BETTER GARDENS.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20233, 17 February 1934, Page 28 (Supplement)

BETTER GARDENS.

Increasing Beauty of City. COMPETITION AWARDS. The Christchurch Beautifying Association’s competition to find the garden that gives most beauty to a city street was judged by Professor J. Shelley this week. P2ntries were received from Fendalton, Papanui, Strowan, Spreydon, Riccarton, Cashmere, Avonside, Linwood and the city. Mr F. G. Morgan, St Andrew’s Terrace, Papanui, receives the Irving Sladen Cup. The judge’s report reads: “ I have been very impressed on my tour of the gardens entered for the competition by the fine standard and the real love of nature’s beauty shown by the entrants. If the citizens of Christchurch generally were to take notice of these gardens and try to emulate them by opening up a view of their own gardens by reducing the height of fences or doing away with them altogether, a walk through the streets of the city and suburbs would be one of the most delightful experiences the Dominion could offer. If, in addition, groups of neighbours were to cooperate in planning some approach towards a joint scheme for their frontages, while retaining their individuality within the garden itself, they would achieve a community expression and foster social feeling in a most delightful way. And this community development is badly needed as a foundation for any social or political theories that may be tried The success or failure of any political organisation ultimately depends upon the proper feelings and mental attitudes of neighbours to one another; and the common love of gardens and pride in the beauty of the district will contribute not a little to the harmonious tuning of the hearts and minds of citizens. The Point of View. “ It is understood that in this competition the gardens are strictly judged from the point of view of a passer-by in the public highway. The gardens were therefore not entered, and no attempt was made to get in touch with the owners to discuss their ideas and schemes. One garden, a very fine one, was ruled out of the judging from the fact that it could not be viewed from a highway but only from a private right-of-way. “ The judging was based upon four considerations; First, the garden was considered in relation to the house itself—the way in which its design and colour led up to and set off the style of building; secondly, the garden was considered in relation to the surrounding environment, the use made by the competitor of street facilities or of neighbours’ properties in planning the lay-out; thirdly, the planning of the garden itself in paths, flower-plots and lawns, trees and shrubs; and fourthly, the harmony of colour in massing flowers and the building-up of points of colour interest by the proper subordination of one colour to another. “ The gardens often proved very expressive of what must be the character of the owner, although the owner was in no case known to the judge. In one there would be an almost mathematical precision of planning: in another romantic glimpses of fairy-like spots through straggling bushes. In one, the colours would be kept strictly in their place like regiments of brightly uniformed soldiers;, in another, mechanical order would give place to a more human mixture which allowed more for the ‘personality’ of the plants. “The judging was made difficult by the very different sizes of the gardens and the very different facilities which the neighbourhoods offered to help out the efforts of the competitors. In some cases a rise of the ground gave a great start to the planning, in others extreme flatness proved a handicap.

But in all cases there was ample evidence of good taste and careful thought —and such thought is not easy, since the planting has to be done so far ahead of the flowering; a considerable degree of imagination for colour and calculation for the season’s progress is involved in garden making, and it is good to see that New Zealand has inherited much of the artistic sense displayed in England’s old cottage gardens which constitute one of the real native arts of the old country. The Awards. .“Allowing for variety of situation, size, etc., is so difficult that a judge is bound to be open to criticism, especially perhaps from trained horticulturists, but I wish to make it clear that my awards have been based upon the appeal which the gardens make to an ordinary passing citizen.” The awards are as follows: 1. —F. G. Morgan, 68 St Andrew’s Terrace, Papanui.—The opposition of violet outside the fence and the gold and red inside is good, and the lawn tempts one to ask where the cues and billiard balls are kept. The colour of the low fence is somewhat glaring and attracts too much attention. 2. —H. Waldron, 284 Avonside Drive— A deep frontage makes necessary a great deal of labour, especially as the flatness makes for monotony. The colour arrangement is good, but relief by a few bushes might make for more half-hidden beauty. One feels that everything is ‘in the window.’ 3. —A. Newton, 117 Birdwood Avenue, Beckenham.—The co-operation with a neighbour eleminates any feeling of crampedness in a small section. The colour and variety are good and the standard roses well placed. The fence at one side of the house is a little unrelieved and improvement could be effected by a little planting in the road. A most pleasing garden. Other gardens that deserve honourable mention are; J. T. Lowe, 15 Rata Street; G. Borgfeldt, 121 St James Avenue; Mrs W. Campbell, 3 Thorrington Street; W. A. Gaffney, 363 Gloucester Street; and H. E. Otley, 26 Heaton Street. “The efforts of the Beautifying Association are to be warmly commended, and I . should like to thank the association personally for the joy given me in seeing the beautiful gardens and opening up to me a new vision of the city beautiful,” says Professor Shelley, in concluding his report.