DESIGNS FOR ORAKEI.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19028, 27 May 1925, Page 14

DESIGNS FOR ORAKEI.

POSITION OF ARCHITECTS.

"NOT SOUND BUSINESS."

REPLY TO SURVEYOR-GENERAL.

Iho statement made by the SurveyorGeneral, Mr. W. T. Neill, in regard to the participation of architects in tho competition for the design of the Orakei garden suburb, and recently published in tho Hjciuld, wero discussed yesterday by a loading Auckland architect. This professional man said that lie doubted whether there wouid bo many aiehitect competitors, at least of thoso members of the profession who had contributed to tho advancement in architectural accomplishment that had been evident in tho past 10 or 15 years. Tho reason was simply because, from tho point of view of tho practising architect, tho competition as promoted by the Government was not a sound business proposition. An architect entered a competition for a war memorial, a public building or a garden city because, if properly arranged, it offered him at one and the same time an opportunity to earn his living and to erect a structure or plan a site that would contribute to tho coun try s progress in such matters—in other words a work in which, through practical necessity, he was able to express tho aesthetic sense withing him. Carrying Out of Design.

It is true ho takes a chance, and a very great chance, of being defeated in the competition," continued this architect, but in view of tho opportunity if ho succeeds he is willing to take such a chance and to face the cost that entering such a competition means. Must architects would waive the consideration of money prizes if the carrying out of the project was entrusted to the successful competitor at. tho scale of fees which is considered adequate Under the circumstances. The Orakei competition does not offer such an advantage, and so the money prizes have to be taken into account and are found not adequate to the cost and risk of the competitor. The Minister for Lands, in support of tho argument not to allow the winner of tho competition to carry out the design, says that tho law of the land requiring all subdivisions of land to be made by a licensed surveyor precludes such an arrangement. But docs it ? Could not a clause in the conditions of competition state that an architect winner of the competition must engage the services or otherwise collaborate with a licensed surveyor . Further, how does the Minister's argument hold in the caso of a licensed surveyor becoming fjio winner of the competition ? Under the circumstances even he would not necessarily be allowed to carry out his design." Cause and Effect.

The fact that not many registered architects would be competing was not because of any instruction from the council of u iio lnstituto of Architects, added this architect, but was simply a case of cause and effect—the conditions of competition were not inviting enough. There was no body of professional men of which so much was expected as of tho architects in this matter of public competition. In no profession other than that of architecture was the practitioner called upon to perform work for nothing to enable his fitness for the work in view to be gauged. The average architect had to count well the cost, before he could disorganise the work of his office with purely speculative competitions, especially when, as in tho case of Orakei, they promised little. As tho conditions of competition at present stood the winner would get his monetary prize, but he would not get that which was natural to tho man of ideas—the opportunity of carrying those ideas to fruition. Onco tho competitor had got his prize tho Govemeinnt could slip in and modify and even maul his scheme—as happened with Canberra in Australia—to its heart's content. To be retained as an adviser, so that no modification could take place without his consideration, was the least tho winner of the competition was entitled to.