CORONATION PIER THE SUBJECT OF PROTRACTED DEBATE

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 15116, 27 October 1949, Page 3

CORONATION PIER THE SUBJECT OF PROTRACTED DEBATE

Planning WHS Continue With Disputed Width At Fifteen Feet

TAURANGA HARBOUR. BOARD CHAIRMAN CRITICISES OBJECTIONS

Against the original provision for a width of eight feet—which had been criticised as being insufficient and a cause of danger—a width at the outermost “T” of 15 feet will be provided in the plans being prepared for the reconstruction of Tauranga’s now badly dilapidated Coronation Pier. This was decided by the Tauranga Harbour Board at a meeting called cn Tuesday afternoon, when the board’s consulting engineer, Mr Andrew Murray, met the board to discuss the plans for the reconstruction undertaking, and the case of the “T” width was debated.

Addressing the board before it met the engineer, the chairman (Mr J. D. Alach) criticised objections which had followed the submission of the plans for the work to the local bodies, A heated exchange between the chairman and Mr L. R. Wilkinson ensued.

He made his statement reluctantly, said Mr Alach. It was desirable that local bodies should work together in harmony and understanding, as good neighbours and, he said, the board had tried to do this. Such relations, however, cou d be kept up only with common respect for each other’s activities. In the instance of the reconstruction of Coronation Pier, he added, other local bodies were interested. Ratepayers the Judges

The hoax'd had asked them to submit their views on the plans but it did not concede any local body the x’ight to approve or disapprove of what . the board was doing. Whether the board was qualified to carry out its work, he continued, was tested when, the same as with other local bodies, it went before the ratepayers at the local body elections, when the ratepayers were the judges of its actions. No body had been given the authority to approve or disapprove of what the board was doing. The Tauranga Borough Council, Mr Alach went on, had passed a resolution disapproving of what the board had decided to do and he considered that it should have taken the attitude of meeting the board and hearing the financial position, if councillors felt that they had something to add to the scheme. “But to pass such a resolution is a direct discourtesy,” the chairman stated.

Suggestions made with the proper approach were welcomed by the board but, he repeated, the council had no authority to disapprove and demand that the width of the structure should be increased.

Surely, he emphasised, the board was fully qualified and able to decide what was within its financial limits to do. He added that there was the further point that the board was using the old authority for the loan. He had said there would be no expense without an opinion- from the ratepayers, but he had waived his objection because of the urgency of the work. The beard wanted to provide the minimum required but would not agree to do more work than this 'minimum! without putting the matter before the ratepayer’s.. Proposals of the Future

The question of tire future, he said, had been discussed by the board and if in the future it was necessary to extend the pier, another “T” could be added. This had been examined by the committee, Mr Alach went on, and he said it was debatable whether in 20 years the traffic across the harbour would increase or decrease.

With a traffice bridge over the harbour there would be buses, a railcar service to and fro, as well as the regular ferry service, and, he repeated, it was debatable whether the traffic over the harbour would increase or diminish.

Mr Alach thought it wrong that opinions should be given without a knowledge of the full facts. There might come a time when a structure over the harbour would have to be provided, at a cost of thousands. Where would that money come from? Coronation Pier, he declared, had to be kept down to the minimum requirements. Twelve Berths Provided

He considered the width at the T to be satisfactory and he could not see the time when passengers would be embarking and disembarking at the T simultaneously. Twelve berths were being provided and it had been stated that if the work could be done at the estimated cost, and that the width then be increased this would be desirable. He supported this. If the Ts were made wider than was necessary, he stated, it would encourage people to congregate there. If there was no great width there, people would not congregate, Mr Alach said.

He was surprised and alarmed, said Mr Wilkinson, that members had come to the meeting to be lectured. The members, he remarked, had not just “come in out of the cactus.” He disapproved of the attitude to the statement the borough council had made and said that Mr Alach, if he could have, would have suppressed the views. The borough council, he added, had been asked for an opinion and had given it in a courteous and honest way. Had it, altogether, he asked, been just courtesy for the board to ask opinions? “You make no mistake, Mr Chairman,” stated Mr Wilkinson, “as long as I am on the borough council I will see that we have our say.” Was Mr Wilkinson speaking as a borough council member? asked Mr Alach.

Speaking as a New Zealander “As a New Zealander, a New Zealand citizen,’' replied Mr Wilkinson.

Mr Alach repeated that he did not concede to any local body the right to disapprove. The harbour board would not object to the borough council’s plans for reconstucting Cameron Road, he said. “We do not concede,” he continued, “that we have to submit schemes to the borough council or any local body.”

While the borough council had the right' to make suggestions, it did not have the right to sit in judgment on the work of the board, declared Mr W. I. Withy.

A member: It is rather unfortunate that the storm had to come at this stage. Mr Wilkinson: Don’t ask for an opinion if you don’t like it when you get it. The secretary (Mr W. J. Walker) read the letter that the board sent to the borough council.

Mr Alach remarked that he thought the letter had been a mistake in the first place.

Boat Owners’ Attitude

It had been with the interests of the harbour board and the borough council at heart, said Mr W. A. Cars-

well, and he had been thinking of the future, when he brought up the question of increased width. The width as it was at present would be very troublesome and he understood, he said, that boat owners would be at that meeting to protest on the grounds that the width proposed was too dangerous. He asked if the wharf as planned could take the strain of larger ships than the ferry boats. • ; . If it took another £2OOO, it would be better, he considered, to do the extra work today instead of doing' it later, at a cost of £7OOO or £BOOO. He thought that this was what the borough council had in mind when’ it gave its opinion. It had not been ti'ying to dictate to the board. Everyone, Mr Carswell added, knew that the population was going to increase vastlv. Piailcar traffic would be limited and the ferries, he said, would have to carry most of the travellers, both regular and the visitors who liked the sea trip. The railway line would often be needed for other traffic, while the ferries could go on operating all the time. A toll on the ferry passengers had been suggested. Mr Alach suggested that the board should appoint a committee to meet a deputation to discuss the Question. This was seconded and Mr Alach remarked that it was now for the board to agree to meet borough council representatives. A committee was appointed. Pre-casting Favoured

Presenting a plan for the reconstruction, Mr Murray said that the planning had gone a certain distance, generally following the lines of the preliminary plan,.' which allowed for two office buildings on the pier. No details for the buildings had been prepared yet, and this matter should not be rushed, he considered. Construction methods had been gone into, particularly the pre-cast method. Pre-casting of the bulk of the members would .give a better structure and .at a saving in cost. The method obviated the need for boxing. The price, however, was more than he had originally thought, said Mr Murray, though, with-, the pre-cast method, it would, still;'be less than was previously expected; For the pre-casting, a. yard would be set up in Tauranga. With this plan, thci .best possible concrete would result. •

Asked by Mr Wilkinson of the cost, to widen the T-piece at the end Mr Murray estimated that the: cost to double the width of the- T from eight feet would be about £ISOO. The cost would still be below that, estimated.

It would, he answered further; cost about £4OOO to widen the T later. The job would be a better . one if this was done immediately. The structure, he emphasised, was designed as a ferry wharf. If 16 feet wide it would be stronger but the structure would still not accommodate 200-ton vessels only ferries. It could be designed to accommodate larger ships. The present cost was £21,400, allowing for the office buildings. With the cheaper method of .construction the pre-casting if the width was made .14. feet the cost would still be within that estimated. He had ' allowed, said Mr Murray, for variation in the cost but it was difficult today to estimate costs. He estimated that the pier could be constructed in 15 months. Margin Of £SOO It was desirable that the pier be constructed between the two holiday periods from Christmas to Christmas said Mr Alach. The pier could be used by the ferries before the ' final work was done, said the engineer. Allowing £ISOO on the extra width, there would be a margin of £SOO on the job.

Asked if, as an engineer, he would prefer more width at the T, Mr Murray said he would prefer a width of 14 feet. An additional foot (to the 14) in the width would cost perhaps £2OO. The structure, however, would still only be designed for launches.

As the board was today it was paying its way, commented Mr Alach. He warned members that there were always expenses that were not expected. Out of its general revenue, the board would be able to do only the minimum of work. He agreed with the proposed increased width provided the structure was kept within the available finances he stated.

Mr Wilkinson asked if the board could not arrive at a decision that afternoon. Mr Murray had said that a width at the T of 14 or 15 feet would be within the estimate, Mr Wilkinson continued, and how, he asked, about a width of 16 feet? It was moved that the board agree on a width of 15 feet. This, it was stated, was a compromise against a width of eight feat. Removal Of Bank Mr Withy mentioned the removal of a bank which existed at the site. He considered that the question of involving greater cost hinged largely on cost likely to be involved regarding the bank. If the bank could be removed for a reasonable sum, that would be all right, but without knowing this, the board might be taking a step in the dark.

Those boats that would be working the inside jetties were small and could negotiate the bank, said Mr Walker, though the bank could, if necessary, he thought, be removed in the future. The inside jetties, he added, would not be worked by the ferries. Small boats were negotiating the area every day. “It appears to me that with a loan over 25 years, the extra width would mean an addition of about £6O a year,” stated Mr S. F. Newton.

Better service and safety for the public must be remembered, said a member.

The big ferries would work the outside wharves, Mr Newton observed.

“I am not against the wider T on

the end providing it can be done within the original estimate,” repeated Mr Alach. “If that can be done, I am quite happy about it.” Opportunities To Check Mr Murray corroborated this. With the extra width the scheme would still be well under the £21,400 target, and as the work of the planning went on, he said, there would be plenty of opportunities to check the estimate. “Costs rise swiftly these days arid if the work does not start for 18 months it may then be uneconomical,” observed Mr Withy. “We are going ahead as fast as possible,” Mr Alach rejoined. When completed the plans would come before tire harbour board before being submitted to the Loans Board. The board then agreed that Mr Murray should prepare the plans, allowing for a width at the T of 15 feet. The board further agreed on an investigation of the bank at the site, regarding its size and nature.