NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE. No. 51

14 APRIL 2011

WHEREAS the Department of Building and Housing has begun to investigate the causes of the failure of 4 buildings in the Christchurch City CBD (the 4 specified buildings), namely the 2 buildings specified above, and the following 2 other buildings:

(a) the Forsyth Barr Building; and

(b) the Hotel Grand Chancellor Building:

WHEREAS it is desirable to inquire into the building failures in the Christchurch City CBD, to establish—

(a) why the 4 specified buildings failed severely; and

(b) why the failure of those buildings caused such extensive injury and death; and

(c) why certain buildings failed severely while others failed less severely or there was no readily perceptible failure:

WHEREAS the results of the inquiry should be available to inform decision-making on rebuilding and repair work in the Christchurch City CBD and other areas of the Canterbury region:

Appointment and order of reference

KNOW YE that We, reposing trust and confidence in your integrity, knowledge, and ability, do, by this Our Commission, nominate, constitute, and appoint you, The Honourable MARK LESLIE SMITH COOPER, Sir RONALD POWELL CARTER, and RICHARD COLLINGWOOD FENWICK, to be a Commission to inquire into and report (making any interim or final recommendations that you think fit) upon (having regard, in the case of paragraphs (a) to (c), to the nature and severity of the Canterbury earthquakes)—

Inquiry into sample of buildings and 4 specified buildings

(a) in relation to a reasonably representative sample of buildings in the Christchurch City CBD, including the 4 specified buildings as well as buildings that did not fail or did not fail severely in the Canterbury earthquakes—

(i) why some buildings failed severely; and

(ii) why the failure of some buildings caused extensive injury and death; and

(iii) why buildings differed in the extent to which—

(A) they failed as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes; and

(B) their failure caused injury and death; and

(iv) the nature of the land associated with the buildings inquired into under this paragraph and how it was affected by the Canterbury earthquakes; and

(v) whether there were particular features of a building (or a pattern of features) that contributed to whether a building failed, including (but not limited to) factors such as—

(A) the age of the building; and

(B) the location of the building; and

(C) the design, construction, and maintenance of the building; and

(D) the design and availability of safety features such as escape routes; and

(b) in relation to all of the buildings inquired into under paragraph (a), or a selection of them that you consider appropriate but including the 4 specified buildings,—

(i) whether those buildings (as originally designed and constructed and, if applicable, as altered and maintained) complied with earthquake-risk and other legal and best-practice requirements (if any) that were current—

(A) when those buildings were designed and constructed; and

(B) on or before 4 September 2010; and

(ii) whether, on or before 4 September 2010, those buildings had been identified as "earthquake-prone" or were the subject of required or voluntary measures (for example, alterations or strengthening) to make the buildings less susceptible to earthquake risk, and the compliance or standards they had achieved; and

(c) in relation to the buildings inquired into under paragraph (b), the nature and effectiveness of any assessment of them, and of any remedial work carried out on them, after the 4 September 2010 earthquake, or after the 26 December 2010 (or Boxing Day) aftershock, but before the 22 February 2011 aftershock; and

Inquiry into legal and best-practice requirements

(d) the adequacy of the current legal and best-practice requirements for the design, construction, and maintenance of buildings in central business districts in New Zealand to address the known risk of earthquakes and, in particular—

(i) the extent to which the knowledge and measurement of seismic events have been used in setting legal and best-practice requirements for earthquake-risk management in respect of building design, construction, and maintenance; and

(ii) the legal requirements for buildings that are "earthquake-prone" under section 122 of the Building Act 2004 and associated regulations, including—

(A) the buildings that are, and those that should be, treated by the law as "earthquake-prone"; and

(B) the extent to which existing buildings are, and should be, required by law to meet requirements for the design, construction, and maintenance of new buildings; and

(C) the enforcement of legal requirements; and

(iii) the requirements for existing buildings that are not, as a matter of law, "earthquake-prone", and do not meet current legal and best-practice requirements for the design, construction, and maintenance of new buildings, including whether, to what extent, and over what period they should be required to meet those requirements; and

(iv) the roles of central government, local government, the building and construction industry, and other elements of the private sector in developing and enforcing legal and best-practice requirements; and

(v) the legal and best-practice requirements for the assessment of, and for remedial work carried out on, buildings after any earthquake, having regard to lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes; and