Board Reviews Use Of Harbour Slipways

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29766, 8 March 1962, Page 9

Board Reviews Use Of Harbour Slipways

whole thing needs cleaning up and tightening UP. said the chairman (Mr t Macfarlane) when the Lyttelton Harbour Board yesdiscussed slipways in Charteris, Church and Hay’s Bays.

There were 101 slipways, •nd while some were soundly constructed, others were most unsightly, Mr Macfarlane said. Members would be reluctant to impose restrictions on tne owners of small craft, but it was obvious that stricter control over the recent development would be necessary, he continued, borne slipways were not being used, and the board should consider whether the owners should be made to remove them.

As a first step, he proposed that each owner should be made to take out a proper foreshore licence under the Harbours Act This would involve a search and survey in the first instance, but the time and expense should ultimately prove worthwhile. When any more permits were granted there should be strict supervision of the construction of slipways, said Mr x. T. Sutton, who complained that some of the slipways were frail and a possible danger. Where slipways were not being used, permits should be forfeited and the slipways allocated to persons who wanted them. One of the difficulties was that some houses were built right on the teashore, and the owners objected to slipways and sheds being built in front of them, said Mr L. G Amos.

“In the Interests of harmony, the board would be wise to call a meeting with the owners and Mount Herbert County Council representatives to discuss the matter,” he said.

On closer co-operation with the council, Mr Macfarlane said there was a good deal of uncertainty over the boundary between county and board land and also whether there was any land between

the board and county vested in the Crown and commonly referred to as the “Queen’s chain.”

Until these questions were properly resolved, the logical course would be to ensure that all structures on the waterfront should be approved by both the council and the board.