Strengths & Weaknesses : Greater Christchurch

Land Use and Housing	Business as Usual Option	Option A	Option B	Option C
*Strengths*	Good choice of housing location, type and section size	Uses least amount of land Lowest infrastructure cost	Good choice of housing type, location and section size Lower infrastructure cost	Some choice of housing location, type and section size
*Weaknesses*	Development spreads High infrastructure cost	Limited choice of housing location Land cost likely to increase	Most development around busy urban centres	Uses most land Highest infrastructure cost

Transport	Business as Usual Option	Option A	Option B	Option C
*Strengths*	People able to drive to destinations	Smallest congestion increase Smallest increase in travelling times Walking, cycling and public transport practical alternatives to driving Lowest infrastructure cost	Good for walking, cycling and public transport around urban centres Public transport to district towns	People able to drive to destinations
*Weaknesses*	Travelling times get longer with increased congestion Higher cost of travel	Limited transport choices outside inner Christchurch	Travelling times get longer with increased congestion	Biggest increase in congestion Longest travelling times Poor choices for transport Highest roading cost

Community Identity	Business as Usual Option	Option A	Option B	Option C
*Strengths*	Established communities retain identity	Range and quality of inner city facilities improves Good access for local city residents	Range of facilities around urban centres Good access for people living around urban centres Communities retain identities	Established communities retain identity
*Weaknesses*	Growth may be insufficient to retain facilities (e.g. schools) New subdivisions may not have community facilities	Influx of new residents could change community identity	Some change in community character around urban centres	Spread of growth may result in loss of existing facilities New subdivisions may not have community facilities

Natural Environment	Business as Usual Option	Option A	Option B	Option C
*Strengths*	Opportunity to create parks in new developments	Least water consumed Best air quality improvement Best response to natural disasters Increased opportunity for regional parks	Water use moderate Air quality improves Good response to natural disasters at urban centres Increased opportunity for regional parks	Lower risk of damage from natural disaster
*Weaknesses*	Higher water demand Slower response to natural disasters in outer lying areas	Increased risk from natural disaster Risk to streams and Estuary	Potential risk to streams and Estuary unless growth managed	Highest water demand Vehicle emissions increase Harder to respond to disasters Greatest impact on landscape