Car-park decision today

Press, 23 May 1977, Page 1

Car-park decision today

By

STAN DARLING

The controversial Bridge of Remembrance car-park proposal goes before the Christchurch City Council again this evening after another month of opposing sides being unable to convince each other that their cause is right.

Central Christchurch retailers are firm in their contention that opponents of a car park in the triangle near the bridge are seeking extra open space that is neither needed nor feasible at the busy corner.

Opponents of a plan for a combination of 36 parking spaces and landscaping in the vacant triangle of land say just the opposite. They say that the businessmen have not proved their need for the more expensive parking proposal. Debate up to now indicates that it will be a close vote. At last month’s council meeting, a narrow decision against the carpark plan was expected. But the proposal was referred back to a committee at the last minute. Whatever the outcome, it will not reflect a straight party-line vote. The leader of the Labour Party minority (Sir Robert Macfarlane) has indicated on several occasions that he has little sympathy for the landscaping-only argument.

The Deputy Mayor and chairman of the parks and recreation committee (Cr P. J. R. Skellerup) has come down staunchly on the side of open space and the Mayor (Mr H. G. Hay) has hinted that he might vote against the car-park.

Some critics of the landscaping-only proposal have tried to - brand its proponents as “antibusiness” but that label has not stuck. The only gauge of public opinion — a 4400signature petition against the car park, organised by the Values Party—has had its opinion-taking reliability questioned by car-park supporters, who say that,the true public interest will be served by catering to the majority of shoppers and the motoring public.

Petitioners said that the public did not object to the new Durham Street bridge taking part of the bank along the Avon River because it was believed that there would be compensation in the form of adjacent landscaping. They said that the council would be going back on its word if it accepted a car-park. At this evening’s meeting, Mr Hay will present a third plan. This one is from the Christchurch Civic Trust, which had it done by a Lincoln College

landscape architect. It calls for less pure landscaping but does not include parking.

The Cashel Street Businessmen’s Association plan would include 36 off-street carparks. Because some metered parking on the street would have to be removed, there would be a gain of some 25 short-term parks. Businessmen say that such parking areas are essential to the success of a proposed pedestrian mall, no matter how much space is available in nearby buildings. The Civic Trust plan has a concentration of trees at the corner where three streets come together. They would screen out traffic from the Bridge of Remembrance area, muffle traffic noise, and provide a place for informal sitting during good weather.

Between that and the bridge would be a kiosk and an area paved with tiles, perhaps with tables, chairs, and plants. A stone wall would shelter some seating from easterly winds.

The landscape architect, Mr M. J. Cole, suggested pedestrian traffic signals at the Oxford Terrace side of the new bridge so that people could continue walking along the river

bank. The signals would cause no delay to traffic if they were synchronised with signals at the major intersection, he said.

The recent two-day bus strikes have also thrown new light on the controversy, coming as they have on the busy shopping days of Thursday and Friday. Parking was permitted on bus stops, but much of it was longterm. There was space available in council car parks in spite of the sudden rush of traffic.

Local retailers said that their late-night shopping was not affected by the strikes, and one retailer said that he was busier than usual. Sales were not reported down in the central city because of lack of places to park. When he returned from his United States tour earlier this month, Mr Hay said that the city-centre parking policy was due for review. At present, the City Council bears the financial burden for offstreet parking facilities. In the outer suburbs, developers must provide the total expected parking requirements, or cash in lieu, when new buildings or extensions are constructed.