ARTWORK PUT PUBLIC AT RISK
which the report found was reasonable. However, the council, as landowner, still had an obligation to ensure the work complied with the Building Code.
‘‘I note that at the time of the collapse, the structure was not complete but the fences had been removed.
‘‘This would appear to have put the council in a position where they were in breach of the Building Act and Building Code,’’ Tait said.
The other report was by engineering firm Beca, which said the collapse was probably caused by the use of the four ordinary bolts.
Barnett said a series of events had led to the decision to bolt the tower in position temporarily, and for several days longer than initially planned.
‘‘Under other circumstances, it would have been adequate as a temporary measure.
‘‘If we had known that wind was coming, things would have been handled very differently. ‘‘There was no carelessness. ‘‘The important thing is that lessons have been learned.
‘‘When public safety is involved, there can be no stopgaps.’’
City council customer services general manager Peter Eathorne said the council had adopted recommendations from the reports about the co-ordination of future projects.
While the report found it had acted properly as a regulator, it could have done more in its responsibilities as a landowner.
‘‘As landowners, we accept we should have ensured this work was properly checked.
‘‘We can assure the public we now have systems in place to ensure it won’t happen again.’’
Eathorne said multidisciplinary teams were being appointed to projects under the leadership of one person to avoid aspects of the work being handled in isolation.