“KEEP THE VIADUCT CLOSED”

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVI, Issue 19155, 11 April 1932, Page 6

“KEEP THE VIADUCT CLOSED”

VIEWS OF MOTORIST, TRADESMEN AND GENERAL PUBLIC. STRONG SUPPORT OF MAYOR’S PROPOSAL. “Not a single argument outside the claim of a few thoughtless motorists and one or two selfish tradesmen, can be adduced in favour of the re-opening of the Bay Viaduct for general traffic,” declared a visiting motorist on Saturday, on being invited by a representative of “The Timaru Herald” to comment on the hostile attitude of several members of the Borough Council to the Mayor’s proposal to close the Viaduct roadway against all but pedestrian traffic.

“If any Councillor or any motorist is not convinced that the stand taken by the Mayor and his supporting Councillors is sound,” continued our visitor,

“I would invite them to draw a diagram of the street intersections, into which the reopening of the Bay Viaduct would provide another highway through which another • stream of traffic would add another dangerous factor in a traffic death trap, to pedestrians as well as motorists.” It was pointed out that the intersection is one of the most dangerous in the South Island, without having to contend with another disturbing factor, which might shoot out from the Bay almost without warning. The unusual angles of the converging streets make the control of traffic most difficult because each stream of traffic has to cut across other streams, but the very suggestion that another stream could be added without increasing the traffic risks, is to reveal an imperfect appreciation of existing dangers, particularly in view of the grade of the roadway from the Bay making for more difficult driving than would a level roadway. Moreover, the acceleration of speed necessary to take the hill on the south side, adds to the difficulties of control, while the traffic that swings down Wai-iti Road is another disturbing factor, and so is the practice of the municipal buses, in making a stopping place close to the Bay Viaduct, especially as the presence of a big bus and sometimes two, further restricts the view of the outlet of the Bay Viaduct. Then there is the north-bound traffic coming down Evans Street, which would find another dangerous factor being introduced to an already all too dangerous converging point of motor and pedestrian traffic, if motor traffic were allowed to use the Bay Viaduct.

“My advice to the Timaru Borough Council as the body responsible for the safety of its streets,” added the visiting motorist, “is to keep the Bay Viaduct closed, otherwise the traffic at such a dangerous intersection will very frequently become so seriously confused. that only the constant presence of a traffic inspector will make the crossing anything but a death trap, alike for motorists and pedestrians. Even under the present arrangements, it must be something of a nightmare to women and children who cross the intersections going in and out of the Bay, as the Viaduct is the only possible entry into the Bay for the great majority.” Facilities for Tradesmen.

Timaru tradesmen of long-standing, who have business on the Bay, in the season and out of season, expressed amazement at the failure of Councillor Chittick and Councillor Kennedy to put the Whole truth before the citizens. The strongest objection was taken to Councillor Chittock’s statement that “he knew of one tradesman who had been unable to make his business payon account of the extra petrol consumed in making the round trip.” “It would be interesting,” said one tradesman, “if Councillor Chittock would disclose the name of that tradesman, because it would seem that neither Councillor Chittock nor the tradesman Knows all about the conditions prevailing.” It was asked why Councillor Crittock had not told the Council that ample facilities, consuming less petrol than by way of the Viaduct, are provided for tradesmen to enter the Bay from the south end up to 9.30 every morning, and the inspector has been most reasonable in handling this question. If Councillor Chittock had had sufficient interest in his tradesman, he would have advised him to get a move on in the ’ early morning, and use the south entrance to supply his customers on the Bay, and not risk running into the Bankruptcy Court by taking the round trip, while all the time, he could run into the Bay before 9.30 in the morning, do all the business there is to be done there in the off season in five minutes, and run off again either by the south or north-end entrances, without having to give a moment’s thought as to whether the Viaduct was closed or open.

Amazement was expressed by motor - sists and tradesmen at the attitude of the Deputy-Mayor, who had said that

“a bogey is being made of the matter.” It was claimed that Councillor Kennedy had not taken very much notice of the traffic dangers, otherwise he would not have made such a statement. As to his protest against what he termed “the inconvenience of going right round Te Weka Street,” it was pointed out by one tradesman, that Councillor Kennedy either did not know of the facilities already provided for tradesmen to serve their customers on the Bay, or he had purposely refrained from putting the whole question before the Council in its true light. “In any case,” conjectured another tradesman, “how many tradesmen have business on the Bay at all during the off season? I think I could number them on the fingers of one hand. As a matter of fact, there is no inconvenience under the existing arrangements to wide-awake tradesmen, who can surely transact all their business on the Bay before 9.30 a.m. by a very much more convenient route (and one that consumes less petrol), than that offered through the Viaduct, so surely this ought to meet Councillor Crittock’s opposition.” General Support. North-enders who daily use the intersections of the streets at the Viaduct, are strongly in favour of keeping the Bay Viaduct closed all the year round; indeed, general endorsement is given the statement that a positive death trap exists there, both for motorists and pedestrians, particularly women and children. It is pointed out, too, that nearly all the support of re-opening the Viaduct to motor traffic came from Councillors living in the south end of the town. “I am rather afraid,” said one prominent resident of the North End, “that the South-enders on the Council do not fully realise the dangers that already exist, particularly to pedestrian traffic bound for the Bay, and this danger would be immensely increased if motor traffic were permitted to come out of the Bay at all hours through the Viaduct. The Council has provided, at considerablue expense, an excellent entrance at the north end of the Bay, which diverts the motor traffic joining the main highway to a spot where there is a minimum of traffic and a minimum of danger. To talk of adding another traffic entrance info an already dangerous intersection, does not say much for the Councillors supporting such a proposal. Already the death roll has been sufficiently large

to impress most observant people, and it is difficult to conceive of a responsible Council doing anything that would add considerably to the dangers already existing.” “I hoDe the Council will, on further consideration, give unanimous support to the Mayor’s proposal,” said another North-ender, who traverses the street intersection at the Bay Viaduct almost daily. ‘‘Anyone having experience of that difficult point, will realise that the intersection contains sufficient dangers without adding another by permitting tradesmen and others to use the Viaduct.” “Now that motorists and pedestrians have become accustomed to the Viaduct being closed,” said a prominent business man, who is almost a motorist, “no reasonable argument can be put forward in support of the Councillors who have offered opposition to the Mayor’s proposal to continue the existing arrangement. Even if one or two tradesmen were inconvenienced (and I claim they are not), that in itself would not justify the City Fathers in adding to the risks now only too plentiful at the crossing, and taking upon themselves the responsibilities of having opened the way for another line of traffic to enter the intersection, into which streets set at particularly dangerous angles, pour an ever-increasing volume oi motor traffic, including two municipal bus services (which, in the busy hours of the way, maintain a fifteen minutes timetable in and out); as well as the numerous privately-owned motor services which make Timaru the centre of their operations.”