Architect Ian Athfield, who was appointed Christchurch’s architectural ambassador, has laid down an ultimatum that he will not be part of the city’s rebuild unless the one-way system is removed and fewer buses through the city.
To be honest I am not sure quite what to think. I think it is certainly arguable whether the one-way system serves as vital a function as many think it does. Certainly, it mainly caters to through traffic so I have to ask whether we want this through traffic in the CBD or we re-route it around (or discourage it a bit). And it has to be said, the one-way streets do form a barrier and do suffer from a lack of development. The Christchurch City Council has previously talked of removing the one-way system anyway (more huff than puff though) so it probably is fair to say that its future should be debated (and I would probably support its planned removal on the basis that we shouldn’t have through traffic in the area).
However, Athfield’s comments on buses are a little more worrying. He said, “We also run a lot of buses around the city with not many people in them”. This seems a rather generic and ignorant statement, but could have been portrayed in the wrong context in the media. Is he saying we should give up on growing public transport? What about all the cars that run around three-quarters empty? Or is he saying we need to improve the public transport system? His idea of having buses stay out of the central part of the CBD and instead run around a ring are similar to those made by Jan Gehl last year in a report to the Christchurch City Council, a report I am generally in favour of as it supports a more accessible and people oriented CBD.
Whatever the case may be, Athfield has certainly created a lot of controversy and debate. If you dare, check out the comments on stuff!
marsoe
Christchurch Transport Blog 
bismarck
March 24, 2011
WTF? OK, if you remove the one way streets, you’ll encourage car drivers to avoid the city centre (probably good) and they will instead go around the 4 avenue’s and other roads…
As we’ve seen already since the quake, these roads are just diabolical now that the CBD is off-limits.
So how will running fewer buses help anyone?
If getting around by car is too hard (due to congestion on 4 Ave’s and other inner routes) and getting around by bus is too hard (too few of them) then all this will do is encourage people to go shopping at their nearest location which for the majority is a large sprawling suburban shopping mall.
Hardly a way to encourage people back into the city centre (which will already be a tough ask now that it’s mostly wrecked!)
marsoe
March 24, 2011
Indeed, it looks pretty par for the course so far from government(& buddies) which is mostly vague statements without any plan or vision backing it up.
I’m also concerned with Athfield’s ability to look at the bigger picture – certainly the biggest thing I was struck by in the CCC’s Civic Building was the really poor use of internal space. It’s an impressive exterior, but inside it’s this weird, dark, dingy cavern, with all sorts of empty nooks and spaces under exposed stairs, and noise bouncing off endless shiney surfaces despite it being nearly empty of people.
“if you remove the one way streets, you’ll encourage car drivers to avoid the city centre (probably good) ” exactly Bismarck. No cars and no buses? Then what will carry the people there?
David Welch
March 24, 2011
Ian Athfield obviously did not live in Christchurch before the one way system was developed – every journey with -in the Avenues was a tedious stop -start journey, where one often only traveled about 500 metres (one block) before having to stop again, and next block again. It is a bit like every street was like pre-Earthquake Manchester Street – and with current traffic levels I suspect every street will be like Manchester Street, queues stop-staring. Of course it was much worse in thse days because though there were fewer cars there were also far less traffic lights, meaning countless give way or stop situations, which involved having to judge each corner when safe to go, an added stress and really tiresome. The real problem is that, like most city centres, there isn’t enough road and parking space for everybody to drive into town . Therefore his idea of reducing or removing buses is in contradiction to plans to remove one-way streets. As the posting notes he has the normal persons misunderstanding of bus loading patterns – not applied to cars or indeed why have shops that often only have two or three customers in taking up all that ground space!! All in all Ian Athfield has not come up with any intelligent plan at all and then is so bloody immature he starts with a bit of a paddy – if I can’t have my way I don’t want to play. This suggests he lacks not only the planning acumen or depth of understanding of the negative effect of ChCh’s grid pattern but also lacks the necessary statesman like maturity and leadership qualities to lead a reconstruction. Bob Parker responded coolly, sensibly, rightly. My opinion is.any more crap like that and Athfield should be dumped, this is a major disaster in which he is employed to assist recovery not an amateur theatre rehearsal !! I see potential to create six lane [mostly] type boulevards (with residential apartments above and bus lanes or light rail lanes) along Tuam Street and Manchester Street, and these might be the in a sense the main through corridors.