HOARDINGS.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19164, 22 November 1927, Page 11

HOARDINGS.

COUNCIL'S ATTITUDE. SIGNWRITERS AND DECORATORS PROTEST. In spite of tho fact that the pros 1 and cons of the question have been thrashed out time and time again, hoardings continues to be a very live subject, and cropped up again at last i night's meeting of the City Council. The By-laws and Finance Committee reported as follows: A petition has been received from signwriters and decorators protesting against tho Council's attitude in refusing business pooplo the right to advertise and make better known their wares by means of hoardings on their own and other peoplo's properties. The petitioners state that tho action of the Council is not only chocking commercial progress but is hampering tho trade and profession of signwriters and commercial artists, and they ask that the Council will not further check this industry. The committee has replied to the effect that the Council does not interfere with people advertising their business on their own premises. The report was ndopted. Advertising Panels. The By-laws and Finance Committeo reported that Chandler and Co., Ltd., had applied for permission to erect advertising panels in the undermentioned positions:—(l) On property owned by Mr B. Slocombe at No. 830 Colombo street north, about 22ft in length; (2) on property owned by Mr A. E. Marriott at No. 121 Victoria street, about 30ft in length; (3) on proporty ownod by Mr C. E. Hollis adjoining Methodist Church, Colombo street, Sydenham, about 22ft in length; (4) on property owned by Mrs H. J. Cook, No. 120 Ferry road, about 22ft in length; (5) on property of the trustees of Mrs Eliza White at No. 98 Manchester street, about 54ft in length; (6) on property owned by Mr A. R. Blank at No. 100 Oxford torrace, about 48ft in length; (7) on Mr A. E. Blank's property, No. 480 Papanui road, about 86ft in length. The Town Planning Committee had approved of the erection of Nos. 1, 2, and 5, but after having given the matter careful consideration, the By-laws and Finance Committee recommended that the application bo refused, as a whole. Cr. E. H. Andrews opposed the motion for the adoption of tho report, and said the Town-Planning Committee was not getting a fair deal from the By-laws Committee, who overrode its recommendations. To put it plainly, ho was disgusted with the position. What disgusted him was that the Mayor should have got Councillors into his room prior to the previous meeting commencing, waived his notice of motion concerning the question, and agreed that each application should be considered on its merits. The sites were subsequently inspected, the Town-Planning Committee recommending three of tiona. It surprised him to know that the Mayor subsequently moved a motion in committee and used his casting vote to* refuse the lot. He failed to understand the Mayor's attitude, especially as the Mayor had himself used a hoarding in the vicinity of his church to advertise a sale of work, a photograph of which Cr. Andrews produced. What is a Hoarding? The Mayor laughed, and said that a hoarding was generally regarded as a structure on which goods to be Bold by other people than the owners of the hoarding were advertised. Cr. Andrews: Yes, I understand that. But a hoarding is a hoarding after all. . The Mayor: Pass it (the photograph) up. Cr. Andrews: Yes, I will, and I hope it. will go all round the Council so that they can see what a consistent gentleman you are. Cr. J. W. Beanland said he had voted against the hoardings in both committees. Cr. Andrews: You have been led astray also. You have done a bit of advertising too, and not very far removed from hoardings if I can remember the board you had above your gate some years ago; Cr. Andrews moved as an amendment that applications 1, 2, and 5 be granted. He added that he thought the Mayor's uncomprehensive attitude was due to an advertisement from the Citizens' Association some years ago which had annoyed him. Cr. E. E. McCombs seconded the amendment and hoped that one night there would be an explosion at the way in which the Town-Planning Committee was being treated. Upholding a Principle. Cr. J. W. Roberts congratulated the By-laws Committee in upholding the principle that they were not bound to give permits for hoardings because they were in the business area. Most of the hoardings were advertising whisky or some other drug, and there were too many of them already. Cr. Beanland considered that the Bylaws Committee had adopted the right attitude. The committee was perfectly correct in taking a stand against such a recommendation. Cr. Sharpe said he opposed hoardings as the Council had to protect the morals and artistic senses of the people. As a member of the Labour Party also— Cr. Beanland: Don't bring the Labour Party into it. Cr. Sharpe said that hoardings were being overdone to the detriment of the cost of living. The people who bought the goods advertised had to pay a part of their money for hoardings or other advertising. Cr. B. M. Macfarlane said the time had come when the Council should decide what the position of the TownPlanning Committee was. It had been consistently and persistently overridden by the By-laws Committee. Cr. T. M. Butterfleld said hoardings served a useful purpose in many cases, and he considered they should be approved in the present instance. Cr. G. Manning, as chairman of the Town-Planning Committee, expressed diffidence at rising to oppose older members of the Council and members of his own Party. He was absolutely disgusted with the By-laws Committee in bringing forward an absurd and negative proposal. Cr. M. E. Lyons: Do you want to make a rubber stamp of us? Cr. Manning: You're worse. You're negative. | A. Councillor: Oh, no, we're very definite. The Town-Planning Committee, continued Cr. Manning, had jurisdiction as to what sort of structure should be erected in Christchurch from 1927 on. They went to the trouble of carefully inspecting the sites, as the special body set apart for the work, and then found the By-laws Committee, without any investigation, negativing the TownPlanning Committee's recommendation. Hoardings and advertisements had certain rights, and must be given them. What was the use of the Town-Plan-ning Committee wasting time in inspection when another committee turned down its proposals} "Heat Blown Off." The Mayor said that so far as the Town-Planning Committee was concerned a great deal of unnecessary heat had been blown off. The Town-Plan-ning Committee had no right whatever to decide where hoardings should go. It was merely asked to give the By-laws

Committee its opinion. Did Cr. Manning suggest that because the Town-Plan-ning Committee had a certain opinion the rest of the Council had no right to hold a diverse onef As for his own attitude, he had made it clear time and again that he was opposed to all hoardings. He would oppose all applications, and if he had his own way would clear every hoarding out of the City. Cr. Andrews's amendment that the applications in respect of hoardings 1, 2, and 5 should be granted, was then carried, the Mayor and Crs. Roberts, Sharpe, Lyons, and Beanland voting against it on a division.