Police: Charges over CTV collapse not certain

Print

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 6:00p.m.

Eyewitnesses say the CTV building collapsed in seconds (Reuters)

Eyewitnesses say the CTV building collapsed in seconds (Reuters)

By Hamish Clark

Christchurch's CTV building just was not up to the job.

An investigation into its collapse during last February’s quake has found it did not meet the building standards in force at the time it was constructed - in 1986.

When it collapsed and caught fire in the quake, one hundred and fifteen people died - the largest single site of tragedy.

Eyewitnesses say the CTV building collapsed in seconds. The more than 100 people inside the six-story building stood little chance of survival.

The only thing left standing was a burnt out lift well at the back of the building.

Now experts have concluded that the building collapsed when one or both of the columns on the east wall failed causing the internal beams and floor slabs to fall, bringing the whole building down.

Three critical factors contributed to the collapse:

  • The intense horizontal and vertical ground shaking
  • Brittle and inadequately reinforced columns
  • And the interior walls that twisted and put extra strain on the columns

Relatives who lost loved one's were the first to hear why the building collapsed, among them Brian Kennedy whose wife was working on the fourth floor.

“There were a few poor decisions made some years ago in its construction and it didn't help with the power of the earthquake of February last year,” he says.

Experts say damage in the September and Boxing Day quakes was deemed relatively minor and did not compromise the building although those who worked in it say it shook every time a truck went past.

David Beaumont lost his son Matthew at CTV and says today’s findings go some way to establishing the truth.

“If there are any faults it has got to rest with the conscience of the people who made those faults, and I think if anything does come out of it, it is the accumulation of facts that occurred with the design with the building and the consents that were issued.”

The report is now with police to determine whether a criminal investigation is necessary.

Assistant Commissioner Malcolm Burgess told a news conference the case is unprecedented and charges of criminal nuisance or even manslaughter are by no means a given.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

09 Feb 2012 11:10p.m.

Suspicious wrote:

Great! So in NZ I can purport to be an expert in building a structure or an expert to sign off a structure that doesn't meet safety standards - subsequently over 100 people die as a result of my inaction to build to the safety standard or my action to sign off a building that doesnt meet the standard and I am not criminally liable! In that sort of legislative environment I may as well take a gun out into public and shoot dead over 100 people and not worry about the consequences! This is also the sort of environment where I can build and operate operate a coal mine that doesn't meet reasonable international safety standards (Ala Pike River) and still believe I am not criminally liable! NZ sounds like a Mecca and safe haven for gross professional negligence and criminality populated by naive citizens with a death wish to me!