Control Wanted Over Railway Hoardings

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30125, 8 May 1963, Page 8

Control Wanted Over Railway Hoardings

Railway Department hoardings should be under the same control as those erected by private enterprise, the Christchurch Regional Planning Authority agreed yesterday. It supported the efforts of the Auckland authority to have the Crown bound by the town planning legislation as it applied to advertising signs and hoardings. The decision was prompted by a .letter from Dr. G. C. Riley drawing attention to the Auckland action, and saying: “Railway hoardings are a blot on the New Zealand scene and do much to depreciate the country’s tourist value. It is time concerted action was taken to overcome the apparent indifference of the Railways Department.” The Counties’ Association had fought the case numerous times, said Mr J. H. Weavers but oould not get anywhere. “It seems wrong that we can bar other people from putting up hoardings, yet the Railways do whatever they want.” “Hoardings are a blot on our landscape,” said Mr H. E. Denton. Irrespective of the merits of what was on the hoardings, the hoardings themselves were often allowed to get into disrepair and become a blot.

“My own department has had a go at the Railways at various times, more particularly from the road safety aspect where main highways nun alongside railway lines,” said Mr E. C. Smart, the Dis-

triot Commissioner of Works, “but we have not been able to make headway.” He was particularly concerned that the Railways Department had put five hoardings on the south side of the Colombo street overbridge, said Mr T. D. Flint. Some Sydenham people had complained that the hoardings were a menace to road users; but he had to admit that another group had said “thank goodness they are hiding the dreadful yards." Apart from aesthetics, there was the important road safety angle, said the chairman (Mr E. J. Bradshaw). It the Auckland move to have the Crown bound succeeded, the Railways Department would still be in the same position . s the private owner, and that was not unreasonable.