BUILDINGS AND EARTHQUAKES

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21244, 16 August 1934, Page 10

BUILDINGS AND EARTHQUAKES

i — # SUBSIDY NOT AVAILABLE UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD CRITICISED The refusal of the Unemployment Board to extend its building subsidy scheme to cover work done in making buildings safer in earthquakes was criticised at a meeting of the Christchurch branch of the Town Planning Institute of New Zealand last evening. The secretary of the New Zealand Institute wrote that he had interviewed Mr W. Bromley, deputychairman of the Unemployment Board, who was very definite that the board would not favourably consider any subsidy for this class of I work—the removal of ornaments, | parapets, and overhanging parts of buildings which would be dangerous in an earthquake. The letter continued that Mr Bromley had stated that the subsidy covered only a certain type of dwelling, and was not intended for commercial buildings. Mr Bromley was quite satisfied that that form of work would go on in any case, and did not need any stimulus. The board's policy was definitely established. "This is a pretty drastic damper," said the chairman, Mr A. R. Galbraith, "but I do not think we should relax our efforts as an institute and as individuals to carry out this necessary work. There is no doubt that this work should be done as soon as possible. In a violent earthquake the greatest danger is from existing buildings. The application of the subsidy to commercial buildings would arise, but the safety and lives of our citizens should take precedence." Mr Galbraith said it would be months before the committees of the Standards Institution of New Zealand could submit a scheme to the Government, and then the Government would have to issue the scheme as adopted in the form of regulations. The secretary, Mr E. F. Scott, said the Wellington City Council was very perturbed about the slow response it was receiving to its campaign. Mr E. H. Andrews said he must join issue with the board in its statement, that the work would be done in any case. Public bodies were doing it, but it would not be done by private persons unless there was some inducement or encouragement. The institute should not relax its efforts. He suggested that the institute should obtain a survey of the most dangerous buildings. No doubt members could use their influence and powers of persuasion on the owners. Mr Galbraith said Mr Andrews had made a very valuable suggestion. Such a list would serve as an object lesson. Tic moved: "That the institute keen the matter before it and take action at the first favouraide opportunity." This was carried.