Five Bodies Seek Underpass Or Flyover

Press, Volume C, Issue 29702, 21 December 1961, Page 17

Five Bodies Seek Underpass Or Flyover

A meeting of representatives of the Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association, the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce, the New Zealand Road Transport-Alliance, the Automobile Association (Canterbury), and the Christchurch Suburban Carriers’ Association yesterday decided to press for an underpass or flyover through the junction of Moorhouse avenue and Colombo street. The meeting also decided to press for an additional overbridge giving access to the south across the railway line either at Orbell or Montreal streets, with separate road access by either underpass or flvover, through the junction so formed.

Those present at the meeting had earlier formed a deputation to the Minister of Railways <Mr McAlpine) asking that the Durham street level crossing be reopened. Yesterday, they formally received a letter from Mr McAlpine saying that the crossing would not be reopened. -The Minister's decision is final as, under the Railways Act no further appeal can be made legally,” said the president of the Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association i Mr R. H. Stewart), who presided at the meeting. He said it was a great pity that Mr McAlpine had not withheld his decision until new problems created at the Colombo street overbridge, such as traffic density, had been investigated. •'lt is now essential that the City Council should ensure that adequate traffic supervision is maintained at the Colombo street overbridge. as thousands of additional vehicles will be passing through there." Mr Stewart said. He said the organisations represented at the meeting should see that the Regional Planner (Miss N. Northcroft) addressed them on the master transport plan her office was preparing. He was sure the plan would be enlightening

- and that it would overcome a some of the present traffic r congestion. ’ Mr A. H. Lee said that now t that the Durham street crossing was closed for good, - the City Council should press - for the construction of an s underpass at the Moorhouse - avenue end of the overbridge. This was part of the agrees ment between the council s and the Railways Departi ment oo the closing of the e Durham street crossing. The r council should also press for 1 a second overbridge at - Montreal street or Orbell street to give better access r sou*h of the railway line, t Mr R. C. Neville, agreeing 1 with Mr Lee, said that Cr. A. e R. Guthrey. at the last meetin” of the No. 14 Roads DisI trict Council, had moved that the underpass for the i Colombo street overbridge be • made first priority in the c council’s list of works. This ‘ motion had been seconded by ; Mr F. W. Freeman. * “I am sure the City Coun- „ cil will be only too happy to

push hard for an underpass. The council is well aware that it will be for the benefit ot the city, and the council will not have to finance it, as the cost will be entirely on the National Roads Board because it is on a State highway Moorhouse avenue.” Mr Neville said. A member said that a flyover or underpass at the overbridge would not upset Miss Northcroft’s master plan.

Mr Neville: I think that this committee should push for this access, either flyover or underpass. In my experience, the council does not oust) hard for things unless there is considerable publicity about these » things. Mr McAlpine conceded it was needed. Mr Lee: I think that the question of a second overbridge, or third, counting the Waltham street bridge, should be pushed hard. We all know it takes years to get these things started. The committee decided to ask for early talks with the City Council on the question of better access to the south of the city over the railway line, and also to request Miss Northcroft to address representatives of all the bodies represented on the committee on the regional master transport plan.