THE WATERFRONT RAILWAY.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 156, 4 July 1922, Page 2

THE WATERFRONT RAILWAY.

(Vo the ECltor.l Sir—The engineer's estimate for the railway to the Western wharf is £,_>,000; add 15 per cent as a moderate amount for an underestimate, and fIo.OOO foi 1 existing works wantonly destroyed, and " you have rough Iv f 100,000. The board cannot borrow money at less than 8 per . cent, so the cost of this idea without ' any allowance for maintenance or de- * preciation will be £fioOo per annum. There is not one penny of revenue to 'be obtained by the board from these ' work!", _» ffiOOO mere revenue will have ' to be extracted [mm the public, for it is 1 the public who in the end find the money, and this £6000 will represent the interest bill alone. Vet several members argue ; that the intention is to facilitate and : cheapen the handling of cargo. It would Ibe interesting to hear in what way this sort of finance can assist anyone.—T am. etc., POOR FINANCE. (To tbe Editor.) Sir,—May T correct your report of my { remarks at Wednesday's meeting of the Takapuna Borough Council concerning the proposed railway past the Ferry i Buildings. The paragraph made it ap- ! pear that I approved the scheme, or at i any rate was not prepared to oppose it •That is not at all correct. No reporter ! was present at that stage of the meeti ing, and that may account for your ; error. Tlie resolution moved by mc, and i which was carried unanimously, shows ] the true position: "That the council's I 1 representatives on the Marine Borough?' | Association be a committee to confer 1 with representatives of the other Xorth ' Shore boroughs, with power to take such 1 steps to protect the interests of residents as might be thought fit." Tlie substance of my remarks -was that the proposal was a serious menace to the safety and convenience of the residents on this ! side of the harbour. It had been urged !in the Harbour Board that the line was i necessary for the prosperity of the port. IWc were all concerned with that aspect lof the matter, and due consideration i should be given to it. I iftd no information whatever, excepting that which ' had appeared in the newspapers, how i far grounds of that nature could pro- - perly he urged in support of the scheme, ( but in view of the opposition by certain . board members I could hardly credit that • j the line was as essential to the pros- ' perity of the port as had been stated . !by supporters of the proposal. Also I i was much impressed by the stress laid by several members on the increased value which the line would give to Harbour Board properties at Freeman's Bay. That certainly was not a valid reason for constituting a serious danger to the residents of the Xorth Shore, and the '. ! citizens of Auckland generally, in the 1 j use of an important -public highway. I ' | suggested that the Auckland City Coun- I til might have to be consulted before ( t__at highway was interfered with, and ' even if the Minister of Rail wars had \ power to proceed without the consent of 1 the City Council, it seemed to mc unlikely that he would take this important . stop without ascertaining the wishes of s the council. That being so the committee ' should get into touch with the City t Council concernine the scheme.—l am etc.. " ' (

: . A. M. GOUT.D, Mayor of Takapuna. | -To the Editor.) i ! -, correspondent "Devonport ; : Resident rightly say s that the intention ; j to extend the Quay Street street railway I by a costly viaduct to Frecman*s BaY j reclamation, with a swing bridge as an * entrance to the timber mills, has been . . kept in the background. But there is another matter in this connection which .might very well receive a good deal .! more prominence. Who is going to pay tor this work? The engineer's estimate 7 c .' tl ; railway, it has been stated, is |t.0,000. Such estimates are usually I exceeded, but accepting this one as cor- ? | rect, the interest on the amount named | at 6 per cent is £4500 per annum, to ; « hich must be added working expenses maintenance, and depreciation. Tlie Harbour Board, in conjunction with the | General and Local (iovernments throughout the Dominion, has gone in on such !?h b T orrowing and jthat f/.1,000, I suppose, may be regarded | as a mere bagatelle, but its latest .Tcheme | should cause the most optimistic and .reckless of gamblers on Auckland's j »«ture to pause. The estimated cost of ■ this Princes wharf is £700,000. and it j will provide berthage for four oceangoing snips. In contrast with this may :be placed the value of our three chief ! £l'arvcs as shown on the Harbour Board s balance-sheet for the year ending December, 1921 : Central wharf (including S ' d * sheds, cranes, and all equipment) ,«,.„ „ . Queen's wharf ("with ' 4> ° ° ° King s wharf 16-1.482 0 0 Total for 3 wharves £1522,011 0 0 In view of these figures the £700.000 Z Mn " CCS Wharf " daggering: and the shipping community cannot surety .regan, , jth „ , ight * hean BUr^ bilities of the Board at the dose of 10>1 exceeded £3.000,000.. and the payments i for interest ,„ that year £92.700 Its I [working expenses were £111,654' Ex-I (elusive of rents (£38,726) it collected a j revenue of £239.634. <-u'iectea a . Prince- W wbn -*" ° onnp - tion *ith the >\Z, __?-£* means an addition of ! ;a^u ; £4C.000 to the burden of interest,! l«hich must be charged uuon shipping <\ ime t r!a the , P ° rtf ° f and" on mer_hand.se landed at or exported from ' our wlla ryes. Auckland, which, with™ i Should i adVanta f S and endowment.J iJSfb™" ° f th , e <,hea in the world, is becoming the dearest. These are manifestly . handicar on ° j ™n m T e ° f th " P° rt . which Til", finally end any possibility of competing' Mltb tue merchants of Sydney in the iLritr. b P d°" th P -^'and" win .£ l!Kj b " rdCn °" r Pr-ducers „f staple I of tie n" ln . c ? m V''ho n with other ports Tn ?reater orudence . OneoH r a lT inist ™tion is displayed.': ■art „Wr that im P rp sses'me ash %- T 6r ° f rivio "tatters is the j: i extraordinary fact that the City Council appears to have subordinated its autW Board r" Str?ets to the Harbour ! streK-- A ", V ° ne with foresight must' purely see that U)0 Auckland tramway j offW cf ad ' V "t the foot ! of Queen Street, will have to bo extended westward along Quay Street. Yet the Council is supinely allowing this mam thoroughfare to be obstructed by ' an unnecessary railway line, with a level ' crossing over the main street of the ' my. i ve n t urp fo say that such a condition would not bo" tolerated in any ' other city of importance.-I am. etc.. * ' cms. ' Edward Burkliarett thinks that a thi f Bt ; with subway* for i IU .1 / traffir * wonM bp advantageous _ to the development of the port. f

_________________-___-_____===^=========^_9 (To the _*.h0... Sir.—Enough stress does not appear to lie placed on tlie fact that the railway down Princes wharf is only an u> stalment of the Harbour Board schen_fc The larger part of tlie proposal is the extension by a bridge in front of the timber mills to tiie western breakwater wharf. Iso that we will have wagons of Wa/ikato coal crossing the front of U» city, not for.export, but to pro\ ide mannfacturers on the reclamation with fuel at a fractional saving of freight; and logs nnd timber will block traffic in transit to the Kauri Timber and J.eyland O'Brien Mills. Tho enormous cost of constructing guch a bridge railway with its need of an opening (o allow the p» sage of vessels in to the mills will be felt in higher chargps on ships and their freight. There may possibly be effected a small saving to the pockets of individuals, but the community must suffer in added eharsres and the popularity of the port t>c injured by imposition of further dues on the high rates already existing.—l am. etc.. COMMERCIAL SENSE.