Master Traffic Plan Planner Welcomes Interest Of Group

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30058, 16 February 1963, Page 10

Master Traffic Plan Planner Welcomes Interest Of Group

(By C. B. MILLAR, Director. Christchurch Regional Planning Authority]

tin this article Mr Millar comments briefly on the recent series of articles on the Christchurch master transportation plan contributed by the City Planning Study Group] On my recent arrival in this country I recall stating, through the press, that while there might be several points of view there could be only one plan, but if Ahere was a healthy interest tn the work of a planning authority and if the people were wholeheartedly behind the scheme amazing results could be achieved. My hopes in this direction are high in respect of the master transportation plan, both from the opportunities afforded by the newspapers and from the response of individuate and groups in letters to the authority and letters and articles to the press Since almost all, ’ in spite of criticisms, alternative suggestions, or recommendations for future stages, have applauded the outline master transportation plan, tt augurs well for its future. While I must now accept the responsibility for it. the credit must naturally go to my predecessor. Miss Northcroft, and the team of experts, traffic engineers, planners, and technical representatives of professions, boards, and authorities No little credit for future success should go. I feel, to the City Planning Study Group for the work both by individuate and as a team which has culminated in Tiday’s sketch proposals Although I understand this group was formed only to study the master transportation plan. I sincerely hope that it continues and expands membership so that we may have the nucleus of a town-planning association of the kind which has proved invaluable to planning in the United Kingdom. The sketch plan and report go a stage further than outline and propose the precinct development—a type of development for which the master transportation plan allows freedom. No doubt the group, who are obviously well-read in planning, are well aware of the planner’s desires in this direction.

although I would suggest caution in too free a use of the principle, bearing in mind both the limited walking distances of older people and mothers with toddlers, and the time-saving needs of industry and commerce. The sketch plan shows a broadminded approach not favouring any one section of the community, and a boldness in cutting off streets which perhaps reflects a timidity in the master transportation plan in this respect. As the group have commended the master transportation plan, their sketch naturally varies little in general principles. The main variaation, I would say, is the transfer of north and east motorways to the city belts. Bealey avenue and Fitzgerald avenue. Re-examining the research figures, I doubt the capacity <f the belt roads to take all the anticipated •’jump" traffic together with the inner suburb traffic. The group's assumption that these roads can cope is based on what is perhaps a misunderstanding where it stated, "Evidence shows that up to onethird of all traffic in the centra] area is through traffic." The master transportation plan stated that, of the total externa] traffic, one-third is bound for the city centre. Unfortunately, two-thirds of the inner suburbs traffic is also bound for the city centre. In this case. I am sorry if the plan document did not make this sufficiently clear and that so much of the group's work in this aspect has been lost However, the sketch has shown much other work in connexion with one-way systems and collecto. roads which could well be valuable 1 am unable, unfortunately, in the absence of sufficient detail showing such matters as right-hand movement, parking centres, or bus routes, to fully evaluate these proposals. I must commend the group members in their civic pride and sacrifice of time. I hope they may be persuaded to continue in future planning studies for which I would be very willing to assist with information.