WAR MEMORIAL SITE.

Western Star, 10 February 1922, Page 3

WAR MEMORIAL SITE.

ARCHITECT'S REPORT.

'Following, is tho'report 1 of Mr Etlmund R. Wilson, architect, Invercargill, on tho five suggested sites for the proposed local memorial. This report will be submitted to a general meeting of (subscribers on Friday, 24th inst. ’ —

In accordance with your wishes I met am 1 ! discussed with your subcommittee the sites suggested at Riverton for the proposed War Memorial. I now beg to report thereon, trusting that my special knowledge of the subject and detachment from local influences may be helpful to your subecriber® in arriving at a wise decision.

The proposed sites are five in number, as under: — 1. The junction of Palmerston .■street with the traffic bridge. 2. The bank above the old railway \ cutting, immediately aboye the boathouses on the South Riyer- ■ ton side of the bridge. 3. The triangular space at the intersection of two roads, immediately above the bridge oil ' ' the Southvßiverton side. 4. The bold; bluff or pomt above the bridge and at the road angle' in front of Mr Hall’s cottage on the South Riverton side. , 5. The headland or point jutting out into the stream opposite Waldeck at South Riverton. Jin my report to you of the 24th March last, I referred to all of the above excepting Nos. 3 and 4. The remarks I then made I still hold to ? but I may supplement them now in discussing the full proposals. .Xo. L Site: Palmerston StreetBridge Junction. — ■

This site is excellent in many ways. It is prominent, on the essential water frontage, and! would group well with the town and its ifiain street developments. The defects are that the sub-soil is of sand, which, by reason of its proximity to the water frontage, is a treacherous material to build on, especially with a structure necessitating heavy concentrated loads. It would be necessary .to remove J some of the existing shelter trees, and. probably to make provision for and replant substitutes further out; also to widen the roadway there with some filling and rock facing to protect it. The foundations would have to be wide, of the floating type, i.e., very spreading, and! altogether I estimated that about £2OO would be spent, on initial work' before we started on the monument proper. Further, the structure would always be very exposed to our worst weather. —No. 2 Site: Railway Cutting Bank,

South Riverton.—

This site lias much to commend it. It is again on the watef frontage, the outstanding feature of Riverton which distinguishes it from all other Southland towns and from most in the ‘ Dominion. ' The environment could be easily improved by planting the cutting appropriately with native shrubs, etc., by removing, the crown of the ridge on which the monument, would stand and forming thereon a level, platform sufficient for the monument's immediate surroundings, and forming a better approach from the main road at the rear. All of these improvements would be eseentialj as also the removal of the pinus insiguus, tree .presently on the bank. The boathouses at the water Brink would be immediately in front of the monument, and could he improved in the 'future provided some wise public body could artistically control the design and manner of their recrcction. In the meantime they are so\obviojisly temporary and unpretentious that they would not .present a serious drawback. The roadl bank rising at the rear of the monument would form a partial background of a desirable nature.

'The defects of the site are that except from one point 1 ' of approach, i.e., from the town, thG monument would be practically hidden. South Riverton residents would not see it till close up to it. There is also the almost certain risk of rather distracting buildings arising in 'time above the road bank and creating an undesirable background when seen from the main point of approach. When viewed from the main road at South Riverton, the monument would suffer in dignity through want of elevation from that quarter. 'Considerable expense on the' site (would be essential, as pointed out above. —No. 3 Site: Triangular Space at

Road Junctions.—•

Thi® site has also much to commend it. - It is axial with the present traffic bridge, and! were the new bridge to be built on the game spot, the claims of this site would be greatly strengthened. The foundation would be good, much the best of these three;' and easily and cheaply developed. It is fairly well sheltered. Approaching either. from the town acros® the present bridge or from the main road up thg river, the /monument would be prominently in view. The defects are mainly due to the certain environment of many cottages or other such buildings without the chance, by reaqou of the small ground available, of planting appropriate tl'ees to for pi a field against which it could be seen instead of the inevitable distracting competition of the seneral run of cottages probably of cheap character. Further, I think it must be assumed that the new bridge will not occupy the position of the present one. With the removal of the bridge, most of tho advantages of this site disappear. Also, the monument would not be seen at all from below the bridge, i;e., on the South Riverton side. —No. 4 Site-: The Rocky Bluff at South Riverton in front of Mr Hall’s' S>‘ A ‘ This i® „.i,e, — •menun’-' -.er excellent site. The ’-cut would bo in full view of all who cross either the present or any future traffic bridge in the locality. It would be seen for very considerable distance® up and down the river and also from the town itself. In fact, it is one of the best views I noticed just before leaving -Riverton, from the heart of Palmerston street tovvardb the railway

station street. From that point of; view, a monument‘ would appear jto be almost in the main street- itself. If the new bridge lands on this point, or rather at the foot of it, the axial position with bridge and street would be almost ideal. The foundation is excellent andi second only to No. 3. Should the monument be electrically lighted, such lights would perform a most useful public service apart from their sentimental function. Thin has always been a favourite place of resort for persons wishing to rest and to view the delightful surand tliiis feature could be preserved and erciphasiued appropriately in the monument. The face of the bank could be easily improved by facing it with rubble masonry of the local green stone. Rustic steps could be formed, in the game, lip the bank.

I can see only two defects in this' site. The main defect is the environment again of cottages ■which would mar the appearance from the bridge or principal point of approach. - ' With the 24 feet of depth promised by MV Hall this could be minimised by planting tall narrow growing trees beliind the monument in a semi-circle or straight line, using say 1 native cabbage trees or Irish Yews close planted. For this purpose it would be a great advantage if another ten feet of depth could be secured. The other drawback maj not really exist. It is the chance of the Government authorities demanding the cutting back of his bluff to make easier approaches t 6 and from the new bridge end. With your monument there-, this site would -be a sacred spot, and I feel sure all would consider such an act a desecration, and consequently we can afford to disregard this- matter. —No- 5 Site: The Point Opposite Waldeck, South Riverton.— A most excellent site. Here. we s have w site prominent up and down the standing out with good elevation almdst for this set purpose. The foundation is of hard rock, and it is absolutely free from any chance of future disturbance. Riverton may grow by the time this country is as old as the United States of America, to be a large city. A monument worthily .placed here would! still hold the first*' place of honour. The environment is free from all distractions and could be improved indefinitely, making this the chief beauty spot and place of resort for the countryside. Viewed! from the bridge, present or future, it would be bold and impressive. A crowning light would bemost effective at night. The defects are that the monument would not be visible fromi the main town; that expenditure would be necessary in the surroundings for planting and upkeep. Against these it.should be remembered that only, two of the .other! site® would be visible from the toym, and then only from Palmerston'street. Wo are ,all apt to think - in- terms of-' a village, and forget that the- future will see our towns cities, and four villages towns. The growth of- Riverton residentiary will undoubtedly be mainly on the south side of the river, and with, it this site Will be developed into''a beautiful reserve. .There is no need to plant meanwhile with other than hardy native shrubs, and that over a- limited) area. Open wire fencing neatly erected need not be unsightly, nor observable excepting clone at hand. In conclusion, , I consider you are remarkably fortunate in having so many excellent sites to choose from. It would appear that your people are averse to No. 5 site, as many think it out of sight, especially to those who come in from the country on the north side of. the river. If, after reviewing the' matter, ! it is fbund this is l- , considered! an insuperable difficulty, I heartily recommend to you No. 4 site, that is. on Hall's Bluff. In my opinion, it lias only one 1 serious competitor when once wo boil tßb thing : down. The real question may be summarised as 1 to whether it is to be visible from the main street, i.e., Palmerston street, or not. „If so, then Hall’® Bluff stands’ out as the best. If not, then have the Waldeck Site, No. 5.