SAFE BUILDINGS

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 64, 17 March 1933, Page 5

SAFE BUILDINGS

LESSORS FROM tfAPIEK

ADDRESS BY ARCHITECT

That .buildings can bo economically constructed i/io withstand such severe shakes as those experienced in. the Murehison. and .Hawke's Bay earthquakes was maintained by Mr. Stanley Natuseh last evening when delivering a lantern lecture at an "At home" at the Pioneer Club. Amongst those present' were1 the chairman and committee of the "Wellington branch, of the New Zealand Institute of" Architects. Napier before the big shako of 1931, said Mr. Natiisch, contained buildings which were a fair sample of what one would find.in the average New Zealand town. ...- The houses were mostly of timber frames, with corrugated iron or tile roofs. _ The wool stores and business places generally wore timber framed. In some cases reinforced concrete floors were used with suitable \briclc walls. There were a few stone buildings. In the twenty years preceding the earthquake a number of reinforced concrete buildings appeared, largely with incongruous timber floors and partitions, and timber and iron roofs. Only a very few buildings were of Teinforced concrete throughout.

Discussing the problem of guarding against disaster, Mr. Ntitusch stressed the value of proper bracing. Whatever the material of which the building was constructed, it should be framed like a ship. - Floors and roof should be properly braced as -well as walls. Chimneys were difficult to deal with only in timber buildings. In brick and reinforced concrete buildings they formed a part of the whole and did not introduce an essentially .foreign element as they did'in timber. Bricks, being of a heavier nature than timber, were swayed by earth-tremors much less quickly. In consequence ordinarily built chimneys wore quite often battered to pieces by the quick-moving timbers, even in shakes of moderate size. To put boards on the roof so that-the chimney tops could not fall through was a help. - The strengthening of. the weak parts in a building should be done without waiting for the lesson provided by a disaster. It was quite a simple thing to do and often not costly, and the work entailed would relieve unemployment and certainly give a much greater sense of security to the community. The lessons learned from the" Hawke's Bay earthquake had been taken to heart by architects. The magnitude of the calamity had resulted in an urgent demand for the overhaul of building bylaws. The demand of the New Zealand Institute of Architects after the suggestions following the ,Murchieoii shake had been shelved without action, but this time a committee was set up of representatives of the Government, municipal, and local bodies, architects, and. engineers, contractors, and all building interests, .continued Mr. Natuseh. However, the object of the committee was not achieved, although substantial agreement was reached and draft regulations framed for standard building bylaws throughout the country. Buildings erected to those bylaws would provide reasonable safeguards to building owners, tenants, and the public, but the country still waited for our standard bylaws to be made law.

Good and safe building was not a luxury; it was not even more costly than bad. . • ■ ,

Actually in. Napier new building ■work had conformed very- closely to the suggested standard regulations, and calculations of stresses as -well as structural drawings had to be submitted, and ivere checked by two engineers who were lent to the borough for this purpose. Their services were invaluable. Small towns could not each afford full-time engineers, or building inspectors with the requisite qualifications for checking building eonstrucfion, but two or more small towns could Combine to employ one consultant building inspector between, them.