Practical Town Planning Hints

Progress, Volume XII, Issue 1, 1 September 1916, Page 715

Practical Town Planning Hints

(U. In a scries of six public Lectures at Canterbury College, Mr. S. Hurst Seager, F.R.1.8.A., dealt M Y* with Town Planning in such an interesting and helpful manner, that considerable public (pNi top attention was drawn to the subject. We have pleasure in reproducing some of the (CSA IWyjh points made by the lecturer, of direct application in every New Zealand town. “AM

Those perambulating advertisement hoardings, the city traincars, were caustically mentioned by Mr. Hurst-Scager in one of the lectures. He went into the arithmetic of the wretched bit of commercialism to show that tram passengers got scarcely any advantage through tolerating these eyesores. Some exquisite views of the inns of England and some of which had lately been renovated or erected after the old style, in connexion with garden cities were displayed. Showing one which was especially beautiful, the lecturer said: “Who would think of getting drunk in such a place as that!” He then hashed on the scene one of those squat, straightlined hotels with which the people of Christchurch are all too familiar, and across it ran in 6-ft. letters, Drink blank’s Beer.” “No one,” said the lecturer, “could help getting drunk in a place like this.” (Laughter.)

The contrast was most telling, and was greeted with applause, a member of the Workers’ Educational Association crying out: “Oh, comparisons are odious!” “I have to work by comparisons,” said Mr. Seager; “it is often the only way in which to bring the matter before people.” THE VALUE AND BEAUTY OF TREES. A special point was made of the need for the encouragement of tree-planting in the streets. Treeplanting, said Mr. Hurst-Scager was not alone to ornament or adorn the city or to provide shelter in winter and shade in summer, but from a health point of view should be encouraged. The leaves of the trees cnhalcd the poisonous carbonic acid exhaled by human beings and, re-converting it into oxygen, gave it out to the world again in a pure state. Nor did the popular conception that the trees obscured the light altogether hold good. The light might be directly checked by the leaves, but there was a wider diffusion of light than if it had been shot, as a motorlamp projects it, into a blinding stream of concentrated light. That trees did not impede traffic was proved by the Continental cities, in whose leading thoroughfares trees formed a most beautiful aspect. These remarks led to a great deal of discussion, and a “Press” reporter made it his business to interview certain gentlemen interested in tree-plant-ing and municipal work.

A member of the City Council stated that his sympathies were with tree-planting. There was no doubt that it did make the city beautiful, and greatly improved the appearance of the town. "Rut unfortunately, he added, there were many reasons against them. For instance, the roots of' the trees tore —or rather, lifted the asphalt of the side-

paths and injured the road. They also greatly interfered with traffic, while in autumn the leaves of the deciduous trees made a great mess of the streets. The City Council had decided to issue no permits for further street-planting till they had received answers to letters written to many wellknown municipalities where tree-planting had been done, advising them of the results of tree-planting as carried on by them. Mr. H. G. Ell, M.P., honorary curator of the Christchurch Beautifying Society, said he was a believer in tree-planting in the city streets. It was a recognised fact in all the great cities of the world that tree-planting in the streets was productive of more good than harm. He would not, of course, plant trees in such a busy thoroughfare as, say, Papanui road, but he would confine his attention to the side streets, which mostly served residential quarters of the town. He pointed out that in these quarters there was no need of a macadamized road from footpath to footpath. As an example of what should be done, he quoted , the cutting up of Mr. Charles Clark’s Torrington Estate. Here the footpaths were 16 feet wide, with about four feet in grass. This could be planted and the effect would be very pleasant. He would have trees planted, not on the footpath, but some two feet away from the side-channel. In Auckland there were several beautifully-planted streets, and the trees in these were planted some 18 inches from the sidewalk. Mr. Hurst-Seager interviewed with regard to the objections raised by the members of the City Council to tree-planting, stated that he could only quote Mr. Thomas Mawson, the eminent architect in England, who, in his works, gave tree-planting in cities a most prominent part. For instance, Mr. Mawson states: The importance of trees in the general view of a city cannot be over-estimated,” and he devotes a whole chapter in his valuable work on civic art to the best manner in which to plant and assist trees to grow in what to so many is an unnatural environment.” The Mayor of Christchurch (Mr. Holland) stated he was very partial to trees, for he loved them, but he had to admit that there were certain roads which should not be planted. He would not plant any street running east and west with trees. In these streets the shade of the trees in winter made the roads very slippery and nasty, and they remained muddy much longer than unplanted streets. As regards the light, he did not think that trees should be allowed to wreck a lighting scheme that cost £22,000 to install. There were also the telegraph and telephone wires to think of. The matter required a good deal of consideration.

Dr. A. Cockayne considered that there should be a good deal more tree-planting done than was now the case, but he admitted that the course of civic improvement must not be impeded by a simple desire for the beautification of the city. Asked what plants he would advise putting in, he mentioned some of those suggested by Mr. Ell, and, like Mr. Ell, strongly objected to big-growth trees being placed in the streets. He was standing in the College porch in Worcester street, and looking down the street, said he thought some streets hardly needed planting the residents had done all that was necessary. Pointing to the houses opposite, he emphasised the fact that there was almost an avenue of cabbage trees backed up with shrubs and smaller trees.

At another lecture, Mr. Hurst-Seager, with the aid of some very effective lantern slides, dealt at some length with the excellent town-planning systems in vogue in certain parts of London and various other English towns, and explained how some of the most execrable slums of London had been converted into sightly communities. He showed a number of slides showing how the architecture and general planning of parts of London, particularly of the Thames Embankment, most of them on the circular system, compared with the planning of other cities such as Amsterdam, Berlin, and even New Zealand towns, and the various lantern views he showed demonstrated how greatly the consideration of some of the finer and less-thought-of points may help in the general beauty of a town.

A number of very interesting views of the proposed Australian capital, Canberra, were put on the screen, and these showed how much an appreciation of the value of a few lakes in a city, and the intelligent application of the direction of streets and other details in the planning of a town may help towards its general beauty. The proposed scheme of having the Houses of Parliament on the edge of an artificial water effect proved, on the screen, particularly pleasing. THE FALLACY OF STAIGHT STREETS. Speaking of town-planning generally, Mr. Hurst Seager dwelt on the fallacy of having straight roads of too great a length. “A straight road which leads to nowhere is of no use,” he remarked, “that is, from a planning point of view. The chief thing in town-planning is to have a good effect from whatever position one may like to take up, and this is only secured by considering each part in relation to every other part.”

By the aid of lantern views of various English towns and villages, Mr. Hurst-Seager conveyed a very good idea of how a slightly curved formation in a short street ' and in the contour of a line of houses may prove very much more effective than the more usual straight scheme, and he also demonstrated very clearly how an irregular formation may mar a city both from a spectacular and from a traffic point of view, “What makes for utility makes for beauty,” he remarked. He spoke particularly strongly against the direct intersection of streets, which he proved conclusively by pictures on the

screen, was a very great menace to the safety of ning, he averred, was that where several roads meet vehicles. One of the guiding rules of town-plan-at one place, a traffic space should be provided round the intersection, and all traffic should be compelled to go round that space. In fact, all such intersecting roads should have “closed views.” He showed instances where roads directly intersecting had no fewer than hundreds of collision points, and he emphasised very particularly the need for the abolition of such intersections. MONOTONY IN REGULARITY.

In dealing with the monotonous regularity of the rectangular streets and rows of dreary, commonplace houses which are now so common, the lecturer introduced a view of a street in Coventry, running for miles, with house after house almost on the same pattern, attached to one another, with the streets as the only playground for the children, and then contrasted this view with an exquisite picture of the Vicar’s Close at Wells, where the cottages in the short street leading from the cathedral to the chapel were embowered amid roses, each with its bit of garden. He dwelt on the dangers of collisions at the corners of the hideous rectangular town streets, which were such a feature of the town planners’ art of bygone years, and even at the present time. They ignored hills and rivers, and with a rule and a square drew blocks of monotonous regularity. He then instanced the planning of Lyttelton, and said had it been laid out aright it would have been a perfect and beautiful town. But the surveyor had made roads over cliffs and tracks which were absolutely inaccessible, while houses were flung in straight lines, obscuring the view for others. Even in Cashmere there was a road running over a quarry cliff sixty feet high. He then threw on the screen pictures of garden cities as they should be, and his view of places of this nature were exquisite. The roads followed the contour of the ground. There were corners set apart for beauty spots and vistas down which one watched the traffic of the street winding in and out among avenues, gardens and greenery of every description. He illustrated Falling Park, near Wolverhampton, and a garden city at Hampstead, London, and then contrasted it with views of Christchurch streets and other places. He stated that the city should be limited, and that there should be garden suburbs connected by tramway or railway, set a distance away among parks and gardens. People had stated that the cost of these garden cities was too great. The cost, indeed, was less for one of them than in the case of a square planned town.

The course of lectures was remarked by growing public interest, and Mr. Hurst Seagar is to be congratulated upon the success of his effort to popularise the subject of Town Planning.

An architect should live as little in cities as a painter. Send him to our hills, and let him study there what nature understands by a buttress, and what by a dome. — Buskin.