TRAFFIC IN CATHEDRAL SQUARE

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27097, 21 July 1953, Page 10

TRAFFIC IN CATHEDRAL SQUARE

Many Schemes Before City

Council

OUTSIDE BUS STATIONS AMONG PROPOSALS Plans for future traffic in Cathedral square were discussed for two hours and 20 minutes by .the City Council at a special meeting last evening. Further consideration was deferred until the next meeting of the council. “I don’t think we should carry any resolution in the meantime,” said the Mayor (Mr R. M. Macfarlane, M.P.) after representations had been received from several bodies and individuals. “We can give consideration to the schemes between now and the next meeting. That is the best way of dealing with the question. We have been given a tremendous amount of information tonight.”

Some people thought that the control of traffic in the Square was an easy matter but it was not, said the Mayor. He had never said that bus traffic should be out of the Square, but he felt that with the change to buses some of the transport could possibly to taken away from the Square. “With the situation that will confront us in this city in the future, we have a responsibility to look not only to the present, but to the future, otherwise our time and generation of councillors will be looked upon as having had a very narrow view on traffic,” said the Mayor.

Although the Transport Board might i have been held up in some procedures, it had been granted practically everything sought from the Metropolitan* Licensing Authority, said the Mayor.' The bus points granted were tem- ■ porary. Expressing the appreciation of the i council to all who had made representations, the Mayor said that no doubt action would be taken in the near future. “Past history and controversies show that the sanctity of the Square is as great as that of the Cathedral itself and the board, therefore, approaches the subject with trepidation,” said a written statement by Mr J. F. Fardell, general manager of the Christchurch Transport Board. The Square was the focal point of the city and it was a natural corollary that public transport should centre there. Public transport had a greater claim to the use of the Square than motorists had for parking. The only available alternative streets for the board to use were Oxford terrace and Madras street, the latter 750 yards away from the Square, an absurdity for making connexions. Gloucester, Hereford and Cashel streets carried a greater volume of traffic than the Square and if the board was forced to use them congestion would be seriously increased to the detriment of all traffic. The board proposed that the flow of traffic in the Square be facilitated by its plan for bus services to stop at loading zones at certain corners m the Square, the north kerb outside Warner’s Hotel in the Warner’s hotel-Press building corner, a loading zone in front of the Godley Plot and the pavement fronting the Cathedral. X. x. Peak Traffic It had been said that a bus station would satisfactorily solve the problem. No suitable central position was available at anything but prohibitive cost, said Mr Fardell. The station would have to be large enough to accommodate all services and to give manoeuvring room. The board had no * knowledge of any such station being used for main through urban services, with only a three-minute maxirmim' wait at the central stop. The building of the station would be very expensive and to erect one for urban services was considered a waste of -public money. Except for the most important lunch peak, the number of buses in the Square at any one time was small. Tbe maximum number at the peak would be 23. The board seen no reason to change its decision to agree to the ; plan submitted by the Crty Council said the chairman (Mr F. L. Brandt). The Mayor: Do you really think the suggestion has been made that there should be a bus station for all services? Mr Fardell: Yes. Replying to Cr. M. B. Howard, M.P., Mr Fardell said the present depot in the Square was unsuitable for a station. It was small and difficult of egress. re P lied to Cr. J. E. Tait that the ideal distance of a bus station from the Square would be no further than a quarter of a mile. He would have to know the exact loca- • tion before he could say whether it was satisfactory. .. To „ c >? J- L- Hay. Mr Fardell «aid the Cathedral Chapter had made no representations to the board, which had to keep its stops at either end of the Cathedral itself. Does the board feel the necessity for increasing the shelters in the asked Cr.. L. G. Amos. Mr Fardell: It depends entirely on the good wishes of the City Council, the council refused to allow us to erect one in Victoria square, and I presume it would refuse to allow us to put one in the Square. Asked by the Mayor if he thought the Square would provide accommodation for buses to cope with future expansion of the city’s population in 10 years, Mr Fardell replied; “Yes.*’ Views of Church Jrie standing committee of the Christchurch Diocese, the Cathedral Chapter and the Church Propertv Trustees submitted their view that bus stops should not be permitted on the roadway along the western boundary of the Cathedral site. They advocated serious consideration being given to the establishment of a depot or depots near the centre of the city as bus terminals: until the depots were acquired, buses should be rerouted along adjacent streets. It would be most unfortunate, they said, if passenger shelters were ever placed in front of the Cathedral. The Bishop of Christchurch (the Rt. Rev. A. K. Warren) said he heartily supported the submissions of the three church bodies. He was concerned that women and children Mad to wait for transport without shelter. The growth of the city would be considerable. Shelters would be out of keeping with the formation of the city by being placed along the front of the Cathedral. The question of a bus station or terminal was a matter for experts. For 100 years, there had been co-operation between the Church and the civic authorities and it was only because of the fear that a wrong would be done that the church made its submissions. Cathedral square was an entire reserve in the view of those who founded the city, as was proved by a plan attached to a deed of 1851 declaring the land reserved for ecclesiastical and educational purposes. The church and its influence were placed in the centre of the city. Gradually, the boundary had been pushed back further towards the Cathedral “And now we are raising our voices to preserve something of great beauty and dignity and of inestimable value to the future,” said Bishop Warren. "This preservation does not mean depriving people of the adequate bus services they need. The bus stations should be so placed that people who have to wait will have shelter.” The Dean of Christchurch (the Very Rev. Martin Sullivan) said it was indisputable that the plan to make a roadway through the Square the main stopping place for buses would detract very greatly from the character of the heart of the city. “We are confident it would be regretted not only by members of the Anglican community but by many other people outside it who value the beauty and dignity of the Cathedral and the Square and what that beauty and dignity mean to the city.”

I Questioned by Cr. C. D. W. L. Sheppard, Mr E. C. Champion (Chanicellor of the diocese) said the church i bodies did not feel competent to express an opinion on the various plans jfor the Square. | Cr. M. McLean: Have you given any : thought to removing buses from in front of the Cathedral?

Mr Champion said the only suggestion was to remove the buses from the Square. The church bodies did not know whether that was practicable.

Cr. W. P. Glue said he took it that the objection of the bodies was to buses in front of the Cathedral footpath. Was there any objection to buses being some distance away? Mr Champion said he could not commit the bodies, but bus places by a zone nearer the Godley Plot appeared to have some merit.

Cr. Hay said the Square had always been used as a public thoroughfare. “The founders of the city would not have contemplated the density of traffic today,’’ said Mr Champion. The Mayor: Don’t you agree that some people today are not contemplating density of the traffic of the future? Mr Champion: I would say so. Cr. L. G. Amos objected to the cross-examination to which the church representatives were being submitted. He did not think it was proper. The Mayor: I don’t think they mind. All who made submissions knew they would be questioned. Cr. J. Mathison, M.P., asked if the principal objection was to the bus stops outside the Cathedral and not to those on the further side of the roadway. Mr Champion: Yes. The concern is that the buses and shelters will increase in the future.

Use as Terminal Opposed Entire disagreement with Cathedral square being used as a bus terminal was expressed by the Automobile Association (Canterbury), which favoured a gyratory system for the movement of buses in and out of the Square. The buses should be permitted to stop only to discharge passengers, passengers to be embarked at points reasonably adjacent to the Square. Central bus terminals should be created outside of the Square immediately to avoid the increased traffic congestion inevitably following increasing population trends. Mr W. R. Carey said the views expressed were purely on behalf of motorists. What of the future? The Automobile Association felt that whatever- the civic administrators did in the change-over to bus transport they would be faced with congestion of traffic flowing in and round the Square. Sites suggested for departure of buses were within a quarter of a mile of the Square. Victoria street to the bridge could be widened half a chain on either side, and Colombo street could also be widened. Worcester street could also be widened to a two £*? am road through Latimer square. The only purchase in the Automobile Association scheme was of the old buildings opposite the M.E.D. in Manchester and Armagh streets. The authorities should look to the day when the Square would be unable to take the increased traffic. The habit ?hne ieetin ’ ? in the s quare Was one of

Mr G. Falck said the Automobile Association visualised buses passing through the Square but not picking up passengers. Gyratory traffic in the Square was suggested. pie Mayor: What would be the reactions of your members if parking m c ertain areas was prohibited? Mr Carey: We would not oppose it ii it was in the best interests of all concerned: but we would hope that th ® ra would be parking close in, but not for long. The Mayor: If it was prohibited in the centre you would have no objections? Mr Carey: No. To Cr. McLean. Mr Carey said he believed that a thoroughfare for buses should be provided between the Cathedral and the Godley Plot. . Cr -, Baldwin: Has the Automobile Association ever asked the Transport ®°s*3* *5 f °U°w the gyratory system in the Square? Mr Carey: Yes—in 1944. Garden Plots Suggested Ihe scheme of Mr G. A. Hart f6r garden plots between the Cathedral and the Godley Plot was recommended by the advisory committee on civic beautification as a basis of discussion. The committee was opposed to traffic in front of the Cathedral. The Christchurch Beautifying Association also supported Mr Hart’s scheme. The essence of Mr Hart’s plan was that the traffic would be fully gyratory, said Mr R. S. D. Harman, for the advisory committee. It would make the Square safer for all. The broad path in front of the Cathedral could be used by cars on occasions without interrupting the normal traffic. No space would be lost where gyratory traffic flowed. The Square would be given character and dignity. Cr. Hay said it was obvious that bus drivers had difficulty in negotiating the road near ‘The Press” building. The committee proposed easing the corners. Would that meet the drivers’ objection? Mr Harman said he had never seen any form of congestion at the Warner’s Hotel corner.

Mr H. Tillman said the Beautifying Association looked at Mr Hart’s scheme as a garden in a garden city, adding dignity to the Cathedral and the Square. The garden would be restful to the eye and the mind. Mr Hart said the Square should be laid out functionally for traffic and for the public to congregate. Under his scheme traffic would gyrate. Three more zones were proposed. The haphazard crossing of the Square would be obviated by properly marked crossings from the Godley Plot to the zones. The present meanderings of the buses made the Square dangerous as a place in which people should congregate. Space for Taxis 'Die Square was the ideal hub for the city’s transport system, submitted the Canterbury Taxi Proprietors’ Association. The minimum requirements in the public interest would be space for 15 taxis. Through traffic in front of the Cathedral should be prohibited. The association supported the Transport Board’s plan as being the best suggested to date, said Mr P. C. Mangos. It suggested that the board should

load from the kerb and not from zones. A full gyratory system would ease the congestion at the bottlenecks. No buses should be allowed outside the Cathedral, as it did not make a good impression on visitors. The Mayor said that if buses were stopped from parking outside the Cathedral they would have to be placed elsewhere in the Square. Mr Mangos said space should be obtained by abolishing the parking areas.

Cr. Sheppard: Are you quite satisfied. with the present taxi arrangements in the Square? Mr Mangos: Yes. The zones are all right for buses up to a point, but in the future you may have to have kerb parking. To Cr. McLean, Mr Mangos said the association did not favour cruising taxis. Christchurch was not London.

Bus Firm’s Recommendations Contending that it was inescapable that bus traffic had to enter the central city area, Midland Motorways Services. Ltd., submitted that the Square offered the required space to a degree greatly in excess of that available- in any of the adjacent streets, and loading space clear of the traffic flow. While it sympathised with those who would like to see the Square converted into a peaceful haven, the company did not consider that fully practicable. The use of such streets as Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Manchester, and Armagh streets, as main arrival and departure points must lead to greater congestion than in the Square, because vehicles could not pull out of the traffic lanes to stop. Last Wednesday, at 11 a.m., 77 vehicles, excluding taxis, were parked in the Square. The longitudinal space normally required for cars to carry the equivalent of one seated bus load was 17 times that of a bus. Buses made the most economical use of street space at the five peak periods daily.

Recommendations of Midland Motors were that provision be made for bus loading and discharging at points clear of traffic lanes in the Squ'are; that if traffic in the Square was congested, the use of cars be first considered; that traffic safety zones be resited where necessary; that when the tramlines were removed north and south traffic be permitted in front of the Cathedral to reduce the time and distance required to clear the Square; and that the advisability of providing a special lane for traffic to and from the Cathedral be considered.

A scheme for control of traffic in the Square was submitted by Mr W. Rogers. He said he was concerned for the elderly passengers and children if bus stations were away from the Square. As a tramway worker for 16 years, he believed that the Square should be a junction and not a terminus for buses and trams. In the planning of the Square, the pedestrian must not be forgotten. Pedestrians would have to cj oss the lines' of traffic twice under some of the plans when passing through the Square. Cr. Baldwin explained his plan as maintaining the gyratory system and controlling traffic. It provided for buses outside the Cathedral, but they could be moved further westward. Only three bus routes would travel along Colombo street north. All the buses would .be provided for at the zones, except’for three buses in Worcester street.

Messrs C. J. Manhire and S. G. Turner advocated bus stations away from the Square, the former suggesting the acquisition of additional land near the present depot at the rear of the National Mortgage building and the latter either Amuri Motors building or the M.E.D. property at the corner of Gloucester and Manchester streets. City Engineer’s Plans Two plans were explained by the City Engineer (Mr E. Somers). The first was based on ideas when the conversion to buses was begun. It provided for north-bound traffic to go through the middle of the Square and the extension by wings of the Godley Plot to the north and south to give more space for pedestrians. The roadway in front of the Cathedral was to be widened to give two 40ft carriageways, with a six-feet zone between them. Bus stops were provided along the front of the Cathedral and Godley Plot and also around the Square, as at present. Only left-hand turns were allowed at Worcester street, and no right-hand turns were allowed at Colombo street.

The second plan provided for a central island in front of the .Cathedral, leaving a 32ft carriageway to be used only by south-bound traffic. A 40it roadway on the site of the present tram lines would be used by north and south buses. The two disadvantages of the second plan were that it brought buses into the central loop, causing more collision points, and allowed for different routes for buses and other vehicles. The danger was more apparent than real, said Mr Somers.