LINCOLN ROAD TRAM ROUTE

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26264, 8 November 1950, Page 3

LINCOLN ROAD TRAM ROUTE

SUGGESTED USE OF HAGLEY AVENUE

PROPOSAL BEFORE CITY COUNCIL A proposal that the route of the Lincoln road tram be changed from Colombo street and Moorhouse avenue to Oxford terrace and Hagley avenue, made by the Tramway Board to a conference between the board and the traffic committee of the City Council, was referred by the council last evening to the incoming council, for further consultation with the board. During the discussion on the proposal, the chairman of the committee (Cr. C. D. W. L. Sheppard) and other councillors expressed their objection to a statement they said the general manager of the board (Mr J. F. Fardell) had made at the conference, to the effect that the board could request an Order-in-Council if the City Council did not agree to the proposal. The reason given for the change of route was that the tracks in Moorhouse avenue from Colombo street to Lincoln road were in poor condition and would require the sum o. £49,000 to repair or replace, against the cost of the plan for Hagley avenue estimated at £lO,OOO, the report stated. It would be remembered that the tramline along Hagley avenue ran on the western side of the road and close to the footpath.

Loop in Hagley Avenue The board's proposal was to place a loop in Hagley avenue into the footpath on the western side near Selwyn street, but this suggestion was not favourably received by the council’s representatives who pointed out that* additional outward trams on this route were not desirable from a traffic viewpoint, said the report. It had been proposed that a cycle track be constructed along the outer edge of the footpath to make available the maximum amount of roadway for motor vehicles.

“It was pointed out by the genera) manager that, should the council not agree to this suggestion, the board could apply for an Order-in-Council authorising the laying of the loop into the roadway. Also it was intended that the Spreydon trams would then follow the Riccarton route, Oxford terrace, Lichfield street, Colombo street. Cathedral square, and outwards via Worcester street and Oxford terrace, and the St. Albans trams, instead of continuing to Spreydon, would terminate at Moorhouse avenue.

“In order to make this change it appeared to the committee that the one-man trams on the St. Albans run must be replaced or a balloon installed at Moorhouse avenue.

“The plan also provides for a double track for a short distance in Hagley avenue immediately south of Tuam street.

"The chairman of the board stated that the scheme was a temporary one for the puropse of making the best use of the existing tracks and that at a future date the route would be converted to buses and at this stage the re-routing of many of the runs would receive consideration.

“At the time of the meeting the board’s representatives were unable to make known the proposals for the replacing of trams with buses as the board’s future policy had not been placed before its members for approval.

“The council’s representatives were also unable to agree to the laying of a loop on to the roadway on the east of the existing tracks and the duplication of tracks at the Tuam street intersection because (a) the trams travel outwards on the wrong side of the road; (b) outward trams entering the loops would do so in the face of oncoming traffic from the south; <c>/ a loop at the hospital corner would add to the congestion at this intersection. “As the chairman of,the board was unable to give the date of the conversion to buses of the Spreydon line, it was ’decided to hold over the matter until the board’s policy was made known, the chairman advising that it would be given to the council officially. “The general manager of the board now writes asking for the council’s decision on this matter and advises that the conversion of the Sumner and New Brighton routes to trolley-bus operation is to be the first stage of the programme; thereafter the priority of conversion will be determined by track condition.

“Regarding the Lincpln road route, he states that, with the exception of the Moorhouse avenue portion, the remaning track line is such that it will be one of the last routes to be converted. “As the committee views with concern the use of Hagley avenue as a regular route for trams, it is recommended that the request to install a loop on to the footpath in Hagley avenue be declined and the council lodge an objection with the Minister of Works to the issuing of an Order-in-Council authorising the laying of a loop on the east side of the existing lines in Hagley avenue, and to the duplicating of lines at the intersections of Hagley avenue and Lichfield street and at Hagley avenue and Moorhouse avenue.

“Bombshell” Dropped Cr. Sheppard said the committee recommended that the council should not consent to the scheme. A bombshell had been dropped on the conference by the general manager’s statement.

“We were politely, or impolitely, told that no matter what the council thought or did. the Tramway Board could get an Order-in-Council to get what it wanted,” Cr. Sheppard said. “We must lodge now our protest with the department to protect the citizens of Christchurch.”

The only way out of the Tramway Board’s difficulties was amalgamation with the City Council, said Cr. G. Manning. He said there had been no need for Cr. Sheppard to introduce the statement made by Mr Fardell in open council meeting. If the council opposed the scheme, there would be no bad feeling on the Tramway Board, and the board would accept it. The traffic .department was very concerned about the difficulties of the proposed route, said Cr. W. J. Cowles. If the Moorhouse avenue line was in a dilapidated condition, it was time the route was converted to buses, instead of more trams being put on Hagley avenue. The Mayor (Sir Ernest Andrews) asked councillors who are members of the board if the council would be given an assurance that the board would not apply inr an Order-in-Council without the consent of the council. Mr W. S. Mac Gibbon said the statement attributed to Mr Fardell might have been marie in a jocular manner. The suggestion had never been before the board.

“I do not think it is playing cricket to criticise an executive officer of another local authority in open meeting,” said Cr. J. E. Tait. Cr. T. H. Butterfield said Mr Fardell was the best general manager Christchurch had had.

With the Mayor and Cr. Sheppard, he had served on the Metropolitan Licensing Authority, Cr. Butterfield said. They would agree that they had never found Mr Fardell inaccurate in any way. Cr. Sheppard said that if the council received the board’s assurance that it would not seek an Order-in-Coun-cil, it would be accepted. At the conferenced the threat had been made— A councillor: Threat? Cr. Sheppard: In my opinion, it was a decided threat,, and I am not alone in that opinion. He was supported by the chairman and vice-chairman of the board, and not one of the three denied that it was the policy of the board.

Cr. Sheppard said the criticism of his reference to Mr Fardell was a side issue.

Cr. Manning said that the question of applying for an Order-in-Council had not been discussed by the board. Two Labour and one Citizens’ board members, who were present as councillors, had given an assurance that the board would not seek an order.

The council then agreed that the proposal be referred to the incoming, council for further discussion with the board. . I