Cranmer Sq. road plan argued

Press, 3 May 1984, Page 9

Cranmer Sq. road plan argued

Restricting movement, and thus traffic volumes, in Armagh Street would reinforce its role as a local street, a Planning Tribunal hearing was told yesterday. Mr B. B. Hasell, a staff engineer in the traffic division of the works and planning department of the Christchurch City Council, was giving evidence for the council. The hearing, between the City Council and the Inner City Operation Neighbourhood, a group of residents, concerns proposed road widening around Cranmer Square. The council wants to round the southern end of the square, cutting in to three residential properties, to improve the flow of traffic. Traffic signals would be removed and Armagh Street, where it connects with Montreal Street, would be closed to through traffic so that motorists would have to join the north-bound traffic flow. A cycleway would be built so that cyclists could travel all of Armagh Street without having to detour. The Inner City Operation Neighbourhood (1.C.0.N.) group objects to the proposal and wants the designation lifted and alternatives considered. Mr Hasell said that the taking of residential land, involving the demolition of dwellings, must be weighed against an alignment which would avoid an incursion into the square. The improvement was required before the city’s population reached 330,000,

said Mr Hasell. This seemed likely by about 1990. Mr Hasell said that the average daily traffic on Montreal Street in November, 1982, was 10,504 vehicles, and this was significantly higher than in 1979. In 1983, the daily flow in November was 10,897 vehicles, an increase of 3.7 per cent in one year. Armagh Street had been designated as part of the city’s cycle network and the cycleway would solve a local accident hazard, he said. “It is to be expected that the lack of traffic signals at Armagh Street and the smoother alignment of the Montreal Street route should reduce traffic noise and provide improvements for residents in this vicinity.” Mr Hasell said that the use of the Montreal Street route by longer-distance trip-makers would have a beneficial effect on the central city environment. “By removing such trips from roads in the centre it has become possible to make such improvements as the closing of portions of Cathedral Square, Victoria Street, and the creation of the City Mall.” Alternatives had been considered, said Mr Hasell, but these would involve significantly increased incursion on to private property along Montreal Street. A one-way route could be diverted through the centre of the square to provide a uniformly straight Montreal Street. This realignment had been suggested by several objectors at a council hearing, said Mr Hasell.

“However, the layout of the square would be significantly changed and this has been seen as a major disadvantage by many objectors.” Counsel for the City Council, Mrs H. C. Hodgson, said that the original proposal had designated part of the square to be cut away. In excess of 350 objections and further cross objections had been received, most concerned with the council’s proposal to disturb a valued and historic part of the square, she said. Under the Christchurch City Reserves Empowering Act, 1971, the council cannot use any part of the square for a road, street or bridge. After hearing objections the council had deleted designations on the square and put forward the proposal for the southern end: “All of this in recognition of the special character the area has,” said Mrs Hodgson. The council had reduced the roadworks needed to an absolute minimum, she said. Mr M. B. Cox, appearing for 1.C.0.N., said that traffic had not increased by any significant amount in the 12 years since the Montreal Street one-way system was inaugurated. He listed several reasons why the group thought that the proposed changes should not take place. These included that the cost of compensation and realigning was not justified; the road was only congested between 4 p.m. and 5 p.m. each day, more children lived in the area than 10 years ago and slowing of traffic near recreational space was desirable; and not having

straight through traffic deterred heavy trucks and speeding. Montreal Street was a dangerous street with a high camber, and cars parked many feet from the curbside, said Mr Cox. No provision was made for cyclists. “Consequently, they are seen on either side and down the middle, and it is a miracle that not more have been knocked down.” Mr Cox gave three alternative proposals which the group thought would be

just as effective as the council’s proposal, would cost very little, and would keep the existing residential apartments intact. Mr Cox admitted that he was not qualified in traffic engineering and said that he did not know whether the person who had made the drawings for the three alternatives was qualified either. The tribunal, comprising Judge Skelton, Mr R. N. McLennan and Mrs N. J. Johnson, reserved its decision.