THE CIVIC CENTRE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19320, 6 May 1926, Page 7

THE CIVIC CENTRE.

Sir, —Judging from various criticisms reflected in the City Council debate there seems to be a need for exact definition of the term civic centre." Either the civic centre will be created by the agglomeration of certain public buildings and by the. consequent concentration of pubiic facilities and activities, or else tte centre already exists, and U it can bo discovered should be adopted as the site for the proposed buildings. Surely the former is the correct definition. What is meant by the argument that the situation of the centre is dependent upon the development of the city, »,nd cannot be determined until that development has been forecasted ? Obviously this unknown centre cannot mean the geographical focus of the future city, since that might be the crown of One Tree Hill or the middle of the Waitemata Harbour. The centre of gravity of tho future population would be an equally meaningless focus for the concentration of these public amenities. The only intelligible centre of a city seems to be that region about which all the activities and interests of its citizens revolve. In - a growing city, that may not be exactly fixed, but in one that is essentially iv seaport at the stage of development reached by Auckland, there can hardly be any doubt, but that its centre will always be close to the waterfront, and where topographical features are so restrictive as they are here, the possibility of the principal business area being moved is so remote, that one may safely presume that Queen Street will be the true centre of Auckland for centuries. Transport facilities are one of the most important factors, and these are now so completely focussed on the Queen Street waterfront region—railways, shipping and ferries, trams and buses, and main highways—that a radical rearrangement about some other focus is inconceivable: Particularly because of the convenience of access, the proposed municipal buildings should t bo placed as close to Queen Street as possible. Judged from the utilitarian standard, the "civic, square" site is probably superior to that now proposed, but it is inferior in other respects. Architecture of the quality contemplated demands, a better setting than it would receive in. a purely commercial environment; an art gallery and especially an auditorium should be removed, as far as is conveniently possible, from the disturbance of heavy in which respect conditions ijy both Queen Street and Symonds Street,' in the neighbourhood of the cemeteries, are plainly unfavourable. . The Princes Street area, is within convenient distance of transport facilities, but is sheltered from the disturbance they create. Above other considerations is the fact that.the City Council declares a new block of administrative offices and a new art gallery to be essential and that ultimately a new town hall or auditorium will be required. Wherever they are placed, these buildings will be the embodiment of the ideas suggested by the term "civic centre," and granting their existence, it will be impossible for future town-planners to discover another civic centre anywhere else. " .Albert Pask.

Sir,—Li my opinion the members of the City Council, however well intentioned they may be, have* failed to understand the problem set them. The location of the square is not a matter for amateur opinion. In' all phases of life where one requires trained opinion one does not go to one's untrained friends for it. In this case obviously the only opinions worth having are, those of the skilled specialist who has, made it his business to study town planning. I would suggest that a world-wide town planning competition for the lay-out of Auckland be held and that a competent body of experts and representative business men be formed to act as adjudicators. We all agree that the beautiful natural setting of Auckland is unique. It is, even yet, only in its youth. We planners of the present often do not realise our heavy responsibility toward the people of the future. In our hands lies the making or marring of our city. To plan one item without due regard to the remainder is illogical, and shows lack of foresight and true appreciation of the problem. A comprehensive town planning scheme will automatically embrace civic squares, public parks, etc., and all will naturally fall .into their appointed places. Money spent in obtaining expert advice will, in the long run, be money saved. We know, by the problems facing other and greater cities in different parts of the world, how mistakes made in the early and faulty planning of their cities are now costing them literally millions to rectify. Surely, with so many examples of errors round us'it is futile' not to seek and learn lessons from- them ?, Even now in Auckland the growth of our traffic and other problems point emphatically to mistakes in the past and the necessity for avoidance of them in.the immediate future. This can be done by seeking expert advice. Let us get- it now. ; In a world-wide competition wo can obtain the skilled opinions of the world's most competent and up-to-date planners. •Is our city not worth it ? We have a beautiful and valuable heritage. A city properly planned is beautiful, is economical, is efficient end, above all, is healthy. Such a one makes for happiness _ A city allowed to develop anyhow rapidly becomes congested (vide Auckland streets at present), develops slums, is unhealthy, thoroughly uneconomical and inefficient, is inevitably ugly and requires eventually vast expenditure of public funds to rectify | mistakes which, originally, were avoidable. Such a, city makes for a C.3 population, misery and unhappiness. The above anpears to me to be the situation the correctfacing and handling of which is the City Council's responsibility. Let us hope that they will handle it in the right way by calling for a town planning competition, open To the world. If we love our city let ns aim at nothing else but the " city beautiful." Advance Aucki-axd.