Untitled

Auckland Star, Volume XII, Issue 3555, 30 December 1881, Page 2

The City Council appears dctormincd to mako itself ridiculous over the plans of the new coffee palace. The architect of tho building had the temerity to venture outside the dull routine of those.designs with which tho Council is familiar, and tho daring flight has completely staggered our civic rulers. The plans, consequently, have been referred from Council to committee, from committee to Council, and back again to committee, with a sort of feeble hopo that something or other—heaven knows what-will turn up to help tho judges out. Originally brought up by tho City Surveyor for the purpose of deciding the question of overhanging bay windows, no sooner were the plans spread out than Mr Hughes, Superintendent of the Fire Brigade, plunged in with an objection to the mansard roof; and last night, at the invitation of tho Council, he proceeded to denounce it as a highly dangerous structure—a position he endeavoured to support by a number of newspaper extracts. Now, with every respect for Mr Hughes as a Superintendent of Fire Brigade, we value his opinion on a Question of architecture at about its weight in hydrogen. A little knowledgo is ofton a very dangerous thing. The vote of thanks to Mr Hughes might be construed into an implied vote of censuro on the City Surveyor. If the latter gentleman is not iully equal to his duties under the Building jßegulations, Mr Hughes should bo allowed a chance of his office. The obvious com-mon-sense plan for the Council to have pursued in dealing with a matter of this kind was to have referred the plans to the City Surveyor for his report on the custom in largo cities whero building regulations arc strictly enforced while architectural effect is given tho freest play consistent with public safety and convenience. If that had been done the Council would have been relieved at once of any trouble about the mansard roof, for the very sufficient reason that it is strictly within the building regulations, and there is no power to disallow it. Moreover, notwithstanding Mr Hughcs's opinion and newspaper extracts to the contrary, mansard roofs are allowed in all the chief cities of Europe and America. Several magnificent new hotels in London, have within the lost year or two, been erected with such roof, bcHidcß many other notable build ings, and tho style ia so popular in Manchester that ithasbeenadoptedina majority of the large buildings erected in that city within the last few years. There is, undoubtedly, danger in all buildings of three or four storeys, where wood is used freely in their construction, but anything Mr Hughes has to say against the mansard roof might be said with equal force in favour of prohibiting the use of windows, and compelling all tall buildings to be hermetically sealed within four dead brick walls, and flat concrete covering. The architecture of Cabul would about meet Mr Hughes's notions of design, But then he should not press the point too hard, because with its introduction his occupation would be gone. The question of overhanging bay windows stands on a different footing. These infringe the Building Kegulations, and the Council is right in discussing fully the propriety of sanctioning them. Still here also common sense and the custom elsewhere should be the guide rather than tho rigid letter of the bye-law. Some scope must be Riven for achitectural ornamentation,and with large public buildings each case ought to be dealt with on its merits. An upstairs bay window, with proper provision for carrying off the drip, if an evil at all, is assuredly a much smaller one than the undrained two feet copings which the regulations allow, as the unwary pedestrian along yucen-street sometimes iiads to his sorrow. In Wain's Hotel, on which the Coftee Palace plans are largely modelled, the City Council of Dunedin has allowed the baywindows, and when a magnificent city improvement like the new Coffee Palace is proposed, the Corporation should encourage