CRITICS ANSWERED

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 734, 6 August 1929, Page 11

CRITICS ANSWERED

BOARD DENIES SPOILING WATERFRONT TERMS OF DOCK SITE LEASE A spirited denial is given by Mr. M. H. Wynyard, chairman of the Auckland Harbour Board. to charges in certain sections of the Press of failure to protect the public interests in granting leases for temporary buildings on the old dock site, and in its selection of a site for a waterside workers’ waiting room. It was stated that an iron shed erected to serve as a petrol station, in conjunction with a parking ground, is a blot on the waterfront, spoiling the entrance to the city. “I desire, on behalf of the board, to deny most emphatically the inuendo that the board is, in its operations, sacrificing the ameiiities to unnecessary utilitarianism,” states Mr. Wynyard. “The personnel of the board should bo a sufficient answer to such a suggestion. “The Civic Centre Commission, set up by the City Council in July, 1926, reported that the board’s proposals for the development of the port showed a wise appreciation, of the fundamental principles of city planning. The board is not departing from this scheme, as approved by the commission. Dealing with the lease of the dock site, Mr. Wynyard states that the land is open for permanent lease. Meanwhile it has been the dumping ground for all and sundry articles, and the Harbour Board had periodically to have it cleaned up. The terms on which the present lease is granted require the ground to be kept in good order. The period is for two years, but possession oi; ffll or any part of the site must be surrendered on the permanent lease of the whole ground in that period. This enables the board to save its annual loss pending permanent leasing, and at the same time keeping the site in good order. In regard to the objections to a building for the use of waterside workers on the waterfront, which, it was complained, would block out the view of the Waitemata, Mr. Wynyard points out that while, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, neithr/a wharves nor buildings are an advantage, they are yet a necessity to the port. In any case, the views would be mainly of wharf sheds and shipping, and of working cranes, with glimpses only of the harbour between the jetties. “Mr. Holdsworth is reported to stress the fact that Sydney is spending many millions to overcome, town-planning defects*,” says Mr. Wynyard. “As far as I am aware, none of these millions is being devoted to rectify townplanning mistakes of the Harbour Trust.” Owing to port requirements, it is practically impossible to see the harbour from the waterfront roads of any of the world’s large harbours. The position of Chicago, quoted by one correspondent, is different, Mr. Wynyard claims. Shipping is restricted to the river fronts, and the lake frontages are used as parks. The water traffic handled by Chicago is less than that of Auckland, and is diminishing yearly.