RE PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS COMPETITION.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1259, 16 October 1911, Page 3

RE PARLIAMENTARY BUILDINGS COMPETITION.

Sir, —Your able loader on the above subject appeal-ins in your paper on October 5 dcsorvos t'ho thanks of all fair-minded persons. Alter reading that article 1 thoug'hi tho response of the public (or at least tho profession interested) would have been immediate and to the point, if you will allow me I will endeavour to state a few facts as briefly as possible. In the first place I would like to draw attention to tho protest lodgedmouths ago by the New Zealand iiMituto of Architects against what they considered the unfair oonditims, the iusuliiciont sum allocated for the cost of the first portion of the.building to bo erected, and tho injustice of allowing the Government Architect . to. draw up tfie conditions under which ho was a competitor. Tho last-named circumstanco was equivalent to asking, a competitor in a race to also act as haudioapper for his fellow competitors. As to orat it was reasonably pointed out by the institute that to comply with tho conditions and provide a fire and oartluiimkeproof building, finished in a manner suitable for the housing of Parliament, was practically ipi possible for the sum named. Tliero wore other points in the protest, but those mentioned alone should have bcon sufficient to command tho attention , of tho' Government, coming as thev did from a body of men who knew what they wero talking about; but the Government, 1 as represented by their polite Minister for Public Works, was adamant and refused to budge. In view of this attitude, tlie majority of members of tiro institute had no option but to refrain from competing. Sixteen, members, however, competed, and these only on account of having been so far advanced with their work during the somewhat protracted dispute they objected to give up the attempt. What their feelings are now can readily be imagined. Now, sir, with respect to the judging. Colonel Vernon, tho assessor, is recognised as a clever architect of staging integrity, but during his stay ; n this city ho was in ill-healt.li and su'rioumied with Public Works officials. .It was a task that even three competent assessors in .good health (as thero should have teen) would have found very exacting, and yet one professional assessor in ill-health was asked to do the work, assisted by a clerk from the Public Works Department. Think of it! How far has this affected tho result? I venture to state very materially. It must be thoroughly understood that the Government and their officers (in view of tho fierce criticism aroused) had to make the competition appear a huge sucoess, and no doubt that view was clearly laid before the assessor, as seen from tho thanks lie accords to the various officers of the Public Works Department, who assisted him. I maintain, sir, that tho designs should have been sent out of tho Dominion to be judged away from official guidance. Knowing tho character of Colonel Vernon and his record, it comes with all tho greater surprise that ho should so far stultify himself by awarding prizes to designs in no way complying with the conditions, notably as to cost, position on site, and the accommodation to bo included in tho first portion to bo erected. Competitors endeavouring to adhere as cloisely as possible to the conditions should have received greater consideration. The fair attitude for the assessor to adopt . when ho found the item of cost had been excowled in the majority,of cases and the remainder of designs were apparently in lits opinion not of sufficient merit to warrant being awarded prizes was to inform tlie Government of his opinion, and thus turn the whole lot down. He refers m his report. to tho resnonso by architects as being ' "spirited," but can it be considered- "intelligent" wlien tho conditions were evaded in such a flagrant manner? What a howl would have arisen had a similar thing ■ occurred in other walks of life or ill tho field of athletics. One is irresistibly drawn to the conclusion that .official instructions have been given to tho assessor outside the conditions issued to. competing architects. Anything in the .nature of a critical review of the designs was impossible owing to the absurdly short time and the bad manner in which tho designs were displayed. Surely designs costing not less than ,£1)000. to prepare were worthy of .tetter treatment. iNono. of the prize designs can bo carried .out for tho money stipulated, and in tho case of at least the second arid third designs, grossly offend against the conditions. The first-prize design is cramped in its lay out, ill-lighted in parts, difficult to ventilate, and very restricted in its entrance halls. Tho main flight of steps to the entrance is another absurd feature. Imagine the Governor and other official visitors to a State function running up those steps in a howling southerly or northerly with heavy rain. Tho above objections are surely bad enough, yet I venture to say that even tlie Government Architect will not be able to carry out his design for anything like the sum named. It makes one wonder who was responsible for the sum fixed on in the conditions. The second-prizo design is a fine one, but altogether outside the conditions, Tho cost would be enormously exceeded, the building came very far forward ol the line stipulated on the site, and tho Legislative Chamber was not included in the first part to bo erected, all of which strict conditions were ignored. How pretty it is to be fancy free and build castles in the air. The point is, how did it secure a .prize? The third-prize design offended in like manner with the second, with the addition that it involved the removal of the existing Parliamentary Library, which the conditions distinctly implied was not to be touched. Again I ask. why was this design awarded a prize? It must be conceded that, speaking artistically and architecturally, this particular design (as a design) .was the best submitted, but that Burely was no ground for awarding the prize when tho conditions were so grossly evaded. The design placed fifth was a good one, of ample and convenient arrangement, and could bo carried out for a sum within measureablo distance of that stipulated. Why was this displaced? This also applies to . the design placed eighth. Why were, these two designs supplanted by tho second and third nrize-winners, who complied in nono of the main particulars with the conditions? Much more might be said as to site, etc., but I will merely wind up by sounding .a note of disgust. Disgust at the shuffling of the Government, disgust at the weakness of the Assessor, and disgust at tho unfair conditions which prevented my becoming a competitor. This competition should have been the opportunity of every architect in the oolony to display the best that was in him, and tho public had a right to expect it; yet, through the maladministration of a decaying Government, a hu<re wrong has been committed to Ihe public ghastly insult offered to architects. 1 hone. sir. that you will use your now. erful influence in drawing nointed attention to this latest act of the Government, so that tho public may be brought to a proper knowledge of how they are gov«rned.—l am, etc., .N OX-COMPETITOR.