Two cities two codes?

Two weeks ago a 7.1 magnitude earthquake struck Canterbury and no-one was killed.

One of the reasons given for that was building codes which made homes, hotels and other buildings safer.

Two days ago the roof of Stadium Southland collapsed under the weight of the snow and again no-one was killed.

Is this a tale of two building codes?

If not, how can regulations which make buildings strong enough to withstand an earthquake in Canterbury not make a roof strong enough to withstand a snowfall in Southland?

3 Responses to Two cities two codes?

  1. Raymon A Francis says:

    It’s not as if snow has never fallen before in Invercargil, although it doesn’t fall as often as those in the north might believe


  2. Neil says:

    It’s quite interesting that this matter has arisen.
    I listened to Mayor Shadbolt and Acton Smith,Stadium Southland chairman, discuss this on Morning Report.
    Mayor Shadbolt has made vague claims about the roof that have no known factual endorsement,while Acton Smith has defended the building practices from what he knows
    During building and planning of buildings etc there can be enormous pressure to avoid some building regulations to save money.The temptation could be “wink wink,nod nod” to save money and time.
    Councils are often in the unenviable position putting regulations in the way of well meaning but possibly flawed proposals.
    This is a timely reminder that anything is possible !
    Remember in Cracow,Poland five years ago, an ice skating rink planned by an Australian architect, collapsed after a heavy snowfall, with people in it, killing a number. The Australian went on trial for manslaughter.
    At the moment it’s time for all in authority to sit tight and wait for an enquiry.
    What we don’t need is a kangaroo court of public opinion with so much hearsay and distortions.
    A bit more like Bob Parker rather than a “chinese whispers” game


  3. Sally says:

    “What we don’t need is a kangaroo court of public opinion with so much hearsay and distortions.”

    This from this writer is deceptive at the very least. Back in February 2006 the GDC Mayor allowed this councillor his own ‘kangaroo court’ where blatant disregard of standing orders shamefully took place.

    The public has a right to debate the issue as much public money has been put towards the stadium. Open and transparent governance is what we ask for, far too many councillors think it is OK to disregard this principle.

    Would someone please tell me why I am unable to bring up


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: