UNWARRANTED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 15, 18 January 1930, Page 12

UNWARRANTED.

HUGE EXPENDITURE.

REASONS FOR DECISION.

REFERENCE TO HARBOUR BRIDGE.

NO MARKED ECONOMY LIKELY,

The proposal to deviate the- North Auckland railway line by building a tunnel under the city, from Beach Road to Morningside, has been abandoned. In ah interview this morning, the Minister of " J^^ys ; ilthe.2.]ffon. :^Wj r "B. Taverner, who passed through, on his way North, stated that the Govern-ment-had decided not to v proceed with the >-ork. The Mayor, Mr. Geo. Bail-don/-was informed of this decision today.?; • >

To enable the Morningside tunnel proposition to be fully and fairly reviewed, the .Minister said he had requested the general manager of railways, Mr. H. H. Sterling, to .go into the whole question, "in. the light of the circumstances as at present existing, and as they might be forcasted for the future. The netessary reports had been received, and the' whole matter had been carefully considered by Cabinet. For the reasons set out in the reports, the Government had , decided not-, to proceed -with the work, Preliminary surveys and estimates showed that the constructional costs of the tunnel, deviation and under- _ ground stations would be approximately £1,000,000.. "This estimate can be accepted only with -reservations," . said :Mr. Taverner, "as : ; the driving of a large section railway. tunnel under closely built city areas has-not-yet been done in New Zealand. The position in Auckland is complicated by the fact that the city' 3 configuration is distinctly' undulating, and it would not be possible always to secure a substantial depth of ground above the tunnel, and thereby avoid danger to the stability of buildings and interference" with sewers' c and other' underground services.. .. Disadvantages of a Tunnel. "The bringing of such a tunnel out into '..the open or into Shallow ground is a task fraught with much -uncertainty." continued the Minister. From an engineering standpoint it is difficult to decide how far tunnelling can be safely and economically carried, and how soon open cut should' be adopted. Open- cut methods " for construction of rapid transist subways are often adopted in cities, and usually follow, where possible, the lines of public roadways. This system interferes only with streets during the period of construction, and is often found preferable to, and more economical than, tunnelling under large blocjis of buildings. Consideration must also be given to the possibility of the erection of large buildings above the tunnel, and provision would have to be made - for such a contingency in the design of the^iunnel. "In ;tlie estimate, a reasonable allowanc6vhas,jbeen made for general contingencies, but there would still remain possibilities that might- greatly, add to the estimated cost. As the best rulinw gradient that co.uld be obtained through the tunnel is, .1 .ill 80, and as the'tunnel -would "be about one and a half miles long, steam working would be unsatisfactory and recourse to electrification would be necessary. Another indication of the additional expense that would be involved yi working this route is that, for practical purposes, it would be necessary to electrify the whole of the Auckland suburban area, 1 including the Westfield deviation. The new Auckland station would thus become a "through" instead of a "terminal" station aiid the northern electrification would require to be carried as far as Helensville, in view of the inconvenience of transfers between electric and steam units in and about the general Auckland suburban area. , High Cost of Electrification. fB 1118 .. . an , e^e °trification scheme for the-Auckland suburban area would have to be adopted, including all the lines lying between Papakura to'tlio south and Helensville to the north,, at a cost estimate to. .be in the vicinity, of ' f1,174,570, bringing the gross estimated expenditure to £2,174,570. This would. , include itho necessary electric locomotives end sub-stations,'-'but woaildttot..ptogjd6

electrically equipped rolling stock to deal with the morning and evening peaktraffic, so that a proportion of ordinary rolling stock would have to be requisitioned for that traffic. "The daily average at present of ordinary passengers between stations on the Kaipara line and Auckland (including Newmarket and Mount Eden) is 4720. The passenger traffic at the off-peak periods of the day is negligible, while the morning and evening peaks of about 2200 passengers occur. The Newmarket passengers form approximately 2f> per cent of the total passenger traffic to and ..from the Kaipara line and. the deviation of the line to Auckland via Morhingsids would not be to their advantage, unless a shuttle service between Newmarket and Morningside, involving a transfer at Morningside, were instituted. This service would be both itn-_ attractive and expensive. No Marked Economy. "The 1 cost of working goods traffic from -and to-the Kaipara stations :: has been analysed, and it is estimated that tliere Would be no marked economy as between the existing and the tunnel routes. In the case of the Kaipara line, and traffic to and from Auckland, the distance would be approximately two miles less by the tunnel. There would

be a saving in haulage of approximately 182,222 net ton miles per annum on that account. Of the traffic from Avondale, and north, thereof, to stations on the main line south of Newmarket, - about one-fifth would continue to go by'the prbsent route via Newmarket.; The remainder of the traffic from Avondale and north to stations on the main line south of Newmarket would go via the tunnel and Westfield deviation, and would involve sin increase of 299,050 net ton miles. The traffic from south main line stations to Kaipara stations north of Morningside would involve an increase of 219,505 net ton miles per annum. There would, therefore, he an increase iq net ton miles, after making allowance for the savings as above recorded on the traffic from and to the north and to and from Auckland city of approximately 336,333 per annum. Existing Line Still Necessary. "Although the increased haul via the Westfield deviation, is substantial, the cost is offset by the easier grades on the Westfield deviation as compared with the route via Remuera Hill, and by certain decreases in shunting costs at Newmarket. Actually the working costs by either route would, it is estimated, be substantially the same for goods to or from the Kaipara. The Morningside tunnel route would, therefore, permit of no saving in goods haulage. It would still be necessary to maintain the existin" line'from Morningside to Newmarket even were the tunnel route an plished fact, because an alternative route to and from the north would be required in the event of a. blockage of the tunnel, and also to handle the passenger traffic and the heavy goods traffic to and from Mount Eden aad Newmarket. "Future developments do not promise improved economic results from the heavy capital expenditure on the proposed tunnel deviation, as the growth of Auckland may develop on. the Waitemata side so extensively that the harbour bridge may be built, and this, of course, would seriously detiact from the value of the. Morningside tunnel route. . Expenditure Not Warranted. "Tlio total cost in capital expenditure would, as already indicated, be approximately £2,174,570, and the figures indicate that the present' traffic, either as to. its quantity or as to the working cc>iidition's, does not warrant this expenditure. As to the prospective/ traffic, it is not likely that the construction of the would have any mfluenca at all<

on the growth of the goods side of the business. As to the passenger side, any substantial prospective increase is, to say the least, highly speculative, and as such certainly does notwarrant an expenditure of the magnitude involved in the tunnel venture. In face of these facts, after a complete and careful review of the whole position, the Government has decided that it will not include the Auckland-Morningside deviation in its working railways improvement programme."