ACCESS TO THE SEA

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22050, 25 March 1937, Page 20

ACCESS TO THE SEA

XO TH* KSITO> or th* ra«ss. Sir, —The very interesting letter of your correspondent. Mr Cyrus Williams, on access to the sea seems *o me to convey a moral. Read it very carefully," and there seems no escaping the conclusion that any revolutionary work involving an expenditure of £2,680,000 (accepting the cost of the tunnel road as £480,000, though this work is often quoted at £500,000), is certainly not justified, and there is no way to avoid this expenditure on the harbour, if the hoeps of direct loading into sheds on the wharf and thence into lorries are to be realised. As I see it. the moral is gradual, development of an estuary scheme. There are numerous reasons why we should turn our attention to this side.

One is the obvious advantage of being in a position to secure a fair share of the revenues derived from ship to city, for the benefit of the city, and another is that the establishment of direct access would kindle the spirit and the ambition of the generation coming on. Gradual development means the expenditure of something we can stand, without too much strain, and taking into consideration that, after all, most of us are only striving to make this part of New Zealand a little more useful and a little fairer to the local population, heroic measures might safely be modified. We are certainly entitled to get that revenue if we can make our minds up to spend a little money. We are entitled to create a device that will catch and create more trade, even if that trade is confined to ships of limited size. If the mole or moles necessary for this kind of trade prove their ability to stand up to the buffeting of the seas for a number of years, they can be extended if the venture has been a success. . If it has not been a success, our moderation in the first place will find its justification. Usually in these matters the bold policy is considered the best! by thp experts, but the circumstances here are unusual, and the cautious way looks, to this writer, the wisest. The question is, are the official plans and subsequent ones on the same lines, applicable, for a policy of gradual development, or would a total revision be necessary?— Yours, etc., C.D.M. March 24, 1937.