That changed last week when Dunedin man Steve Macknight took it upon himself to — as he sees it — improve the outlook of Queens Gardens by planting 58 trees around its perimeter.
He did so with the intention of screening the area from the busy traffic which flows on all sides of the gardens.
‘‘I didn't sort of have full approval as such, but I just thought it . . . was so minor that nobody was too concerned about it,’’ Mr Macknight told the ODT.
That is just where Mr Macknight is flat out wrong because, as the ODT mailbag and social media feeds have demonstrated, people are indeed very concerned about it.
For every person delighted at native trees taking root at the central city landmark, there is a person furious at their unauthorised encroachment on a beloved space.
Far from being an innocuous botanical bonus for Dunedin, the illicit plantings have deeply divided opinion and actively distressed many.
Paramount of the naysayers’ objections is the new trees’ proximity to the cenotaph, and they have a point.
The trees which surround the gardens at present were quite deliberately placed there as memorials to mark VJ Day, VE Day, and the battles of Cassino, El Alamein, and the Atlantic.
The other plantings in Queens Gardens are in keeping with the existing trees, creating a formal memorial space.
The design of Queens Gardens as an open area dates back a century or more and was entirely intentional, so passersby from any direction would have an unobstructed view of the cenotaph.
The screening which Mr Macknight claimed as the intention for his covert planting work would actually be entirely contrary to the plans of the people who decided in the 1920s that this area of the central city was where Dunedin’s World War 1 memorial should be built.
The trees Mr Macknight has planted, New Zealand broadleaf (kapuka) grow to about 10-15m tall.
If they are left in situ the unasked-for trees will eventually blanket the Cenotaph from sight unless regularly trimmed back.
They have a twisted, gnarled trunk and have the potential to be an ugly eyesore within a few years unless already busy Dunedin City Council gardens staff tend to them — which they should not have to do.
Mr Macknight’s gesture, while generous and no doubt well-intentioned, was ill-conceived.
He had previously encouraged the council to do extra planting work of its own at the gardens, urgings which it had resisted until now — and for good reason.
Despite his protestation that what he was doing was a very small thing, it is actually an undertaking which could profoundly alter the look and purpose of a place of sacred memory and ceremony.
While the Returned Services Association is maintaining a diplomatic silence ahead of a meeting with Mr Macknight and the council, they would be entirely within their rights to be furious about this exercise in imprudent philanthropic planting.
Broadleaf favours exposed coastal areas, landscapes which abound in Dunedin’s vicinity.
Mr Macknight should dust off his shovel and find suitable seaside reserve land which would be augmented by the addition of kapuka to the area.
