CITY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION

Press, Volume LXXV, Issue 22892, 13 December 1939, Page 12

CITY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION

“UNREASONABLE FIRE HAZARD” INTERNAL MATERIALS CONDEMNED COUNCIL ASKED vTO TIGHTEN “Three hundred and forty thousand pounds have been thrown away in fire losses in one. year in three cities, and I think it is this board’s duty to draw the City Council’s attention to the necessity for tighten-ing-up the building by-laws,” Mr K. W. Robinson told the Christchurch Fire Board last night. He condemned the internal construction of many city buildings as a “quite unreasonable fire hazard,” and the chief cause of the heavy loss rate in the last two years. No resolution was made by the board, Mr Robinson, at the end of the discussion, saying he was content if his remarks were taken notice of by the City Council’s representatives. “The City Council would do well to watch the internal construction of city buildings,” .said Mr Robinson. “In his report for 1938, the Inspector of Fire Brigades disclosed that the loss rate for the three biggest cities—Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch—was . £340,000, and he made the following point: ‘On the other hand, the unusually high, loss in urban districts, due to large fires and the circumstances attending these fires, makes it desirable to call public attention, first, to the very unsatisfactory fire exposure conditions existing in most blocks in the high fire risk areas in the cities, and, second, to the desirability of protecting high-value buildings by sprinkler or automatic alarm systems.’ ” . The chief inspector might have gone a little further, said Mr Robinson, and dealt with the very unsatisfactory internal construction of buildings. He could lake members of the City Council into dozens of Christchurch buildings and show them the type of material tacked on to wooden framing, making a fire hazard quite unreasonable in cities of the size of Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch. “The internal construction is making a very difficult problem for fire brigades and you have had several fires in the last two years to emphasise that,” said Mr Robinson. “1 am sure the superintendent will bear me out when I say the internal construction of buildings which have been destroyed have been one of the chief: causes of the heavy loss rates in those buildings.” Mr T. M. Charters {chairman): There is plenty of room for improvement. Laxity Recognised Mr J. D. Carey said the building authorities of New Zealand, specially the Internal Affairs Department, were cognisant of the state of affairs and the laxity in building by-laws. The town-planning scheme, which would supersede the existing by-laws when it came into effect, had very strict building by-laws. “Jerry-building” was allowed to go on in the past and one of the worst cities in New Zealand—Wellington—refuses to talk about town planning,” said Mr Carey. . “The fire hazard there will make a calamity one day if they continue to allow the building as they have done.” Mr Charters said the statement on Wellington’s attitude to town planning was surprising, because it needed it badly enough. Mr Carey: Christchurch has accepted the scheme and the council’s officials are pushing it for all they are worth. City’s Inspecting Staff Mr Robinson: Wellington may do all those things stated by Mr Carey, but economic conditions lead them to build more fire-resistant buildings, with concrete roofs and partitions Unfortunately, many buildings in Christchurch have partitions of very inferior materials; and in each fire those buildings burned out very quickly. Mr E. Sharp said the City Council Engineering Department was handicapped by having only two building inspectors. When Mr Carey praised the work of Cr. J, E. Jones as chairman of the Town Planning Committee, Mr Rohinson commented; “I could take him 200 yards from here to show him buildings that will curl his hair.” Heavier penalties for work . carried out in conflict with the city’s by-laws would be a deterrent, suggested Mr Robinson.