Harbour Board Move To Port Deferred

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31480, 21 September 1967, Page 18

Harbour Board Move To Port Deferred

Lyttelton Harbour Board members were in general agreement yesterday that there would probably have to be a move of the administrative and engineering staff from the city to the port, but that the time was not opportune.

Mr L. G. Amos, the chairman, suggested the move several months ago. Since then a special committee has investigated the proposal and yesterday the board held a special meeting to consider reports from the general manager (Mr A. J. Sowden) and the chief engineer (Mr A. J. Charman). Both recommended against a move. “The report of the officers show distinct honesty,” Mr Amos said. “My only complaint is that I think the reports lack imagination. Also, there is nothing about the financial implications.”

The road tunnel was the key to the future of Canterbury, and the Regional Planning Authority was preparing plans for a new roading network. Mr F. W. Freeman said. It could well be that the whole pattern would change and the board might need, to have its whole activities concentrated at the port. Rather than decide one way or another now, the board should keep a move in view. ' The board was operating at fairly high cost and. one way of. cutting the overhead was to move some of the staff to the port, Mr F. I. Sutton said. However, the reports of the chief executive officers said a move would not be in the interests of efficiency. Mr J. Brand, who said he was disappointed that there was not going to be a move, added that the tenancies of the board’s building in Lyttelton had complicated the position. In future there should be a close watch on leasing of office space so that if a move was required tenancies could be terminated.

There was a possibility of group control of neighbouring ports, and the whole matter of harbour control was in a state of flux at present, Mr E. Brophy said. It would be wise to wait and see what happened. Mr W. P. Glue, the only firm opponent of a move, said the board was “lucky to have a site like this, and as far as I am concerned we stop here.” After everyone present had spoken, Mr Amos said he was pleased that he had support and suggested that the next board be recommended to review a move. “This building has an estimated sale value of $600,000,” he said. “It is costing about $4OOO a year to house 40 of a staff.” The board agreed that a move should be referred to the next elected board.