TAURANGA HARBOUR IMPROVEMENT SCHEME

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LII, Issue 8392, 14 September 1923, Page 3

TAURANGA HARBOUR IMPROVEMENT SCHEME

of theposi- - It would appear from several utwhich have been made m * Sk late, that, there is consuler- ' P £»P« hensi<>n exL ° tiUg ? ina ' iy • ! as to the policy, intentions of tlxe Taurauga Harbour i and its f,, ‘; the at <" Ltakenup with regard t<> the ‘out of sundry harbour [L 3 With a view to clearing i'afc w - P e . rha i" S f lhese 7' ■ logons impressions we have gonehr ■ some trouble to ascertain the tine • Stian, from documentary and JL sources and to set them out as , £/as possible for the inforrnat;oj) of those concerned. We will first take the matter of erecting a large wharf for big over- " ships near the present Public Works wharf at the Mount, a pro- ' icet which it- was recently publicly Led had "been shelved by the Board." On the 19th of March this year, the Board, as the result of consideration of a fresh report by its eugi Deers > Messr9 ™ air tvl.ason, Owen and Brown, resolved as follow? “Thai the policy of barjour development as relating to wharf construction within Taurauga Harbour, and defined: on pages 16 to , ]9 inclusive of the report of Messrs Blair Mason, Lee and Owen, dated 20th February, 1923, be affirmed and adopted by this Board.” The pages of the report mentioned can be briefly summarised as fol-lowsr-is deep water already exists at the Mount, large vessels with over seas cargo, which may in the near future have cause to trade here, fhouldbe provided for at the Mount. The dredging of a deep-water channel, to Taurauga is at present deprecated, though slight deepening might be done advantageously if coast-wise shipping require it. It ■ ■isnot desirable to erect permanent structures in the vicinity of the Mount until the works for the im- - piovement of the; Cutter Channel have achieved their purpose. At present the trade consists mainly of coast-wise vessels, and as the railway is not yet opened to Tauranga, the trade is practically equally divided between) the Mount and Tauranga. When Tauranga is connected to the railway, the coast-wise trade can be concentrated at Tauranga wharves, in which case the Board will reap the benefit of the wharfage charge now paid to the railway at the Mount, amounting on existng trade to approximately £SOO per annum, The distance from the Mount to Te Maunga junction being the same as from Tauranga to the junction, there can be no increase in railway charges to- any part of the country. Benefits gained will be—(a) extra goods handled and consequently extra wharfage .charges collected without increased expenditure; (b) concentration of coastal shipping at one port with a consequent reduction of handling charges ow shipping, tending to reduce freights.

The above, in brief, is tbe outline of the policy sketched out for the Board by its engineers and adopted after mature consideration 1 , which the Board is now proceeding to put it into effect.

The first step in this direction has h»n already taken by instructing the engineers to prepare as soon as possible to put in hand the work of improving the Cutter Channel, (to Sive improved access to the Mount as well ag other parts of the harbour.) Materials and plant are aliMcly being purchased for opening Mohiriki quarry, constructing tramline, building wharf, etc., and probably about the New Year all should be ready to start on this most important portion of the Board’s plans, a work, indeed 1 , of vital importance to the overseas shipping which it is anticipated will in a very few years be seeking berthage at the Mount from world ports. The engineers, not content with their warning against undue haste in commencing permanent wharf works at the Mount in' the pages summaris'd above, reiterate aud extend it in another part of the report, which we quotea s follows:-—“Prom the fuller knowledge we now possess it is ad*ised that the construction of a new wharf or jetty at the site of the de“Klor wall be held over for the followbg reasons (a) That the deflector wall should for be constructed 1 , or the length of lts . tension from the shore deteruntil the effect of the apron laid across the banks, etc., in jmproving the Cutter Channel has observed and noted. Jb) That the lands ini the vicinity deflector wall are part of the railway station yard in which the running tracks are parallel to the general shore line and where there T uasd be little room for building ? storage sheds and: conductthe receiving and delivery of cargo. , ‘

( c ) Thai the trade of the port in ~e Meantime can be met by using'. ‘ f, existing- public works wharf. it is in our opinion undesirable y” e early stages of a harbour tleL >opmeßt sc hemc, when new chan- ** are being created by the aid of ‘ ,a ; Ur al forces, to build" the permau--111 structures, the cl esigns of which or less contingent' upon the a l results obtained from the chanin »V ° r^9 ‘ '^ l ' s ma -" instanced jj 11 ca se under review whore wo a ° consider it advisable to com*acf> the construction of the perlaaent wharf at Maimganui, until _ fUiine as the Cutter Channel imworks show satisfactory +. SU an d ; the ultimate length de- °* I ,ro posed deflector

n aran g the period of construcchannel works the. MaunaH Ul f raihva >’ jetty can be madecaphandling the. trade. As soon le channel improvement works

have induced satisfactoiy channel depths of water the time will then be opportune to commence increased wharfage at the Mount.’’ In face of this perfectly plain and definite advice from its engineers cna cf the- foremost firms in the Dominion, let it be said-—could any Board worthy of public confidence do otherwise than defer wharf construction of a permanent type at the Mount until its professional advisers give the word t 0 go ahead ? Matter's in the above connection now therefore fall into their natural order as follows: 1. Assembly of plant and material for works intended to deepen the Cutter Channel at the Mount, which ; ;maitcr is now 1 in hand. -2. Carrying cut the stone groynes, etc., for the above work. i 3. Erection of the deflector wall land extension as required. ; 4. Construction of the big wharf near the- Mount for over-seas vessels. • -5. While all the above are in progress and until No. 4 is completed, the keeping 1 up of the present Public Works wharf at the Mount for such cver-seas trade as may in the near future develop. Next we will endeavour to indicate the effect which the now very near approach 0 f railway connection with the town of Tauranga, is going to produce on harbour traffic and the activities of the Harbour Board. We . need not comment on the present cumbrous and expensive system under which goods for the railway are discharged at the Mount and goods not concerned with the tailway at Tauranga. The District Engineer, replying to an enquiry by the Boa-rd, as to the Department’s intentions with regard to the Mount wharf, wrote recently as follows ; —“I regret that I cannot give you a definite reply to this query, as the matter is now being referred to Head Office. It ■would, however, greatly assist the Department to make its arrangements if it could be definitely known by what date the railway wharf at Tauranga will be available. As your Board will realist© there will lx* a considerable added cost to the working of the Hue if the Department is forced to run passengers to one station and goods to another.” If this pronouncement be road Carefully in connection with what the-Board’s engineers have already pointed out, aa quoted above, the position resolves itself into the- following 1. As soon as the train is running into Tauranga, all passenger traffic will be concentrated there. 2. There is no difference in the distance between the Mount and any point on the line to the eastward, and the distance from Tauranga station to the same point; hence there will be no difference in charges. 3. When the train is running into Tauranga, the Department desires, as a matter of economy to itself while adding nothing to the charges levied upon the public, to also handle all coast-wise ship-borne goods at a railway wharf at ga4. The District engineer warns the- Board that if railway shipping facilities (for coast-wise trade) be not in existence at Tauranga, when the railway is open to that town*,, cost will be added to the working of the line, and it goes without saying that this cost will be passed on to those whose business causes it, viz., those whose coast-wise cargo necessitates a section -*f goods train' being run between the Mount and Te Maunga junction competing at the latter station; with the main-line train, from, or to Tauranga or the {•oast as the case may be. This added- charge, be it noted, must naturally fall; on tjl>e goods which cause it, namely those, which have to be shipped: or entrained at the Mount consigned to or from persons along the line eastward of Tauranga, whose yoods could be shipped or entrained at Tauranga, without this extra cost, if & when railway shipping facilities were provided at Tauranga. Some six months ago the Board** engineers reported, at the request of l ' the Board, on the advisability of Spending £6OOO om the present Town \ Wharf, with a view to putting off for some years the building of a new railway wharf at Tauranga. Engineering tests revealed that railway communication could not be made to either' the present wharf or even a new one erected close to: the same spot, and the engineers summed up the position as follows(Dated February 20, 1923)—-“We are advised that the railway will be running k two years’ time. This being the cists we think it is not desirable to spend any more- than is necessary on die present structure as it caiuwt bo ] modernised at a reasonable expend!• j tore. Extensions to the wharf, as before mentioned, would help to alleviate the congestion, but im view j of the early completion of the railway wo would advise that expenditure on the wharf be curtailed as far as possible/’ Though this report has been in the i Board a hands since February last, ! it was not until last meeting of the Board, that a final decision on this matter of a railway wharf at Tan- i rauga was arrived at, with a view to

replying to the District' Engineer s request tor information am the point . The Board then resolved as follows: “That this. Board inform the Public Works Department that the Board desires to comply' as speedily as possible with the Department s requirements as regards the erection of a railway wharf at Tauranga, but that its financial arrangements are temporarily hampered: by the present borrowing rate of money. This Board therefore asks the Department if it can sec its wdy to undertake the erection of a railway wharf at Tauranga as designed by the Board’s engineer . and if so, upon what terms.” The allusion in the above resolution to the. hampered conditions of the Board’s finances’, refers of course, to the incidence of the recent addition to the debenture lax made by Parliament', which, has practically raised the rate at which the Board hoped to raise a sum of £50,000 of its sanctioned loan, from 5 3-4 to 61 per cent., a rate at which it is doubtful if authority to borrow would be given, and at which it would be unwise to borrow unless special arrangements could be made with the lender that interest should be paid on a sliding scale conforming to any changing taxation on debentures. It only remains now for ug to briefly review the Board’s' provisions for borrowing, to complete our survey' of its position at the present ' date. 1 The year before last the ratepayers carried a proposal to borrow £125, 000 for harbour works, the particulars of the proposal being grouped for the poll as follows:—Existing liabilities, £3,600; dredging, plant and other miprovemerots between the Heads and Tauranga, £57,000; Mount Wharf, £33,000; railway wharf, stone bank, fete., Tauranga, £24,000; the balance to be devoted to payment of first year’s interest and sinking fund. The above schedule was a condensed regrouping of « member of detailed items estimated to cost various smaller sums, the only item which emerges therein exactly the same as the engineers.’ original estimate of 1919, being £33,000 for the*. Mount wharf. At the, close of last year the Board went inStfi the matter of raising a sum oft £60,000 o nt of the authorised loam* to start the . approvement scheme, it being ascertained that the Board’s present revenue would be jhsti about sufficient to pay interest i any] sinking fund on this sum, thus avoiding the collection of the rate i authorised by the Act. Applications were invited from those willing to buy' debentures, and thus a sum, which now stands at between £B,OOO and £9,000 was raised, and negotiations. have been carried on up to the present for raising the balance. The raising of the debenture tax, however, to 4/6 in the £, is acting prohibitorily on the Board’s borrowing powers, unless the Government can find some way out and is willing to assist the Board. As already stated tho Board has alhorised its engineers to proceed with the assembling of plant and machinery for improvement work at \ the Colter Channel at the Mount, j this plant, etc., being approximately eslmated to cost between £IO,OOO •and £12,000, of which £I3OO worth | has already been delivered'.

It appears both from the District Engineer’s communications with the Board, and from the Board’s own engineers’ reports, that the- presently urgent matter to be carried out ' s the erection of the railway wharf at Tauranga. Without it, the District Engineer points cut that added handling charges will fall on coastwise goods lauded at the Mount, following additonal running expenses on the Department by so- handling cargo. Not only this, but, as the Board’s engineers point out, the provison of such a wharf at Tauranga, while penalising nobody, will bring into the Board additional revenue of £SOO a year without extra ■expenditure-. What may he called the irreducible mnimum cost for this wharf is estimated at £22,000 and the engineers consider that to provide by dredging sufficient depth of water at all states of the tide for the class of coast-wise vessels likely to 1 use the wharf, and an adequate swinging basin for the same, will require a further £10,500. These two sums, therefore, will require the whole of the £24,000 allocated for specified work about Tauranga, and a further possible £BSOO from the second lumped sum on the loan schedule £57,000 for dredging, plant, and other improvements between the Heads and Tauranga. Then, when the engineers have fu.'-tmbled the plant, that is barges, cranes, engines, trucks, tram rails, etc., and got the service wharf in Pilot Bay and tram line from Moiuriki built, work at the Cutter Channel should he pub in baud forthwith, at a cost estimated to total £10,750 in addition to the plant mentioned above as estimated at between £lO, 000 and £12,000. Then, when this work has been completed, the engineer's report indicates a pause te)npox*arily, while the forces of nature are doing their allotted work in scouring out the Cutter Channel, and while thus doingpointing out- where is the proper place for the deflector wall and its extent, and a-lso the proper place for the Mount wharf for over-seas ships. It therefore appears that £30,500 will meet- the most pressing needis on the Tauranga side of the harbour and £22,750 similarly urgent work on the Mount side-, present total of £53,250 out of the loan. This sum it is within the power of the Board t 0 spend without collecting a rate, if satisfactory arrangements can be made with the Government re borrowing powers, and possibly also for erection of Tauranga. railway wharf for the Board. These works alone would give great additional facilities to the port, and a great added impuse to- settlement in the Bay of Plenty.