'QUAKE-PROOF.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 27, 2 February 1932, Page 3

'QUAKE-PROOF.

BUILDING PRECAUTIONS.

MITCH STILI- TO BE DONE,

SURVEY OF EXISTING

STRUCTURES,

On the eve of the anniversary of the disastrous earthquake at Napier it naturally occurs to ask whether the lessons learned are being carried out in the erection of new buildings. On inquiry from a leading Auckland architect this morning it was learned that architects and builders have profited fully, and the glaring mistakes of precarthquake Napier—committed through ignorance—are not being perpetuated to-day. But many of the older buildings are far from satisfactory. In the Napiei area itself the rehabilitation work is under Government supervision, provided for in the earthquake legislation, and a very complete supervision is being exercised over all new structures.

The earthquake had repercussions all over the Dominion, and the drastic bili introduced last session by the Government to tighten up the building laws, and practically give the control to the Public Works Department, caused a storm of technical opposition from one end of New .Zealand to the other. The net result was undoubtedly beneficial, as those interested, notably the architects, got to work and framed recommendations that would make New Zealand buildings as safe as humanly possible.

Danger of Overhangs.

Thc architects are anxious that there should be a proper revision of the law relating to building, but they do not want to see the Government rush into legislation that will hamper the rehabilitation of the building trade juet at a time when a revival is most urgently needed. No one realises better than the architects themselves that there is an imperative need for making safe the existing buildings; they hold that there should bo a resurvey of every building in order to determine what steps should be taken to make them as eafe as humanly possible.

"From this very window," eaid an architect this morning, "you can see some very good examples of exactly what a building should not be in an earthquake country. Observe that high brick building with an overhanging coiner, right at the top, with no support whatever under the overhang." For some reason an entire corner of the topmost storey of the building to which the architect referred had been left in midair, as it were, with no support except that provided by the girders running out from the square of the building. "At the first shock," resumed the architect, "the whole of that overhang would simply crumple up and drop off. There are scores of other examples in the city. Take for instance the false fronts; they are simply courting destruction from a 'quake. In another main street there are some perfect examples of that faulty style of construction. When they were built earthquake risk was a thing not thought of, but now that we know we must build to resist such things there is no excuse for putting off the neceßsary rectification. "I think it is safe to say that 75 per cent of the buildings require some modification to make them reasonably safe against earthquake shocks. In the drastic bill that was before Parliament last session there was no such provision, and the architects arc firmly of opinion that no legislation will be entirely satisfactory until some such provision is made. A Modified Bill. "I may say so much evidence was produced by the architects and engineers throughout New Zealand that we think it reasonably certain that the Government will not dare to reintroduce last session's bill in the form which raised such a wave of opposition from one end of the Dominion to the other. The evidence was so overwhelmingly against the placing of such autocratic powers in the hands of the Public Works Department that I do not think Parliament would pass such a measure. Wc believe and hope that a bill will be introduced during the next session of Parliament, and that it will include the best features of the former bill without its highly unsatisfactory provisions; provisions that would have made the Public Works Department supreme, practically above all appeal, and that would have given building a set back which would have been hard to retrieve. "One of the objectionable features of the old bill was the extravagant manner in which it was proposed to raise money for research work. Japan, Ttaly and the United States have all done, and are doing great seismological research work, and it is all available to New Zealand at a nominal cost. In the bill it was proposed to spend £15,000 a year in normal times. That would have been sheer extravagance. Take Los Angeles alone; they have more people than in the whole of New Zealand, and for a nominal sum we could have the results of their very thorough seismological work that has been going on for several years. By all means let us undertake research work in New Zealand, but do not let us burden the building trade with the handicap proposed in the old bill." Defects Revealed. The earthquake and building construction committee of the New Zealand Institute of Architects has prepared a comprehensive report concerning the modification of existing structural systems in order to provide greater resistance to earthquake shocks. Thoroughly practical recommendations for securing safer buildings are made by the committee, and the underlying reasons for such recommendations are explained by the following generalisations, which were justified by detailed observation of the damaged buildings in the Napier earthquake area: —(a) That badly built brick or masonry buildings almost uni-

formly failed, wholly or in part; (b) that some well-built buildings of brick or masonry construction survived, in some cases even with little or no damage; (c) that buildings of good reinforced concrete frame and steel frame construction resisted the shock with remarkable success; (d) that buildings of wooden construction, even when only reasonably well built, escaped on the whole without damage, except that due to falling chimneys. Unity of Design. The generalisations conveyed two lessons; that buildings designed and built honestly and well in accordance with recognised principles of building construction, possessed to some extent the quality of resistance to earthquake shock; and that certain types of structures designed for normal conditions contained the elements at least of successful earthquake resistance. The generalisations also suggested that careless or dishonest workmanship might render of no avail the most approved design. The committee drew up a list of' technical recommendations, the guiding principle of which may be summarised by saying that the main underlying principle of building in earthquake areas would be to get homogeneous buildings. Any attempt to combine different methods of construction in the one building, such as reinforced concrete and wood, or brick, was bound to result in disaster. A building should bo complete and "all of a piece" in itself, well "tied," and with no overhanging excrescences or elements.