TRAMWAY SHELTER.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10442, 23 April 1912, Page 1

TRAMWAY SHELTER.

PROPOSALS FOR ITS IMPROVEMENT

DISCUSSED BY TRAMWAY BOARD

The tramway shelter, in all its aspects, was discussed yesterday by members of the Tramway Board. The matter was brought before the Board by a letter from the Beautifying Association, similar to the letter sent to the City Council, asking for a donation towards a proposed fund of £l5O, which it was suggested should be offered for competitive designs for a town-planning scheme and the improvement of the tramway shelter in Cathedral Square. The chairman (Mr G. T. Booth) said that he had the utmost sympathy with the Beautifying Association, which deserved support. It might be well to reply that while the Board sympathised with the project it would be glad of further information to show how the tramways would benefit by it. If it would benefit the Board there might be some justification for helping. Otherwise he did not see how help could be given. Mr "VV. Reece said that he was prepared to go further than the chairman. The question was not solely what benefits would accrue to the Board, for the Board was already responsible for the shelter, which was not beautiful or a credit to the Square. Further, it had been distinctly understood that the shelter was not a permanent building. At the time of its erection there had been a great deal of difficulty about the disposal of the Godley Statue, and the shelter had been erected not to be a nuisance, but to be of benefit to the public. The Board should view the application liberally. It was not asked to subscribe to a new building, but to a fund for obtaining plans. He moved that meanwhile the _ Hoard should express its sympathy with the project, and promise support to it. Mr D. Sykes said that the Poard had submitted several designs to the City Council, and if the shelter vas not ornamental it was not tue Board's fault. All the. designs bad Veen returned and the Board liod liuilt the shelter to the Council's specifications. A lot of silly nonsense hul been talked by five or six men and two editors, all of wdiom were in a position to ring up for a taxi-cab whenever it was wet, and they forgot the great public utility of the shelter in_ bad weather. Mr C. M. Gray said that he was very much opposed to the project, and would move as an amendment: —" That the letter be received, and the Association informed that further developments will be regarded by this Board with considerable interest." " That 'will not redound to our wisdom," Mr, Reece remarked. Mr H. Pearce said that Mr Sykes was wrong in his remarks regarding the plans for the shelter. The original agreement had been that the Board should erect something as low as possible for the convenience of passengers, but that ultimately it was to bo pulled down for something more substantial. At all events, it was a pity that the Board could not meet the local bodies concerned and try to bring about the erection of a better shelter.

Mr Gray said that if the pnblio thought that the shelter' was to be pulled down and not replaced by something more commodious there would be a riot. Mr Seager, on obtaining a seat on the Council, had imagined he was going to do away with all shop signs, and send signwriters out of the country. Now he brought forward the present proposal, and eventually he might demand a particular style of architecture in buildings facing the Square. Probably he was honest in his views, but the Board should not be influenced by them. Utility was far preferable to artistry in his oninion. As for the Godley statue, when he had been Mayor in 1891 the question had been asked, "Who was John Robert Godley?" and accordingly a line had been engraved on the statue that he was the founder of Canterbury. Otherwise a. great many people would not have known tha * much, and a great many more cared less. He did not mind if the shelter obstructed the view of the statue, but at the same time he would like to see the statue removed to the north side of the Cathedral or to the Gardens. Let those who had peculiar ideas find the money to carry them ou . -i.-i Mr S. A. Staples said that he would not vote any money for another shelter if it would not give improved accommoJ A. Flesher said that it was extraordinary that Mr Seager should level his attacks against the Board oi the Council when his own office had prepared the plans for the P l ' o^ 1 building. He thought that the shelter was in the right place, and until the City Council had taken some action the Board should do nothing. Ihe Council at its last meeting had sim;% received the Association s letter and done nothing. , i Mr A W. Beaven said that the Board had not the money to provide £l5O, .much less the cost of a new shelter, such as any committee of architects might design. The chairman said that some of the members had misapprehended the purport of the application. It contained no proposal to remove or destroy the shelter, but proposed merely that it should be made more anfple and commodious. He -entirely sympathised with the suggestion that whatever was done, however little, should be part of a greater town-planning scheme. He did not believe in doing _ things haphazard, in the way in ■which the shelter had been put down in Cathedral Square. Probably any scheme of improving the Square would contemplate the removal of the statue, and it should be possible to draw up plans for a better shelter.

Mr PvCece, in reply, remarked that tho older Mr Gray grew the greater adept he became at drawing a red herring across the scent. Wo one had dreamed of removing the shelter, and anybody could draw a harrowing picture of starving creatui'es in the Square lacking shelter in a biting sou-wester. The Beautifying Association had not attempted to do more than lead public opinion. Mr Gray must know, however, that it was quite common for some authorities to insist on uniform architecture. Mr Gray's utilitarian obsession was quite contrary to the spirit in which the original Board had approached its work, for in the cars and elsewhere an attempt was made not to fiuoil th© appearance. Mr Svkes : Tho Beautifying -Association says you are spoiling the appearance of the cars with advertisements. Mr Reece: That is snmf? of your work. Mr Reece went on to say that the Board originally had offered to erect a Gothic building in stone west of tho Godley statue; but tho Council had refused to sanction it. It was incorrect to say that the design of the present building was prepared in'Mr Seager's office. The architect who had prepared it was not then in the office. The amendment was carried on the voices, Mr Jleece remarking, "It is a good advertisement for the Board." On the amendment being put as the substantive motion, Mr Flesher moved a further amendment that the matter should be held over until the City Council's decision was ascertained. _ Mr Flesher's amendment was carried 1 fui the voices.