Harbour Board Seeks Loan For Cargo-Handling Site

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32214, 5 February 1970, Page 9

Harbour Board Seeks Loan For Cargo-Handling Site

The Lyttelton Harbour Board yesterday decided to apply to the Local Authorities’ Loans Board for sanction to borrow a further $lOO,OOO to buy and develop an area of land, on the Christchurch side of the ChristchurchLyttelton Road Tunnel, as a cargo assembly area. The board decided that the loan, “the inner harbour modernisation loan (No. 4), 1970,” should bear an interest rate not exceeding 5} per cent, repayable over a period not exceeding 35 years. The land the board wishes to buy contains about 60 acres. The board intends to handle cargo by modern methods on the land it has at Cashin Quay, but wants land on the other side of the tunnel if congestion at the port makes necessary some cargo assembly and distribution outside the port area. Bulk Loading In his report to meeting, the deputy-chairman (Mr J. Brand) said the loading of 1000 tons of bentonite, held in the transit shed for three months, had begun on January 26. Before the loading the Canterbury Bentonite Company, Ltd, had received an additional order for a further 2000 tons as difficulty was being experienced in obtaining the supplies from the American market.

The balance of the order, 1200 tons, would be shipped to Tasmania as soon as it was stockpiled at the wharf

“This trade is going to get better and better, and highlights the point that the sooner we get the bulk handling conveyer into operation ■the better,” Mr Brand said. Mr W. B. Laing said he had watched the handling of the bentonite and it seemed to

go smoothly and efficiently. Bentonite was susceptible to rain, and he asked whether the bulk handling conveyer to be bought by the board, for use with a container crane, would be covered. The chief engineer (Mr J. B. Bushell) said detailed specifications of the proposed bulk handling equipment had not yet been drawn up. The engineering staff was examining a host of different bulkhandling equipment, but his opinion, at present, was that the conveyer should be covered. He said that the bentonite company had suggested a conveyer system from inside the

transit shed to the ship. The board had said it might purchase such a conveyer from the company provided it could be used for other materials. To date, only sketch plans of the proposed bentonite conveyer had been given by the company to the board. Mr Laing, later in the meeting, said the board’s planned new bulk conveyer should be covered because loading phosphates could cause a dust nuisance which might mean delays in the operation of it. He questioned whether the conveyer should run across the top of the sheds in Cashin Quay and said he was

worried about the question of dust. It might be better to have the conveyer above the road. Mr A. A. Macfarlane said he was also concerned about any possibility of a dust nuisance.

Mr Bushell said various sites for the conveyer were under study and gave engineering reasons for the present preference of siting it above the sheds. He said the straight run of the conveyer could be easily covered and any dust nuisance would not occur there, but at the interchange. He assured the board that the question was being studied most carefully.