ALIGNMENT OF QUEEN STREET

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 146, 19 June 1908, Page 6

ALIGNMENT OF QUEEN STREET

CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION. j . HARBOUR BOARD'S DECISION REGRETTED. At last night's meeting of the Auckland City Council a letter irom the secretary of the Harbour Board conveying the resolution of the Board, regretting that under the circumstances the request made by the City Council and the Chamber of "Commerce to set back the new Ferry Buildings could not be complied with, was read. The Mayor (Mr. A. M. Myers) regretted that the Harbour Board had uot seen its way to accede the Council's request to build their proposed buildings on an alignment, so as to keep the view uninterrupted. In the very near future the mistake would be realised. He had not heard an argument to make the Council alter the decision it had already come to respecting the question. Doubtless the Auckland Harbour Board had been to some expense which would be useless were the request granted, but it would be better to face the expenditure on the extra foundations and the preparation of plans than maice what, in his opinion, would be a serious mistake. He moved that the Harbour Board should be communicated with to the effect that the Council regretted that their request had not, been acceded to, and urging the Board to reconsider the matter.

Councillor Fan-ell, who seconded the motion, said that he felt very strongly on the matter —so strongly that he would urge the Council to enter its earnest protest against the Harbour Board's proposals. Councillor Entrican held that there was something to be said on the other side. There was practically no other conclusion for the Board to come to from their point of view. Tt muct be remembered that Queen-street at the bottom was 120 feet wide. Did the Council expect that the Board leave a clear space of this width? It wiuld be very much better to have a building of the kind intended than the gable end of a shed in view. Od the eastern side the alignment was correct, but for the western side a true alignment would be impossible. The question of expense had not prevented the Board from acceding to the wish of the Council; the question of expense might have been overcome. Councillor Hutchison said that he did not see that the mattei could have been got over in any other way. Of course, if the wharf had been placed in the centre of Queen street it could have been managed.

They could not help feeling, said Councillor Parr, that it was a pity that the Harbour Board could not keep the buildings back so as to preserve the alignment. He thought that it would have been an easy enough matter to keep the view uninterrupted. He likened the future course of the street to a dog's hind 1 'g. and remarked that such a course would not add to its beauty. It was not altogether a matter of sentiment, as persons landing in a city for the first time often judged the place on first impressions. He thought that the Harbour Board should have made some sacrifice to meet the Council. He was a little afraid that there was a section —there was in his time on the Board— on the Board only too ready to raise antagonism to anything emanating from the Council. It was far from advisable that two bodies should have voice in a matter of this kind, and it was one of the scandals of our local government system that there should be two bodies quarrelling upon a mater which made for the betterment of the town. It was one of the strongest arguments in favour of that unification which all desired should be brought about as soon as possible.

The Mayor then put the motion, which was carried with one dissentient.