Is it time to have a re-think about what’s done with the residential red zone on the east side of Christchurch?

I think it’s fair to say that mayor Phil Mauger thinks so. And so do I.

Phil’s saying today that he wants to see red zone land used for housing as soon as possible. With the first cab off the rank being land on the edge of the area already zoned for it.

This includes land the city council is going to lease to a housing trust so it can provide affordable housing on the east side of town. Ten hectares is already zoned for housing and another 24 hectares is earmarked for trial housing areas.

But, with a total area of about 600-hectares all up, why stop there?

I reckon that, rather than nibble around the edges, we should have a proper technical investigation to find out whether much more of the red zone land could be used.

At a time when we have more and more housing developments chewing up more and more land, shouldn’t we be opening our minds to the possibility that some - if not all - of that red zone land could be a better option?

I think so. But it would require a serious commitment and some serious expenditure. Because it would involve some pretty intense investigative work.

But when you think about when that area was declared a red zone, that was at a time when the land was still moving with all the aftershocks and when it probably just seemed easier to move everyone out and to think about what to do with it afterwards.

The thinking was done and, at that point, it was determined that the last thing to do with that area was to put more houses on it.

Which I think most of us were willing to accept at the time.

But it does seem strange that we are supposed to be behoven forever to decisions made more than a dozen years ago.

When not only time has moved on, but so too has our technical capabilities.

I’m no expert in any of the areas that would need to be factored-in to any decision to have more housing in the red zone, so I’m not demanding that houses be built there tomorrow. But Phil Mauger’s comments have got me thinking.

If we did go ahead with what I’m talking about, there’d be no guarantee that the outcome would be any different to what it was after the quakes. But what’s wrong with opening our minds to the possibility?

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.