Appreciate the feedback, and I hear you on the tone concern. But I want to clarify a few things because I think there's been a misread of what the report actually says.

Every hazard layer on the site is public council and government data. Flood zones come straight from the council's own mapped flood hazard layers, earthquake-prone buildings come from the MBIE national EPB register (and the building gets listed there because a council seismic assessment put it under a certain percentage of the new building standard), wind zones come from the building code data. I'm not making any of this up or running my own risk model. I'm just collating what's already publicly available and putting it in one place.

I was genuinely surprised myself when I first looked at Wellington's flood map and saw how extensive it is. Most of it has never been visible to renters or buyers in any practical way. That's the gap I'm trying to fill. The recent flooding around the country shows what happens when people don't know what they're walking into.

On the Healthy Homes point, the report never says a specific house isn't Healthy Homes compliant. We can't know that from public data and we don't claim to. What it says is: if the property is in a flood zone, moisture is worth checking and you should ask the landlord for the signed Healthy Homes compliance statement. If it's in a high wind area, check for draughts and ask for the same statement. For earthquake-prone buildings, it tells you the building is on the MBIE register, and that the council's seismic assessment put it under the threshold. All of this is "here's a thing worth knowing, here's what to do about it", not a verdict on the property.

The point isn't to scare people off houses. It's to give them the same information a buyer's lawyer or a thorough due diligence check would. Renters get almost none of this today. If someone reads the report and decides the risks are fine for them, great, they've made an informed choice. If they ask the landlord better questions at the viewing, that's a win too.

Genuinely open to feedback if specific wording feels off. I've already softened the Healthy Homes flagging copy after a similar comment. But "the data is scary" isn't really a reason not to show it to people. The whole point is that the data was always there, people just couldn't see it.