Images of multi-storey buildings reduced to rubble were on our TV screens, our computers and in our newspapers - pictures of a disfigured cityscape that replaced Christchurch's iconic English architecture.
Buildings that used to house and feed, entertain and teach, and be hives of economic activity became mounds of twisted metal and slabs of concrete that consumed streets.
How could the shift of the earth have caused such chaos? Local engineers who helped assess earthquake-ravaged buildings in Christchurch's CBD are saying Hawke's Bay needs to learn from what happened on February 22 and ramp-up our building standards.
A number of local structural engineers joined efforts in Christchurch evaluating buildings in the devastated CBD.
One of those engineers, and director of local firm LHT Design, Alan Thompson, said it was time the government, councils and building owners took responsibility to make sure all buildings were safe.
"What we observed, and what everybody reported, was that the old brick buildings have really caused the problem. The modern buildings performed quite well.
"In Hawke's Bay we have so many old brick buildings and we've really got to address that issue. Overall, more pressure has to be put on by council and governments telling individual owners they have to do it themselves."
This concern was clearly evident in council findings from their assessments of potentially earthquake-prone buildings in Hawke's Bay.
When both councils developed policies on 'Dangerous, Earthquake Prone and Insanitary Buildings' in 2006 as a requirement under the Building Act 2004, the process of Initial Evaluation Processes (IEPs) in the twin cities began.
Napier City Council Building Consents senior officer John Bryden said that before this time, no checks were ever carried out on buildings except when they were built, if they changed their usage (say from offices to apartments) or if there were significant renovations.
He said there was no law that ever required it to be done until the government introduced the 2004 Building Act and put the responsibility on local authorities.
When the policies were passed, initial inspections began, and Hastings District Council Building Consents manager Malcolm Hart said between 2006 and 2009 Hastings District Council identified 872 potentially earthquake-prone buildings in the district.
In 2009 formal assessments of those buildings started, and 184 had so far been examined.
He said the findings of those examinations would not be released by the council until a report had been presented at the end of the month, as engineers had not finished checking all of the buildings yet.
When this was done, he said a register of unsafe buildings would be created.
"The majority of buildings that have been assessed to date are still going through a confirmation process and will not transfer to the register until that's completed.
"At this point our register contains only three confirmed earthquake-prone buildings from the initial assessment."
Until these findings were released it would be unclear what the state of play was with Hastings buildings, but District Council Deputy Mayor Cynthia Bowers said the council was looking to re-examine its standards in light of the Christchurch earthquakes.
"Yes it is something we are thinking about. We've been working our way through current standards prior to the first earthquake and then, of course, the most recent one happened.
"Up until that point we were reasonably comfortable our standards were about right, but the earthquakes have raised questions about whether they're still relevant or should be strengthened."
Napier City Council chief executive Neil Taylor said that in Napier and Taradale about 280 buildings were identified as potentially earthquake prone.
When IEP assessment began to identify which buildings were actually prone, 61 were assessed - and by August 2010 half had failed to meet the minimum requirements.
The concerning findings saw assessments cease while a report to council by Mr Taylor was compiled recommending building standards and processes be revisited, he said.
"It was triggered by concerns we had that a large percentage of buildings were not up to minimum standard, and it was particularly an issue around Art Deco buildings."
Merely a week after the report was compiled, Mr Taylor said advancements were being made when the September 4 earthquake struck Canterbury and prompted nationwide reconsideration of building standards.
Christchurch City Council quickly pushed through a change in policy requiring earthquake-prone buildings to meet engineering best practice of 67 per cent compliance to code, a move similar to that taken by Gisborne District Council after the 6.8 quake hit that city in 2007.
Mr Taylor said data and reports about how the first earthquake might impact Bay standards were still being considered by the council when the second Christchurch quake struck last month.
Napier City Council Mayor Barbara Arnott said, based on these factors, there will be changes but they won't come from local initiatives.
"Yes, in light of Christchurch there probably will be changes, but they will come from Wellington. Councils are responsive to changes, rather than leading them."
If the matter was out of local council hands, was it time for building owners to ensure their property was up to, or above, current requirements?
Mr Thompson said that quake-prone countries overseas put responsibility on building owners to be proactive, and it was an effective method that may motivate business owners here.
"They actually label their buildings. So when you walk in, it will say either it's safe or it's not. Would you rather buy a dress from the shop that says it's not safe, or the one across the road that is safe?
"That's something we have to think about, it's got to be something that building owners have to take responsibility for."
Mrs Bowers said that despite a lack of strict enforcement, it's clear where the responsibility lies.
"The ultimate responsibility rests with property owners. The council is responsible for assessing which buildings pose a risk and to make sure they do meet standards, but ultimately it rests with the owners.
"It's a personal choice to own, and along with ownership comes responsibility to meet standards that are in place."
Mrs Arnott said any stricter rules for owners that came from central government, would have to be balanced due to cost.
"Any government that's looking to make changes will need to balance on one side for people, because if a business owner is told their building will cost $200,000 to upgrade, they may walk away."
However, Mrs Bowers said that it wasn't a ratepayer responsibility to pay for owners' responsibilities.
"I don't see us changing and contributing to strengthening buildings. I'm not sure it's something the general ratepayer should have to pay for and I suspect there would be a bit of an outcry from ratepayers if they were to do so."
According to Mr Thompson, the issue of cost was the main barrier to solving this debate.
"It differs so much from building to building, but it's like owning an old car - eventually you have to make it roadworthy.
"You don't let people have cars that aren't safe so it should be the same with buildings."
Other changes to policies would require a rethink on the treatment of historical buildings, in Hawke's Bay this applies to our iconic Art Deco cityscape.
In Mr Taylor's report last year, he outlined the number of Art Deco buildings below par, and the issues around bringing them up to code compliance.
Napier's policy currently states the city's historic buildings could be exempt from standards if strengthening put their historic value at risk.
Yet in the wake of Christchurch, everyone seems to agree that safety should not be sacrificed for history.
Last year, when the Art Deco building report was released, Hawke's Bay Today was told by The New Zealand Historic Places Trust that it supported earthquake strengthening of buildings in the Bay.
The organisation said it would work with owners, councils and other interested parties to achieve "pragmatic, cost-effective solutions".
Mr Taylor said the part of the policy that states safety may be "waived" for historic buildings was going to be reviewed this month.
Structural engineers said that historic buildings were just as capable of being upgraded as more modern structures.
"Often we can work around historical regulations," said Mr Thompson. "In the last month look at how much of the social activity in Hawke's Bay relied on the heritage of Art Deco buildings. But the reality is a lot of them could be lost again, so if we don't protect them now we will end up back in the same situation and have to start again."
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
Latest from Hawkes Bay Today
Several Havelock North fires suspicious, two youths arrested
Police are investigating other suspicious scrub fires in the area and considering charges.