'QUAKE LESSONS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 130, 4 June 1935, Page 9

'QUAKE LESSONS.

FORGOTTEN ALREADY?

BUILDING ERRORS REPEATED

NEW CODE DELAYED. The earthquake in British Baluchistan last Friday brings another reminder that there should be no slackening of effort in New Zealand to ensure that as far as possible buildings shall be "earthquakeproof," and that structural alterations made to existing buildings shall not make them liable to serious damage or collapse in the event of a major shock. Strangely enough the lessons taught by the tragedy of earthquakes are easily forgotten. In New Zealand the Government has entrusted to the technical committee of the Standards Institution the task of preparing a new building code. Mr. C. Reginald Ford, of Auckland, a member of the committee, this morning was asked if he could give any information as to the present position with regard to the proposed new building regulations, which it is understood have been in course of preparation for some time pant.

"When the Government first proposed building regulations, its proposals wero bouml up with a number of objection, able features, such as control of privato buildings by the Public? Works Depart. ment,\ duplicate inspection, and duplicate fees," said Mr. Ford. "All thesu. objections have been removed. The new building code hae to be voluntarily adopted by local bodies. It has to bo noted, however, that the Prime Minister has stated that if local bodies did not introduce the new code an Act of Parllameint would be paasctl to make it f compulsory,"

. Confidential Document. Mr. Word stated that the work of liii committee was completed, in so far as i draft building code wns concerned, las December. It was understood then tha the draft oode was to go before a com mittee com posed of the city engineer: of the .four principal olties, a Publii Works Department engineer, and a citi solicitor. Tluit committee wa» not t< lave thq power to amend the draft a! 'aV as its technical provisions were con •erned, but were to see that it was ii iroper by-law form. Up to tlio presents? far as lie was tiware, the committee iad not met, - ; .,. ■ Tho building code is, until its Una •evision, ; a confidential document, Mr fowl said,', and no particulars of it -might >e published. But he emphasised thai t not only covered earthquake-reeistin< ■onstructiom, but brought into Now Zea and practice modern scientific buildinj ■onstructiom. In this way the new codi vould be o4marked advance on anything litherto in use in New Zealand, and or ;hat seore alone its introduction wai nost desiraJble, "From the earthquake-resisting pom >f view, however, its introduction is iiu lerative," Sir, Ford said. "Buildingi ire still beiiig erected in many parts o STew Zealaml which embrace in thi'i :onstructioir all the errors and the weak lesses which were a contributing eausi :q such ft <lisastrouH loss of lifp am iropevty in Na))ier. Despite the lesson! if that disaster, existing buildings, fqi sample, are still being altered so a! o make then- destruction certain in tin ■vent of a shock. If there are ppopli n Auckland ' who believe that. there ii 10 risk of am earthquake in this olty t has to be remembered that if any on< if the centred was destroyed or damagec jv an earthquake Rhock, the whole o Sfew Zealand would have to bear till ;onsequent loss and economic disturb "It will be calamitous," said Mr. Ford 'if the lessons of the Napier earthquaki ire to be forgotten and the work whicl ias already been done upon a new build ti"- code is to> be allowed to remaii iiTcompleted and unused. If this is per nitted, someone will have to bear a ver : n-ave responsibility." The city engineer for Auckland. Air r Tyler, "said'tthis morning that copies >f the draft regulations had been sent o all members* of the committee, but hev had not y(et met to consider them. Jo "date had heien fixed for the commitee to meet. \