City development

Press, 22 January 1988, Page 20

City development

Sir, —Is the Christchurch city planner, Mr John Dryden (January 18) trying to legislate against the introduction of new ideas in the city’s buildings or development? Is nothing to be acceptable unless it is designed to look as if it has been there for 100 years? Is he inviting architects to become humbugs by using modern technology to ape victoriana? Is the city to pretend it is of another time, somewhere else? Such an escapist scheme would bring solace only to some of the elderly, and most of the halfbaked. Tourists are, on the whole, a very polite breed, and the knowledgeable among them would not shrug their shoulders until they were well away. As Don Donnithorne says, “a hot potato,” indeed. In the meantime the young with ideas will seek their fortunes elsewhere, driven from their own city by the reactionaries.—Yours, etc., W. A. SUTTON. January 18, 1988.

Sir, —It is pleasing to read (January 18) that the Christchurch city planner, Mr John Dryden, acknowledges that new development should be designed in harmony with the historic features of the city that are to be retained, but a visit to Queen Street should, be sufficient to raise serious doubts as to the effectiveness of the Auckland City Council initiative. A much simpler policy would be to immediately introduce a hefty rating surcharge on every cubic metre of building space erected above the level of the Cathedral nave. This would discourage the present growth of towering concrete monoliths and we would gain some small recompense for the desecration to the city environment that has already taken place. Part of the extra revenue raised could then be used to provide financial incentives for the conservation of the remaining unique historical features of our city. — Yours, etc., ROBIN PAWSEY. January 18, 1988.