TOWN PLANNING

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 191, 2 November 1927, Page 7

TOWN PLANNING

CONDITIONS IN NEW ZEALAND

THE DIFFICULTIES TO BE OVERCOME.

WHILE THE ADOPTION of the town-planning policy in New Zealand may go a long way towards improving the lay-out of our towns, there are many difficulties to be faced before the proposals can be put into practical effect—difficulties that can only be overcome by the study and application of the principles practised in older cities. An outline of these obstacles is given in an article in the N.Z.I.A. Journal, which stresses the need for controlling the design of buildings.

In New Zealand we have at last been accorded some acknowledgment that town-planning methods should be adopted in our cities, by the passing of the Town Planning Act, which came into force at the beginning of this year—an Act which came into being largely as the result of the activity of the representative bodies of the surveying and engineering professions and of our own institute in setting up committees to press for if, states the article. The executive of the institute has endeavoured to further the matter by communicating with the principal local authorities inviting them to consult and confer with members of the institute in the carrying into effect the requirements of the Town Planning Act. Nevertheless it must be realised that we are only beginning and difficulties may still lie in the path which leads to the adoption of a policy fully in accord with the best principles of town-planning. The Act having been passed and put into operation, there is still need that the vital principles should be kept prominently in view by the institute and its individual members as well as brought frequently to the notice of local authorities and the public whom they represent. Therefore some of the experience of older lands which have advanced further on the path of town planning would be of value in this country, where the movement can be said to be in the initial stages only. One of the chief difficulties of the adoption of town-planning lies in the fact that to comply wholly with its principles it often becomes necessary to interfere to some extent with sectional or individual rights and interests. Regarded in a broad sense it inevitably affects the whole domain of architecture. In the consideration of zoning and traffic problems, very little conclusion can be arrived at unless it be predetermined what function the buildings in the area concerned are likely to fulfil- But if town-planning stopped there—if there were no decision as to the shape, height, air space, and lighting of those buildings—a scheme would not necessarily achieve its purpose. But such requirements as these are already, to a limited degree—and consequently inadequatelycontrolled by local by-laws; so that any control in this respect would only be an extension of powers already existent at the time of passing the Town Planning ActBut in addition to such requirements there is the question of controlling the amenities—the beauty and the graciousness of the buildings, which must inevitably be part of the town; and this means control of what belongs to the individual and not to the community.

Unless each individual, fired by the spirit of community service, does vhal is considered by common consent to be the right thing —and such common consent is based on sound principle—there is bound to be just as great a confusion of jangled and confused architecture; just as great a number of self-important and vulgar buildings; just the same collection of flaring and flashing signs and advertisements as give our streets today that sorry aspect of commercialism which proclaims that, of all things necessary to our existence, money is the chief. What remedy can be suggested then for this condition of affairs? No matter how excellent a town-plan we may adopt or how pleasant and delightful is the prospect of our public spaces or with what taste and ability our public monuments and buildings, and even our street equipment are designed, we shall find that without some such control even the best planned town will not have achieved ihe results sought for by its planners. The individual architect, it is true, could do much to influence and encourage his clients to consider the amenities of the surroundings; but architects are not always employed, and when they are, they frecently have to accept the limitations—both financial and uncultured—of their clients. No by-laws can ever be drafted to fully deal with such matters, which have to do with taste, culture, and principles and cannot be limited to the confines of the law book. In such questions we may therefore look for some guidance as to the means of securing a form of control which will not be obnoxious to the public and which will have the effect of a reasonable exercise and enforcement of sound principles and good taste. Some instances of such powers exercised by local authorities would be of interest and possibly of use in introducing some means of coping with the problems. Having the power to take some action and the machinery available with which to put it into force, it may be hoped that good opportunities will be seized at an early date and that, by an early stimulation of the broader views of town-planning, what is done in the present will not cause us regret in the future. Architecture after all is but a part of town-planning, but a very essential part. If the fruits of good intention are to be garnered so that they may serve the welfare and the happiness of the people, and by their beauty and graciousness of form and character, uplift and inspire our citizens to nobler ends, some such action must be taken. There is no greater function to be served by any art.