Road Tunnel

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30127, 10 May 1963, Page 3

Road Tunnel

Sir, —The Road Tunnel Authority’s statistics published on Saturday are interesting. Perhaps we could have a few more. Is it correct that the tunnel would have been wider but for the Ministry of Works estimate of the extra cost? When the Ministry’s blunder in the estimate was revealed, why was the tunnel width not increased? The money was available. How wide is the Mount Victoria tunnel in Wellington? Who were the consultants?—Yours, etc., RED TAPEWORM.

May 5, 1963. [The chairman of the Christchurch-Lyttelton Road Tunnel Authority (Mr R. A. Witbrock) said: “The final width of the tunnel was decided upon on the basis of estimated traffic volume and cost. The two-lane carriageway will be capable of processing 2000 vehicles an hour but it is not expected that the total traffic will exceed 2000 vehicles a day in the initial stages. The authority is confident, therefore, that the width of the tunnel will be sufficient for many years. Comparable overseas tunnels with two lanes process as many as 30.000 Vehicles a day. The Rotherhithe and Blackwall tunnels in London have two lanes of only eight feet compared with 12 feet in the Christchurch-Lyttelton road tunnel. The Mount Blanc tunnel which is seven miles long, has only two traffic lanes. The Mount Victoria tunnel in Wellington has two lanes of 10ft 3in. It is not known who were rhe consultants for this tunnel. In connexion with the Ministry of Works’ socalled blunder, it is a fact that one of the tenders was close to the estimate. The tender accepted was a favourable one because of the good climate for tendering existing at the time.”]