. Completely demolish the city center and build a modern 21st century CBD that has high rise buildings able to with stand earthquakes.



My Opinion: Don't agree with that one there. High rise buildings can cause a lot of falling down in earthquakes. You need a lot of money to have high-rise buildings. I'm not sure many Christchurch tenants would like a high-rise building and don't think they would be able to afford that like other countries can. Apparently, that's quite expensive to maintain.



C. Restore all key heritage buildings and all other buildings should be built to modern 21st century style.



My Opinion: That's very correct! As pretty as the old buildings are, they have to be demolished because of their unsafe environment. I think building modern 21st century type of style is a good idea because they are safer, not as harzardous than the old buildings.

Answer 2

No where in chch is really safe or perfectly stable, to the east you have the ocean but there's also the swamps up by bottle lake, burwood etc. The city centre has proven to be unstable and then on the west are the hills and I don't think building the CBD up there would really work out.



I love our heritage buildings, I have good memories with those old buildings but for the safety of residents B would be a good option without high rises because that's just not chch.



C would be good too if the restored buildings were also earthquake-proofed. I'm for B or C, whichever one is cheaper because they'll both be very expensive.



That's just my, non-educated opinion.

Answer 3

A. Central business districts are always the main attraction for tourists, so it needs to be at a place where everyone can feel safe and come together. Downside would be it's a hassle

B. Love the idea but too expensive

C. Chch needs to have a mix of ancient feeling as well as modern buildings so that's both a con and a pro

Answer 4

B I believe, a fresh start and a new city in a safer location, but maybe not high rises with lots of gardens and parks. It's too costly to repair broken buildings, and NZ cant afford the huge extra expense.

Answer 5

A relocate the entire city



B good idea as long as the engineers come from Japan



C NZ heritage buildings are not old compared to the rest of the world and are in reality just copies of other buildings.



the entire area is unsafe walk away and make it a tourist attraction