CLOCK TOWER PLAN

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXV, Issue 159, 21 June 1935, Page 5

CLOCK TOWER PLAN

MR. H. HYLAND’S SCHEME

Advocate of Main Street QUESTION OF VISIBILITY In support of the criticism of the Borough Council’s decision to erect the clock tower on a eito 38 feet from Heretaunga street, Mr H. Hyland, whoso plan of putting the tower in the middle of Heretaunga street, at a point near the intersection of Railway road and Heretaunga street, was published a few weeks ago, has written the tollowing letter to the “Tribune.” An illustration of Mr Hyland’s scheme is published below. Mr Hyland writes:— I have attempted to ascertain from what point* the proposed clock and its tower, under the present scheme, will bo visible from Heretaunga street, and it seems certain that almost the whole of the tower, not perhaps including the clock face itself, will be invisible from any point westward of the Bank oi New Zealand doorway, and from any point eastward of the Grand Hotel doorway. A rough plotting seems to prove that even the clock face will be hidden from view eastward of Mr Noel Wilson’* pharmacy.

The points mentioned are on the northern side of the street, and * s obvious that from the other side of the street there will be no view at all either of the tower or of the clockThe plotting made by inc is not necessarily exact, as it was done only from unverified measurements. It showed, however, that the top of Westerman's building will interfere with tho view' from the eastern side of Russell street, and it is not unlikely that the pediment on the top of the Hastings Hotel will prove to be a corresponding obstruction, even perhaps to the extent of obliterating a view of the clock face from the northern side of Heretaunga street on tho other side of Russell street.

It is not of course to be taken as certain that either the Hastings Hotel or Messrs Westerman's building will not in future be raised in height. Hastings is not likely to re nain fir ever a town of two-storeyed buildings, and if the height of the two buildings were increased by even a very few feet

in the future, the position would become very much worse so far as a view ef the clock face is concerned. My proposal, as shown in the reproduction of my plan, is to widen the street, between the site on which the present excavations are being made and th© gardens by the railway line (on the other side of the street) to a width of 75 feet. The present width is 45 feet, tho width at Westerman’s corner u 43 feet, and at the Hastings Hotel corner 48 feet. It has been objected that the council could not obtain dedication of the necessary few feet from the Railway Department, but in answer to that I should like to point out that the crossing itself, and the main street for a few feet on either side of it, has never been dedicated, and still remains the property of the Railway Department. 1 cannot see why the department should be considered unlikely to grant permission to the council to use the extra few feet required for my scheme of widening. 1 advocate the erection of a fortyfoot tower with a six or seven-foot base (the dimensions of the base being larger than the requirements of the London Building Act) and the incorporation of a light-signal to give warning of approaching trains.

It has been said that the tower would obstruct traffic. My view is that it would guide it, as it very much needs, on what is destined to become a very busy corner. If a niotoriet is going to- drive into an illuminated clock tower forty or sixty feet high, lit by street lights and the lights from shops, then ho should not be on tbo roads at alt. Further than that, it would be possible to name a score ol cities in which monuments, towers, and other such feature* are placed in main streets. To my mind the purpose of the tower is not alone to servo tbo utilitarian purpose of enabling people to seo the time Out to provide the town with a wortky architectural feature. Therefore the tower should be set off in the most impressive surroundings, and not more or less hidden away. It should provide an impressive feature and be visible from the maximum number of points. The widening of the street will have to be done some day, and it might as well be done now. It would enable traffic to pass far more easily than nt present and also would set off the jn the most worthy way. So far ns a view of appr<>H'-l''V' trains is <’uii< , erii , d. I should !:!■>»• 1 point out that the uL tiucijou to th

view by the tower, plus the obstruction of the lavatory close by, will provide a far greater obstruction than would be caused by a tower in the middle of the street. Anyone who cares to look for himself will tee that that is so.— Yours etc., H. HYLAND. June 21, 1935.

ANOTHER WRITER’S VIEWS

(To the Editor). Sir, —The uproar about the location of the town clock is in a large measure justified. Its utility and its value as a town asset will assuredly be diminished by at least 50 per cent, if it goes where now intended. It is obviously a mistake. It is noticeable, however, that only one of your correspondents, Air Gardner, makes a possibly practicable alternative suggestion. It would probably be costly, means must be provided for access to the mechanism, it might be unsightly-, but it is worth investigation. At this time above all things councillors should keep cool heads and balanced minds and not allow themselves to be stampeded into any such utterly ill-advised proposal as to make a traffic obstruction of it in the street centre. If the thoroughfare was at least two and a half chains wide fo r a distance of at least four and a half chains and there was no railway crossing, the suggestion might be worth a thought. As it is the proposal is simply absurd.

The council seems to be made of money. Its policy appears to be spend on anything and everything and never a thought for the unfortunate ratepayer.. There are numbers of small ratepayers whose earnings are down to less than half, and numbers of property owners whose rental income is less than half it was live years ago, and yet all are forced to carry a greater rate burden than they had to carry then. Now, at a considerable cost, we have a town planner and, like others of his kind, he is full of costly theoretical ideas. Tho cenotaph must be removoo because, forsooth, things can’t be

“architecturally” balanced. The present position of the cenotaph, open to the view of every traveller by rail or main road, and the atmosphere surrounding it, are as appropriate and as suitable as they could well be, and it is to be hoped the council will firmly refuse to be a party to any proposal to remove it.

No doubt a Civic Square is the proper place for a public library, and the most sensible suggestion yet made is to utilise the former site for profit and de vote the revenue to tho upkeep of the library. Possibly the Lyndon road-lius-sell street corner would fill the purpose if the cenotaph was not there, but the Karamu-Eastbourne street corner is more suitable. It is nearer the main street, generally more accessible, and the aspect it would present from the main street would be much more impressive. So long as wo have a sound practicable common sense scheme, who, except tho Town Planner, cares whether something is “architecturally balanced” or whether this or something else is an “architectural focal point.” Councillors Rainbow and Ashcroft aro to be congratulated on having expressed opposition to a scheme which involves tinkering with tho cenotaph. It is obvious the prevailing economic condition of things will be with us for an indefinite time; we are inevitably faced with the cost of a new sewerage scheme, and please, Mr Councillor, have some little thought for the hard pressed ratepayer. —Yours, etc., ONE OF THEM. June 21, 1935.