AUCKLAND DOMAIN.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 145, 21 June 1934, Page 10

AUCKLAND DOMAIN.

THE PROPOSED DRIVE.

MUSEUM COUNCIL CRITICISM

STRONG PROTEST "VOICED,

The traffic drive proposed by the city engineer, Sir. J. Tyler, in his comprehensive scheme for the future development of the Auckland Domain, was - strongly criticised by the council of the Auckland Institute and Museum at its meeting yesterday, and it was decided . to make an official protest to the City Council against the inclusion in the Domain improvement scheme of any further motor roads, and to suggest that before any pian is sanctioned further opinions should be obtained. The president, Sir Cecil Leys, said the plan was not for the opening up and improvement of the Domain, but to pro- ' vide another outlet for traffic from the '■ city. The road would be used definitely J as a route to Parnell, and the council ( should do everything in its power to ; resist the proposal. , Mr. A. J. Entrican said the question needed careful consideration. He did not see why further provision should not be made for light traffic. Commercial : vehicles should not be allowed to use 1 the road. Additional roads would help to show the public the beauties of the domain. Mr. H. E. Vaile: We do not want more roads. Mr. Entrican: As long as heavy traffic , is kept off it is all right. Plenty of Routes. Sir Cecil Leys said motor traffic was not permitted in the botanic gardens at Sydney or Melbourne. There were plenty of routes through .the Domain from Stanley Street, the hospital, Carlton Gore Road and Parnell. If many more roads were constructed there would be Utile Domain left. It would be all roads. He repeated that the-proposal was not to open up the Domain, but to facilitate traffic. "Is this valuable Domain to be sacrificed to such a purpose?" he asked. "It seems very wrong." Mr. Vaile said a similar proposal had been resisted two years ago. There was no reason to force it upon the public again. Mr. T. Bloodworth said that as a resvut of the proposals of two years ago the city engineer had consulted outside interests and brought down a comprehensive plan. So far the report had not been considered by the council or its committo<Sir Cecil Leys: If we find the proposal harmful the present is the time to make a protest. , , Mr. Bloodworth: Against the whole scheme ? Sir Cecil said there were many fine points in the engineer's scheme. It was the proposed road that they were against. . ' Mr. C. R. Ford said the institute should make its considered views known.

Mr. Eiutrican said the City Council . should be asked to hear the views of the ■ council of the institute before adopting the city engineer's report. The * President : I think that course was taken last time; it can be followed - again. i Miv Entrican said only one small committee of the -council had adopted tnc plan, and that without discussion. Sir Cecil Leys said the plan was public . property and it was open for- anybody interested to discuss it. . As an amendment to the adoption of the r.eport of the scenery preservation committee recommending that a protest should be made to the City Council, Mr. Entrican moved that the matter be dc- , ferred until the next meeting in a month's time in order to give members , an opportunity of fully considering the

project. •- j Question for Public. In seconding the amendment Professor . }H. W. Segar said it.-was. a-question for the general public. The interests of the institute and museum were not affected. "The president said their interests were affected by the traffic passing the museum. ' • - " Mr. A.' T. Pvcroft said the institute represented the citizens. Many people visited the Domain to get away from motor traffic. They needed solitude and quiet. Mr. Blood'worth said it was not intended that the route should be used for general traffic. The council had other proposals for taking the traffic away from the Domain. The President: There is no need for this road. Sir George Fowlds asked how far the present scheme varied from that of two years ago. Sir Cecil Leys said it traversed the same hill and junctioncd with the Domain Drive. It would in no sense be a scenic route, but a traffic road. Mr. G. Arcliey, director of the institute, said the Institute of Horticulture stated that it had not been consulted, \yliile the dissent from the road proposal of the honorary city botanist, Mr. T. L. Lancaster, had not been mentioned in the city engineer's report. On a show of hands Mr. Entrican's amendment was lost and the report adopted. A proposal submitted by the Auckland council of the Institute of Horticulture was approved, suggesting that a joint committee should be set up by itself, the institute and museum council and the Auckland executive of the Institute of Architects and the Town Planning Institute to discuss the whole scheme. Mr. T. L. Lancaster, lecturer 011 botany at the Auckland University College, will deliver an' illustrated address at the Biological Lecture Theatre, University Science block, this evening, 011 public parks, domains and botanic gardens. The lecture will follow the annual meeting of the Auckland Council of the New Zealand Institute of Horticulture, its object being to provide a comparison with the city engineer's proposals for tlw development of the Auckland Domain. .