Chch Earthquake - Extraordinary Council Meeting

Christchurch Earthquake - Extraordinary Council Meeting

2:45pm Friday 10 September 2010

Council Meeting Update

Council held an extraordinary meeting today with its sole purpose to adopt the revised Earthquake Prone, Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy.

Council is required by law to have such a policy. It adopted its first in 2006, and it had already consulted on its revised policy before the September 4 earthquake. The panel had already met, and already made a decision which was due to be recommended to council for adoption at the end of September.

From its 2006 policy, Council has created a list of buildings referred to as Earthquake Prone Buildings. These are specific buildings, and the only ones affected by today's decision There were potentially 7600 such buildings prior to the September 4 earthquake. About 960 of those are Unreinforced Masonry Buildings - the brick buildings most likely to collapse in an earthquake.

While the council has general powers to deal with dangerous buildings, it becomes very complicated when buildings become dangerous as a result of an earthquake. The panel hearing the policy had identified a gap in the current policy and its report proposed a new clause to clarify how to handle known Earthquake Prone Buildings in the event that they were damaged by an earthquake and needed to be repaired.

The panel's original intention had been to recommend to council that its new policy should include a clause specifically relating to damage caused by a seismic event. In the event of damage which resulted in repairs needing to be done, the policy was going to require buildings to aim to be strengthened to 33% of the building code as part of the repair process.

Today the Council lifted that bar higher. The net result of the unanimously adopted policy is this. * It still only applies to those buildings identified as earthquake prone (note - building owners know if their buildings are earthquake prone. It does not apply to the average residential home. It does not affect the likes of chimney repairs). * It only applies to those buildings which have suffered damage in the earthquake which will require building consent to repair. If a building on the list as "Earthquake Prone" is undamaged and does not need repair, the policy does not require it to be seismically upgraded. * It does not apply to a new building replacing one demolished by the earthquake - full building code requirements are in place in that situation. * It applies equally to listed heritage buildings and buildings which are not listed. * The new target for structural strengthening is 67% of code That is a target. Assessments will need to be worked through on a case by case basis. It may not be practicable for some repairs to meet that target. Council will work closely with building owners to achieve sensible, safe outcomes. * That target is not unique to New Zealand. It is for example the same as Gisborne's, which was developed after their 2007 earthquake. The policy was needed as a matter of urgency. Had council left its decision until the end of the month it would have created confusion for building owners seeking to understand what council will be expecting from them as they repair and rebuild.

ENDS