Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

KENT TERRACE AGAIN

BASIC PRINCIPLES INVOLVED A UTTLE-CONSIDERED ASPECT OF IRE PROBLEM (Contributed) In all the wrangling whioli has been going on about Kent terrace it is rather surprising. that there seems to have been little argument on the basic principles involved. Tt should be quite dear that Kent and Cambridge terraces are Teally one street with a central reserve. The trees and shrubs about which there has been much ado, fine though tliev may be individually, are not placed with that instinct of goqd civic design which would give character to the reserve. Sooner or later they must go—and be succeeded by something more beautiful and characteristic. But. having the advantage of twp tolerably wide portions of _ street and four good footpaths, what is the need to lessen the width of the reserve at present? The side known as Cambridge terrace is talcing only north-bound vehicle traffic. If along the edge of the reserve on this side the north-bound tramline were installed this would leave its partner. Kent terrace, entirelv free to carry the south-hound traffic. With adequate crossings over the reserve and good visibility at all intersections of cross streets, there should be less “traffic problem” here than in any otheT street of the city. The reserve might then, instead of being _ a monotonous, half-neglected hotanic garden' combined with children’s playground, he a place well designed with pleasant grassy lawns dignified by a few well selected trees of one species placed so ns not to ; nterfere with visibility of street corners. Such a Scheme then would he less like the petty tinkering with little hits of a city plan, while the need of the day is for a- development plan which shall provide for all such rooviremonts as part of a comprehensive scheme. Can our city fathers sink sectional differences anil advantages and look with wide vision on a question involving the broad principles of traffic regulation P If they Will look at the two terraces As orte, they will sCe that traffic congestion nrtd danger is bound t 6 occur if they overload One side and underload the other.—T am, etc.. AN ADVOCATE OF TOWN PLANNING.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19261203.2.48

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12620, 3 December 1926, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
359

KENT TERRACE AGAIN New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12620, 3 December 1926, Page 6

KENT TERRACE AGAIN New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12620, 3 December 1926, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert