Traffic changes seen as ‘barely noticeable’

Press, 23 September 1983, Page 5

Traffic changes seen as ‘barely noticeable’

The future closing of Victoria Street to traffic through the Victoria Square redevelopment block would create nearby traffic changes, a Christchurch City Council planning hearing was told last evening but they would be barely noticeable more than a block away from the area.

In terms of affecting the inner city’s Residential 5A zone, such changes were probably incapable of measurement, said the City Planner, Mr W. T. Williams., The hearing considered two issues: the stopping of a legal street between Kilmore street and the vicinity of the Floral Clock, and confirming that part of Victoria Street as a commercial zone.

Both proposals drew 26 objections. The City Council wants to open up the northwest quadrant of the Victoria Square block for commercial development and

car-parking possibly incorporated in an international hotel project. South of the Avon River, where neither Victoria Street nor Oxford terrace are legal streets in the redevelopment block, a park closed to motor-vehicle traffic would be created. Design of that park will be subject to future management plan hearings. “Victoria Street south of the river is vested in the council as an estate, in fee simple as reserves for the purposes of lawns, ornamental gardens, and ornamental buildings,” said Mr Williams. It “could become the focal point of the riverside park system, and a handsome civic square containing about five acres of parkland free from traffic,” he quoted from a 1962 report by Professor Gordon Stevenson, a Perth town planner employed to select a Town Hall site.

Street stopping would conform to a 1967 inner-city pedestrian and landscape concept which had been incorporated in district schemes since that time.

“Many of the new pedestrian areas and green spaces which have been created were, in fact, previously public road which was stopped and redesigned,” said Mr Williams.

The need for car-parking in the Victoria Square area would not be ignored in the plans, since any future commercial development would include parking for both the Town Hall and the development.

Mr Williams noted that some objections were from business interests which thought that a street closing could mean some loss of patronage although the principal concern seemed to be back of parking. Others objected to the diversion of traffic into adjoining streets, and the effect of that diversion on nearby areas.

There was also the inconvenience of having to make a less direct trip to and from the city. Mr J. H. Roberts, a Chester Street West resident, said the proposed street closing had considerable personal significance to his family because their residence was too close to it.

The intrusion of more traffic into inner-city residential areas would be harmful, he said. Traffic could have subtle, complex, and destructive effects on residential life.

He questioned whether the street should be closed to provide tourist beds that would be surplus to the city’s needs. Mr D. E. Cottle, another Chester Street West resident, said that traffic would be diverted into and near an "already overstressed” residential area. Victoria Street had commercial activities along siost of its length, and

should be kept open. Many people preferred Victoria Square to remain as it was, he said.

Mr Williams said that present proposals had received full exposure to the plannning process since 1968, and could be said to be publicly endorsed. Over the years, he had heard strong objections to proposals that would have deviated roads through public reserves, such as parts of Hagley Park, Latimer Square, and Cranmer Square. This was a proposal “to take a road out of a park,” he said, “a park which should probably not have had a road there in the first place.” Many objections were effectively saying that the road should not be stopped because of the need to provide adequately for cars. “The contradiction in these attitudes demonstrates a lack of consistenty in the public attitude towards the types of planning matter which we are debating today,” he said. “The one common element in many objections seems to me to be resistance to change.” Traffic engineers said that the only local street in the RSA zone which was expected to carry additional traffic after the closing was Armagh Street, between Durham Street and Colombo Street.

Mr J. L. Robb, the Canterbury United Council’s regional planning engineer, said that his council supported the traffic diversion and complete road closing. It was consistent with regional scheme policies.

However, assurances were required on the adequate provision of parking in an area which would have increased commercial development.

' A decision on the streetstopping issue will be made ultimately by the Planning Tribunal. .4