EARTHQUAKE-PROOF BUILDINGS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXII, Issue 66, 15 September 1906, Page 15

EARTHQUAKE-PROOF BUILDINGS.

TO THB EDITOB. Sir, — Your correspondent, Mr. James ODea, writing on the above subject in last night's Post, is in error in classifying the Call Building in San Francisco as a type of ferro concrete construction. This building belongs to the skeleton steel-framed stone-covered type, which, he cbndemns. or -of -t*-liiel» b=> states no proof can be given that it withstood the effects of the earthquake. Buildings in San Francisco are classified if constructed of steel or iron as class A and class B. Class A is defined as follows : — "All buildings wherein all external and internal loads are transmitted from the top of the building to the foundation by skeleton or frame- ' work of steel, and the beams and girders of which are rivetted to each other." The Engineering Magazine,- of July date, in an article on "The Effects of Earthquake on Modern Steel Buildings," 6tates that class A represents the most approved form of construction, -the buildings of this type being the only ones that were not a complete loss. Of these there about twenty-three in the i city. An American scientific magazine has ths following : — "After a. careful examination of the business district of San Francisco, some of the best architects and structural engineers have come to the conclusion that class A buildings can be made fire-proof and earthquakeproof." (Earthquake-resisting, I presume, is 'meant, as no building can be said to be absolutely earthquake-proof.) '•The Claus Spreckeb (Call) building, the St. Francis and Fairmount Hotels, etc., etc., show that a city can be built of structures that will come almost unscathed out of 6uch an ordeal as the earthquake and fire." I tan vouch 'for it as a result of personal ' inspection that the Call Building . is of steel skeleton frame construction, class A, with granite and stone facing externally, and that it is not ferroconcrete construction. Ferro-concrete is a good material, not untried in Wellington. We used it for floor and stair construction ten years ago hare successfully, and the Northern Boiler Mills mentioned by Mr. ODea is a type o f [ building suitable for its adoption ; but lor important office buildings, in which the public naturally looks for architecj tural- detail, it leaves much to b,e desired. — I am, etc., ARCHITECT. Wellington, 12th September.