WILL BE REBUILT

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 32, 7 February 1931, Page 14

WILL BE REBUILT

ARCHITECT'S OPINION

'A-COMPARISON

. **Will they rebuild Napier? The Answer is unquestionably, Yes," said Mr. A. S. Mitchell, consulting engineer and architect, of Wellington, who returned to-day after a visit to the ■ Hawkes Bay district in company with Mr. H. IP. Butcher, City Town Planner. Both Mr.- Mitchell and Mr. Butcher are members of tho Earthquake and Building Construction Committee of the New Zealand Institute of Architects, and together with Mr. C. R: Ford, of Auckland, another member of the committee, they reported to the institute upon the effects of the 1929 earthquake. Their xe'port has since been published. "We went to Napier without reference to the executive, feeling that the necessity was evident and that should our visit be delayed the very necessary evidence at present obtainable might ' have been destroyed," said Mr. Mitchell. "The question has been frequently asked: Will they rebuild Napier? .The answer is unquestion: ably, Yes. If one roughly estimates ' the damage done to buildings throughout the city and environs at • some £2,500,000, it must be remembered that the civic services, roads, etc., represent a sum, which in a case of this kind cannot bo lightly disregarded. The harbour shoaling may seem for the moment to complicate matters, but inasmuch as the security and availability of both the inner and outer harbours are dependent upon dredging it would ; appear that continuance and extension of this service will still be necessary. NOT BEYOND SOLUTION. "To one who knew Napier as I did, the panorama of desolation is appalling," Mr. Mitchell continued, "and it certainly requires great courage even to contemplate the vision of reconstruclion of the city, even on lines similar to those of the past. Closer investiga- ; tion, however, indicates that the situation, although extremely difficult, is not_ teyond solution. The evidence :, of' buildings still standing in 1 permanent materials, in which one would have been safer than, on the: streets, encourages one to hope that by the enactment and enforcement of a rigid building code, builders of the future will profit from the lessons of this disaster arid give. an assurance of public safety greater than has been their lot in the past; Buildings of all types suffered, even those on which expense had not been. spared and in which the "highest degree of skill had been employed. It is significant, however, that in those cases in. which that measure of skill had been'so employed the damage was reduced-to a minimum, and the repairs to be effected to make the buildings usable will be negligible. EFFECT ON TIMBER HOUSES. "In residential districts the timber house, always looked upon as a.harbour of safety in .time of, earthquake, was apparently viewed with mistrust by the public, even after, the chimneys had been shaken^ to 'the ground. This is supported tjy. the fact that all Napier residents preferred, to sleep upon their lawns or their neighbours Mawns rather than in the, security afforded by timber dwellings.. I .did, not share this opinion, and preferred whatever,risk there might have been; in sleeping indoors to ; the physical discomforts of sleeping on ' a lawn, minimised as they were by the provision of ample bedding and supplies. Two sleepless nights thus spent ■ make of the human frame a very sensitive seismometer, and during the first night I ' counted some 49. shocks of varying magnitude, and during the second night some extremely' severe ones, although much less in number.: • The shock at 9.17 on Thursday night was the heaviest since the main shock, and it certainly was the heaviest and ' most intense I' have ever experienced in New Zealand. lam confident that had there been anything left assailable .it would have been demolished on that occasion. .« • GREATER THAN IN 1929. '?In comparing this disaster with that of June, 1929, and having due regard to'the density of population in both Murchison and Napier, I am confident," Mr. Mitchell continued, "that the intensity of this,shake was greater. This, I may say, is entirely based upon the' relative quality, not quantity, of the'1 destruction in the two areas.. It ■ may seem difficult to make a proper comparison-between the two, but. the . essentials by which the intensity is measured were available in both places, that is, of course, in the absence of any ■'. instrumental record, of which co far I have no knowledge. * "Almost invariably, the chimneys came down in the residential of both Napier and Hastings, and as far down as. Waipukurau, sometimes resting gently on the roofing and sometimes in- smaller units on .the ground or on the roofs. In. almost 'every case no attempt has been made to repair these chdmn'eys for' Vl earthquake shock, the walls being but 4J inches thick and aged and weathered beyond tho point of resistance. Insufficient clearance round the chimneys, as pointed out in the case of the Murchison earthquake, was, in conjunction with the above, almost invariably .the cause of failure, the difference in periodicities of vibration between, thq . greater and lesser masses (house and chimney) bringing about collision, and .damage. In this connection', it is interesting to note->that already on the. roads from Napier southwards chimneys are being restored in,brickwork and no doubt, as in the case of Murchison, Nelson, and Westport, this will continue just as soon as the more necessary work of caring for the comfort and safety of those affected has passed its critical stage."