Co-Operation in Town Planning

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 94, 12 July 1927, Page 14

Co-Operation in Town Planning

LOCAL BODIES AGREE BAFFLED BY ARITHMETIC CO-OPERATION was agreed on by the representatives of the local bodies, who met in the City Council chamber last nignt to consider a town-planning scheme. They might have agreed on other things, but unfortunately they were confronted by two problems. The first was arithmetical, it turned on the question, “Can 28 go into 15?” there were 2S bodies invited to the conference and all, it was presumed, would want representation on the town-planning committee, but the Act provides that the maximum number of committeemen shall be 15. This was such a baulk that they gave it up, after long discussion. The second problem was a definition of the word “metropolitan,” which one delegate declared was “red rag to a bull.” This also was given up. The conference lasted for two and a-half hours. The Mayor of Auckland. Mr. G. Baildon. who presided, explained that it had been thought that one scheme for the area and not individual ideas of the local authorities should be the foundation of town-planning. JOINED FORCES WANTED “In town-planning we have to look beyond municipal boundaries,” said Mr. T. R. Hammond, director of townplanning, who had convened the meeting. "It must be clear that one local body cannot proceed independently of the others. We should regard the area as a whole and not take into account the artificial barriers.” He explained that the making of industrial areas adjacent to residential areas w r ould come about if the authorities did not co-operate. In Manchester there were no fewer than 96 local authorities in a big town-planning scheme, so they should not fear the co-operation of the 28 Auckland authorities. He hoped they would appreciate the importance of joining forces. Mr. Baildon moved: ‘'That this conference approves of the principle of co-operative action between the local authority of the Auckland metropolitan area in the preparation of a regional scheme under section 28 of the Act/’ Mr. E. H. Potter, Mayor of Mount Eden: What do you call the metropolitan area? We will soon have a concrete road to Helensville and Mercer. We must consider them in a general scheme. The Mayor: My idea was to take in the '2B authorities around Auckland, south as far as Papakura, and up to Henderson. Mr. Potter: I would suggest you took in the heavy traffic district, including Helensville and the northern suburbs. Mr. Baildon: The metropolitan area is big enough for the meantime. Seconding the motion, Mr. Aldridge, Mayor of Devonport, said that the idea of the conference was instituted by Devonport. No town-planning would go on in Devonport until a comprehensive scheme was found. The idea did not necessarily turn on the bridge across the harbour, but cn the two canals, the Manukau-Whau and the Waitemata-Manukau. They should be the key-notes of the scheme. The engineers of the local bodies should form the committee. “It seems unnecessarily wide to include Pukekohe and Mercer in the scheme,” said Mr. Ledger, representing the Pukekohe Borough Council. “Pukekohe would not be willing to come in.” Mr. Potter moved an amendment that the question of preparing particulars for town-planning should be referred to mayors and chairmen of local bodies, whose areas were involved together with their engineers, in order to suggest the most convenient method of carrying out the work and the area over which it should extend. The Mayor of Avondale, Mr. H. Tiarks, said that the conference should look a little further ahead than it proposed to. He seconded the motion. City Cr. C. I. Crooks asked whether Mr. Potter’s amendment was in order. Mr. Baildon explained that the committee, under the Act, could not consist of less than five or more than 15. The amendment was out of order. PROBLEM OF ARITHMETIC Mr. Potter: There are more than 15 local bodies. How are the others to be represented? Mr. Newton, of the Town-Planning Association: Some local bodies would have to form themselves into groups, so that a committee of, say, seven, would prepare the plans. Mr. Knight, Ellerslie: I suggest that you limit the area to 15 local bodies. Mr. Hammond said that the area could hardly be decided that night. Mr. Skeates, Mayor of Birkenhead: We are in the soup about 28 authorities. What happened in Manchester? “They worked on the group system, I think,” said Mr. Hammond. City Cr. A. Eady: Surely there can be no opposition to a unified plan. City Cr. Melville asked what a ‘metropolitan area” realy meant. Mr. Hammond said that it would be difficult for him to define at present. Miss Melville said that small towns like Manurewa could not be considered on the same basis as the populous suburbs. Cr. Crooks suggested that the word “metropolitan’ was like “waving a red rag to a bull td some people in this room.” The motion should be modified to leave out that word, and specify the bodies represented at the conference. Mr. Sexton, of the Manurewa Town Board, said the exact boundaries would be decided by experts. The need of districts like Manurewa was as great as the suburbs, because the districts were unformed. “How can we possibly carry out the town-planning without the Auckland Harbour Board?” asked Mr. C. E. Powell. ‘Whether it needs an amendment to the Act or not, we should bring the Harbour Board in.” GOVERNMENT HELP ‘What authority will we have over the Government department like the railway?” asked Mr. Sexton. “These departments have promised to fall in with our plans as far as is practicable,” said Mr. Newton. (Laughter.) Mr. J. A. C. Allum: We should consider what this town-planning proposition is going to ebst. It won’t be a little. We should agree to co-operate but not on how far we should cooperate. “It is ridiculous to include Manurewa and counties like Franklin in the scheme. It will be hundreds and hundreds of years before the City of Auckland extends as far as that. Let’s be reasonable.” City Cr. A. J. Entrican thought that the area should be within 10 miles of the General Post Office. The scheme would cost a lot of money, and the bodies outside would probably be thankful for being so. “We cannot look on this in a parochial manner,” said City Cr. E. J.. Phelan. “Joint operation is necessary.” Mr. Horne, chairman of the N»*w , Lynn Town Board, suggested that the

I area from the Whau to Tamaki.h be one of four areas for • Engineers.” he said, "and of course have to do the planr. S **** “But it is quite possible thet.i, engineers who planned th. *"• way yards in Hobson Bat r *' 1 ' take on the town-plannino "w y cannot regard their tile , w « knowledge which arrived Cn , n,c *l yards to be an asset to ***• planning!” ° Cr. Crooks submitted an am.„, which read: That the loeM S o ** here represented agree to sunrv,~ les principle o£ co-operation on the ~ tion of a regional plan." ev olu. This was carried. Cr. Entrican said that he th representation on the committee Urh: have to be on the basis nf ee "°uM value. capita! A Voice: At that rate Aucklam n would have 14 representatives rest would have one among thm., Mr. Entrican: And that would n plify matters greatly! u ***&- Mr. Knight declared that earh should be on the same level of V„ lei presentative. In answer to ’JCn’"I*' 1 *' asked: "Haven’t you the brains Auckland Council to delegate tman?” (Laughter.) ne Soe«i It was decided that Mr should convene a meeting of :h '■ presentafives of each local ami I*' preferably the mayor or chairm£’„ ri,y consider the best method of car?,.' 1 " out section 28 of the Act. and to i E vise ways and means of securing rh‘ co-operation affirmed in the m-oT: resolution.