Our 22nd Prize Competition

Progress, Volume IX, Issue 11, 1 July 1914, Page 1150

Our 22nd Prize Competition

FOR A BAND ROTUNDA

Won by Ed, Petit (Orpheus) Auckland

Five designs were sent in for this competition, viz.:—"Orpheus," by E. Le Petit, with Mr. A.

by A. Morgan, with Messrs. Wilson and Moodie, architects, Auckland;and "Pan," by L. D. Bestall, with Messrs. Hurst, Seager, and McLeod,' architects, Christchurch. As will be seen by the judge's report below, he is very pleased with the designs as a whole, and offers a special prize of 10s. 6d. for the design placed second ("Talbot," by G. G.

Wiseman, architect, Auckland; "Talbot," by G. G. Hunt, with Messrs. Wade and Wade, architects, Auckland; "Harmony," by H. L. Massey, with Mr. A. Wiseman, architect, Auckland; "Scarab,"

Hunt, with Messrs. Wade and Wade, architects, Auckland). Mr. Cecil. Trevithick, A.R.1.8.A., Auckland, kindly acted as judge for this compettion. His report runs as follows: — "I have received five sets of drawings for my "Band Rotunda" competition, and am exceedingly pleased at the standard of the work submitted, and the originality displayed by some of the competitors. After carefully considering all the points which I mention in my conditions, viz., general design, construction and draughtsmanship, I have placed the designs in the following order:Orpheus, Talbot, Scarab, Harmony, Pan. I must congratulate "Orpheus" on .his design; it is very pleasing in every way, though in my opinion it would have been greatly improved if he had lowered his roof to a much flatter curve more after the style of the design placed second. The general contour of the elevation is good, sitting solidly on its base, and at the same time leading nicely up to its dome. His details show originality. The design of "Talbot" placed second is rather pleasing in general shape of elevation, but his plan is weak. The alternate sloping banks and seats round the base would not look well. His detail of ornamentation on his supports and dome is very good. The pillars especially being a good piece of pencil work for which I myself will give an extra prize of 10s. 6d. "Scarab" I have placed third chiefly on account of his sheet of details which is good. His elevation is unhappy and lacks that feeling of unity which is possessed by both first and second, mainly on account of the apparent weakness of his supports for the mass of his dome. His balustrade and

frieze are good features. In "Harmony" we have a design which is "true" according to all the recognised authorities on the orders and their proportions, but it is heavy and lacks "life." His construction in many parts is much too heavy. The design of "Pan" is not up to the standard of the others, which the author cannot help but admit when he studies the designs of his fellow competitors.