WALLBOARD USED AT BALLANTYNE’S WAS BREACH OF BY-AWS

Wanganui Chronicle, 9 June 1948, Page 6

WALLBOARD USED AT BALLANTYNE’S WAS BREACH OF BY-AWS

(PJL.) Christchurch, June 8. Under cross-examination at the Ballantyne fire inquiry today, Ewart Somers, City Council engineer, said the use of wallboard in Ballantyne's was a breach of the by-laws, and when permission had been given for the use of wallboard non-inflammable material had been available. No permits had been given for the use of inflammable wallboard in new build.ngs in the innei area in 1936-37. Permits for Ballantyne’s had been granted by a junior officer. The wallboard had probably contributed to the heat of the fire, but perhaps not so much to its rapid spread. He would favour prohibition of the use of wallboard unless treated with a Are resistant material. The openings at Ballantyne’s could well have been one of .he main factors in the disaster. The City Council had approved the egtess code nearly three years ago, out had never adopted it, though pressed to do so by the Christchurch Fire Board Somers said he considered it safe to rely on an external fire escape as an alternative means of egress. There was no provision in the by laws requiring lire doors for openings. Similarly, there were no provisions dealing with unprotected floor space, partitions, internal fire walls, enclosed stairways, fire alarms, emergency lighting in exits, or the distance inmates of a building had to travel to reach a fire escape. That made the by-laws unsatisfactory from the point of view of prevention of fire. The chairman: If the council is hopelessly behind the times with its by-laws, who considers that?—The Housing and Town Pltmning Committee. The matter has been in hand for months, but during the war we could not get to it ‘‘Even so, that is hardly a reason for going to sleep on the matter. —■ We were not asleep. It has been hard to obtain statf. “What strikes me is that neither the City Council nor the fire brigade seems to have known anything about the inside of the buildings.—We knew the buildings generally.’’ Two of the three City Council members of the Fire Board, John Edward Tait and William Percy Glue, appeared at the request of the Commission to answer questions. Tait told Mr. J. D. Hutchison, for the Fire Board, that there was full co-operation between the local body members and the fire underwriters' representatives. Before Ballantyne's fire he had no idea there were deficiencies in the brigade's equipment, but since then the Fire Board had made inquiries about getting a ladder which could be used for life-saving. For the Crown, Mr. G. G. G. Watson cross-examined Taif at length on the council’s by-laws and the inspections of buildings by brigade officers. Witness told Mr. Watson he did not think there was much difference on the control of the brigade by the council or by the Fire Board. CONTROL OF FIRE BOARD “One of the very difficult questions which will arise is whether the control should be municipal or not,” said the chairman. Sir Harold Johnston, when he asked Tait if he was satisfied with the present system of control. Tait replied that he was satisfied, but that the administration might be easier if the council had control. Glue said he had been on the Fire Board since 1941. He said he did not think the present system of control of the brigade would be improved if the brigade was put under the City Council. There was room for “quite a lot of improvement,” he said to the chairman. Mr. Watson: Are you satisfied with the efficiency of the brigade at Ballantyne’s? Witness: Abolutely. At Ballantyne’s fire there were 17 appliances, 18,000 feet of hose. 231 authorised firemen, and 30 points of supply. I think results were excellent. The whole block might have gone. To further questions by Mr. Watson Glue said that the board had neither envisaged the possibility of a major fire taking place when the superintendent or his deputy were away at the same tiprie, nor taken steps to meet the possibility. Mr. Watson: Before Ballantyne’s file were you satisfied that there was no regulation or by-law to provide safe egress from buildings in ChriA church?—l did not know it was as bad as that, but I know it was pretty bad. To another question by Mr. Watson. Glue said: “I am disappointed and surprised that we have not adopted the standard egress code before this.” The Commission adjourned intil tomorrow.