Pragmatist hat fully clipped on and tied, I’m saying Mayor Daaave Cull is an alarmist and should be whipped. Page one news (see ODT Online link below, if you dare) is not Daaave Cull at his intelligent best.
What? His council doesn’t know of other buildings in a similar condition to the Barron Building (it’s true there are none so strapped and nudged by its owners, engineers and insurers to collapse under a bulldozer ‘tomorrow’).
So. DCC doesn’t know about Prista Apartments Ltd (372-392 Princes St and 11 Stafford St)? Funny that, DCC issued a work order on 386 Princes St as a direct consequence of submissions made at recent Resource Consent hearings. Funny again, DCC doesn’t know it is the Respondent to an Appeal to the Environment Court by New Zealand Historic Places Trust, in regard to the Resource Consent granted to Prista Apartments Ltd. And funnier, DCC doesn’t know about the Dangerous Building, the old Education Board/AH Reed building on the corner of Crawford and Jetty Sts…. so that wasn’t DCC-initiated safety tape around it?
Oh. I see.
We know nothing! And we have council officers and managers that know nothing! We can’t possibly know anything!
(And this a university town. Shock horror. Alarmism.)
The elected arm of Dunedin City Council, at least, might be expected to know a little of something that doesn’t immediately POSE AN IGNORANT AND ALARMIST THREAT to the fabric of this city, much of which lies in private investment hands.
Daaave, your words inflame and polarise and give little ground for negotiation. You can’t ad-lib on behalf of something WE own and you don’t, and that’s Dunedin’s future.
So ruck off, eat a cupcake, get a sugar load. Because we are very rational and considered, it is WE who will deliver community solutions in sight of legislative change and compulsions.
Do not talk crap. Listen and learn, Daaave.
In other words, smarten the hell up.
The lessons from Christchurch will require re-examination of construction policies in every city and town in the country. In Dunedin, that must surely include existing building standards and compliance codes; whether the district plan should continue to allow construction on land likely to be subject to liquefaction and, if so, the degree of protection required; the provision, location and design of services; and, surely, the future of many of our heritage buildings. None are insurmountable challenges, but they are challenges and have to be faced.
### ODT Online Fri, 4 Mar 2011
Editorial: Re-examining our building codes
Based on seismic data and historical records, New Zealand experiences about 300 – on average – 4 to 4.9 magnitude earthquakes every year, and an average of two magnitude 6 to 6.9 a year. As we have so tragically discovered, earthquakes of these magnitudes can kill and will damage and destroy many man-made structures.
The authors of What if? regretfully note the website template can’t and won’t drop the following news item down into very fine illegible print.
### ODT Online Fri, 4 Mar 2011
Cull: stark choice over quake plan
By David Loughrey
Dunedin faces a stark choice when it puts in place a policy this year to prepare the city for earthquakes – accept the fact many buildings may not fare well in a quake, or agree to widespread demolition of the city’s heritage architecture.
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr