Landslides caused by the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake and management of landslide risk in the immediate aftermath
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.44.4.227-238Abstract
At 12.51 pm (NZST) on 22 February 2011 a shallow, magnitude MW 6.2 earthquake with an epicentre located just south of Christchurch, New Zealand, caused widespread devastation including building collapse, liquefaction and landslides. Throughout the Port Hills of Banks Peninsula on the southern fringes of Christchurch landslide and ground damage caused by the earthquake included rock-fall (both cliff collapse and boulder roll), incipient loess landslides, and retaining wall and fill failures. Four deaths from rock-fall occurred during the mainshock and one during an aftershock later in the afternoon of the 22nd. Hundreds of houses were damaged by rock-falls and landslide-induced ground cracking.
Four distinct landslide or ground failure types have been recognised. Firstly, rocks fell from lava outcrops on the Port Hills and rolled and bounced over hundreds of metres damaging houses located on lower slopes and on valley floors. Secondly, over-steepened present-day and former sea-cliffs collapsed catastrophically. Houses were damaged by tension cracks on the slopes above the cliff faces and by debris inundation at the toe of the slopes. Thirdly, incipient movement of landslides in loess, ranging from a few millimetres up to 0.35 metres, occurred at several locations. Again houses were damaged by extension fissuring at the head of these features and compressional movement at the toe. The fourth mode of failure observed was retaining wall and fill failures, including shaking-induced settlement and fill displacement. These failures commonly affected both houses and roads.
In the days and weeks immediately following the earthquake a major concern was how to manage the risks from another large aftershock or a long return period rainstorm, in the areas worst affected by landslides, should one occur. Each of the four identified landslide types required a different risk management strategy. The rock-fall and boulder roll hazard was managed by identifying buildings at risk and enforcing mandatory evacuation. In the days immediately following the earthquake this process was based on expert opinion. In the weeks after the earthquake this process was rapidly enhanced with empirical data to confirm the risk. The rock-falls associated with cliff collapse were managed by evacuating properties damaged by extensional ground cracking at the top of the cliffs, adjacent properties, and properties damaged by debris inundation at the toe of the cliffs. The incipient landslide hazard was managed by rapidly deploying movement monitoring technologies to determine if these features were still moving and to monitor their response to on-going aftershock activity. The fill and retaining wall failures were managed by encouraging public reporting of areas of concern for rapid assessment by a geotechnical professional.
The success of the landslide risk management strategy was demonstrated by the magnitude MW 6.0 earthquake of 13 June when rock-falls and boulder roll damaged evacuated buildings and ground cracking and debris inundation further damaged evacuated areas. Some incipient landslides reactivated, producing similar movement patterns to the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Several retaining walls identified as dangerous and cordoned off also collapsed. No lives were lost and no serious injuries were reported from landslides in the 13 June 2011 earthquake.
References
Barrell, D.J.A., Litchfield, N.J., Townsend, D.B., Quigley, M., Van Dissen, R.J., Cosgrove, R., Cox, S.C., Furlong, K., Villamor, P., Begg, J.G., Hemmings-Sykes, S., Jongens, R., Mackenzie, H., Noble, D., Stahl, T., Bilderback, E., Duffy, B., Henham, H., Klahn, A., Lang, E.M.W., Moody, L., Nicol, R., Pedley, K., Smith, A. (2011) “Strike-slip ground-surface rupture (Greendale Fault) associated with the 4 September 2010 Darfield earthquake, Canterbury, New Zealand”. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 44: 283-291. doi: 10.1144/1470-9236/11-034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1144/1470-9236/11-034
Beavan, J., Fielding, E., Motagh, M., Samsonov, S., Donnelly, N. (2011) “Fault Location and Slip Distribution of the 22 February 2011 Mw 6.2 Christchurch, New Zealand, Earthquake from Geodetic Data”. Seismological Research Letters 82(6): 789-799. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.6.789
Beavan, J., Samsonov, S., Motagh, M., Wallace, L., Ellis, S., Palmer, N. (2010) “The Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake: geodetic observations and preliminary source model”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 43(4): 228-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.43.4.228-235
Bradley, B.A., Cubrinovski, M. (2011) “Near-source Strong Ground Motions Observed in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch Earthquake”. Seismological Research Letters 82(6): 853-865. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.6.853
Forsyth, P.J., Barrell, D.J.A., Jongens, R. (2008) “Geology of the Christchurch area”. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences 1:250,000 Geological Map 16. 1 sheet + 67 p. Lower Hutt, New Zealand. GNS Science.
Gledhill, K., Ristau, J., Reyners, M., Fry, B., Holden, C. (2010) “The Darfield (Canterbury) Mw 7.1 earthquake of September 2010: preliminary seismological report”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 43(4): 215-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.43.4.215-221
Gledhill, K., Ristau, J., Reyners, M., Fry, B., Holden, C. (2011) “The Darfield (Canterbury, New Zealand) Mw 7.1 earthquake of September 2010: a preliminary seismological report. Seismological Research Letters 82(3): 378-386.
Hancox, G., Massey, C., Perrin, N. (2011) “Landslides and related ground damage caused by the Mw 6.3 Christchurch Earthquake of 22 February 2011”. New Zealand Geomechanics News 81: 53–67.
Holden, C., Beavan, J., Fry, B., Reyners, M., Ristau, J., Van Dissen, R., Villamor, P., Quigley, M. (2011) “Preliminary source model of the Mw 7.1 Darfield earthquake from geological, geodetic and seismic data”. in proceedings, 9th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, 14-16 April, 2011: Paper 164, 8 p.
Kaiser, A., Holden, C., Beavan, J., Beetham, D., Benites, R., Celentano, A., Collet, D., Cousins, J., Cubrinovski, M., Dellow, G., Denys, P., Fielding, E., Fry, B., Gerstenberger, M., Langridge, R., Massey, C., Motagh, M., Pondard, N., McVerry, G., Ristau, J., Stirling, M., Thomas, J., Uma, S.R., Zhao, J. (in press) “The Mw 6.2 Christchurch earthquake of February 2011: Preliminary report”. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics.
Quigley, M., Van Dissen, R., Litchfield, N., Villamor, P., Duffy, B., Barrell, D., Furlong, K., Stahl, T., Bilderback, E., Noble, D. (2012) “Surface rupture during the 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake: Implications for fault rupture dynamics and seismic-hazard analysis”. Geology 40(1): 55-58. doi: 10.1130/G32528.1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1130/G32528.1
Quigley, M., Villamor, P., Furlong, K., Beavan, J., Van Dissen, R., Litchfield, N., Stahl, T., Duffy, B., Bilderback, E., Noble, D., Barrell, D., Jongens, R., Cox, S. (2010a) “Previously unknown fault shakes New Zealand‟s South Island”. Eos Transactions, American Geophysical Union 91(49): 469-470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2010EO490001
Quigley, M., Van Dissen, R., Villamor, P., Litchfield, N., Barrell, D., Furlong, K., Stahl, T., Duffy, B., Bilderback, E., Noble, D., Townsend, D., Begg, J., Jongens, R., Ries, W., Claridge, J., Klahn, A., Mackenzie, H., Smith, A., Hornblow, S., Nicol, R., Cox, S., Langridge, R., Pedley, K. (2010b) “Surface rupture of the Greendale Fault during the Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) Earthquake, New Zealand: initial findings”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 43(4): 236-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.43.4.236-242