CTV Building in Christchurch - Essay Example

? CTV Building in Christchurch Table of Contents Introduction 3 Discussion 3 Conclusion 7 References 8 Introduction The Canterbury TV Building of Christchurch Central City of New Zealand came into the news in February 2011 when an earthquake hit the area, killing about 115 people and causing damage to the stakeholders of the building. The owner of the building was Madras Equities who took the consent of the City Council for the construction of the building. Since the Canterbury area was an earthquake prone one, the codes for designing buildings in a specific area had to be changed from time to time. But this was ignored while undertaking the construction activities. This research report makes an attempt to find the reasons and the shortcomings of the project of construction and the consequences of such disaster. Discussion This part of the essay will investigate the key reasons behind the collapse of the CTV building. The New Zealand government is trying to find out both legal and actual reasons behind the collapse of the CTV building. The Government of New Zealand stated on the basis of the Royal Commission report that the construction plan of the CTV building did not meet the standard level. In addition, the Royal Commission stated that critical deficiencies in the design and construction of the building are key reasons behind the collapse. The designing engineer of this specific building designed the building out of his competency and depth. In addition, the staff of City Council that investigated and examined the building before the earthquake were unprofessional and unskilled engineers. The building and construction minister finally said that the investigation report would be handed over to the institute of professional engineers. The government of New Zealand tried to identify the level of crime and corruption associated with the CTV building collapse. The investigation commission blamed the construction group for developing a building with an inadequate and noncompliant design. According to the report of the Royal Investigation Commission, it can be stated that the city officials are responsible for this accident, along with the owner and engineers, as the city officials did not send a notice after the investigation based on the problems related with the CTV building. It is true that the CTV building got a green sticker after the 2010 earthquake despite the critical situation of the building. Although the building was not eligible for a yellow sticker, signalling authorities and the group of engineers gave a green signal to the building in order to achieve a huge profit margin. In any earthquake prone zone, a building is to be designed according to the guidelines imposed by the government of that state. There were a number of people who were engaged in the designing of the building. There were chiefly three main entities: the designer of the building, the company that the designer represented, and the other management individuals of the company. The design component had two parts. The Structural Engineer was David Harding under the brand of Alan Reay Consultants Ltd and Alun Wilke Associates Architects was the architectural firm who had been employed for the construction of the building. Gerald Shirtcliff, who supervised the construction in the name of William Fisher, did not have a degree in engineering. Harding used to work under the guidance of Alan Reay, the owner of the firm. During the establishment of the building, the CTV building did not meet the standards. On the other hand, the principle engineer and the owner did not follow the regulations or legal aspects during the review process. Alan Ray was the principle engineer of this building. He did poor supervision and passed the review report to the structural engineer. However, the owners and stakeholders did not even bother to review the building plans or rectify the challenges and issues accordingly. The government of New Zealand took one wrong decision by appointing the City Council for the investigation of the property. It was the key responsibility of the City Council to employ a group of effective and professional engineers. This supervision team lacked competence, skills and technical knowledge. The inadequate decision making process of the City Council is the major reason behind the collapse of the CTV building. The structural designer lacked experience. These inexperience and inadequate decision making process had taken away the lives of several innocent people. IPENZ is trying to reveal the legal reasons behind the conspiracy and collapse. It is constantly meeting with the government of New Zealand in order to discuss the significant jurisdiction on a private level investigation. The Chief Executive of IPENZ, Mr. Andrew Cleland, is continuously trying to discuss with the construction and building minister regarding the investigation of the collapse. They are continuously trying to reveal real and true facts. IPENZ is suggesting the government to undertake legal processes in order to judge the performance of the engineers associated with the building. Moreover, this organization is undertaking a review of ethical codes. It is true that corruption, unethical practices and inadequate decision making are the major reasons behind the collapse of the building. However, the committee is trying to conduct a formal and neutral investigation. Investigation by the Royal Commission for Inquiry exposed the fact that there was no compliance maintained while the construction took place. The building construction was not apt as the design that was used was not conducive to an earthquake prone zone. However, the investigation report proved that the structural engineer, David Harding, did not have commensurate experience in construction of buildings, but the head of the consulting firm, Alan Reay, said that he could completely bank on Harding. But reports suggest that he had never constructed any building which had more than two floors. The latter blamed Raey for saying that he depended on Raey for his guidance on construction. It was also discovered that the construction supervisor had faked his degree and was actually not the person who he claimed to be. This area was an earthquake prone zone and hence from previous experience, the government had changed their designing strategy guidelines, too. But the obsolete, non-ductile design was used during the construction of the CTV building. Along with these issues, it was also found out that the design of the building was not appropriate for approval, but the construction started and there was no one to point out that the method taken was not right. The inspectors of the construction of the building had made their scrutiny twice before the earthquake but had never pointed out that the building had structural defects and that it was dangerous to house an office in that building. Hence it was ignorance on part of the supervising authority as well, which led to the collapse. It is clear from the above discussion that the CTV building collapsed due to the inadequate quality of the structure and design. Moreover, several issues such as lack of an effective decision making process, poor supervision processes and unethical business and operation practices are responsible for this collapse. After the 2010 earthquake government of New Zealand appointed the Christchurch City Council to inspect the safety standards of the CTV building. There was a chance for survival, but the Christchurch City Council appointed an inexperienced engineering supervision team. The owner and shareholders could have arranged for a better review process. They also had avoided this option. Lack of technical knowledge, experience, skills and competency of the principal engineer forced the council to provide a green sticker. The City Council could have appointed a professional team. It could have helped the CTV building. At the end of the day, this collapse resulted in loss of several lives. Maintaining health and safety standards in the workplace is very much important for an organization. Each and every organization has to follow health and safety regulatory standards to avoid legal complaints and issues. In case of law violation, the employees have the total right to file a complaint against the organization or the management of the organization. These complaints could force the owner of the building to review the whole property. After the earthquake in 2010, the government should implement the structural failure investigation process. It would force the owners to follow the ethical standards. Strict random supervision and investigation could force the organization to follow ethics. However, it is recommended that these policies be developed and maintained in order to improve the scenario of business environment within the country. Conclusion The CTV building collapse was the major consequence of the Christchurch earthquake in 2011. From the above discussion, it can be stated that several reasons are responsible for this collapse. Inadequate design and quality of structure are the major reasons behind this incident. Government tried to arrange an investigation process in respect of the CTV building by appointing the City Council. However, inadequate decision making of the Christchurch City Council and the poor review process by the inexperienced engineers forced the council to give a green sticker. The Government of New Zealand along with IPENZ and the Royal Commission are trying to find out the real reason behind the collapse of the CTV building through several private investigation processes. References http://www.fsnnetwork.org/sites/default/files/en-svmp-instrumente-akteuersanalyse.pdf. http://www.wbdg.org/project/pm.php. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/editorials/8639296/Editorial-Injustice-over-CTV-building-collapse http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10853110 http://www.smh.com.au/world/individuals-must-take-blame-for-collapse-minister-20121211-2b6xx.html Read More