EASTERN ACCESS

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 32, 6 August 1929, Page 10

EASTERN ACCESS

COST MAY GO UP

WESTERN APPROACH

LOANS BOARD RULING

It is understood that there is every likelihood of a further change of plans in connection ■with the western approach to the tunnel through the Mount Victoria ridge, dne to the advice given the City Council by the Local Government Loans Board that the board is of the opinion that it would be unwise for the council to depart from the route recommended by the Access Commission If this course is followed the cost of the tunnel complete will be very much higher than, the figures recently published. As has been made fully clear the tunnel, approach works and tramway equipment cannot be financed out of the amount authorised by the ratepayers in 1920 (£ 161,250, or, with the , 10 per cent, which may be raised without a further poll, £177,375). During the discussions at the council table, prior, of course, to the calling of tenders for the tunnel work, this financial difficulty was much stressed and, in the early stages of these, discussions it "was the general opinion that there ■was no way out but to appeal to the ratepayers for permission to raise further money. However, when tenders ■were called the figures were much more favourable than most councillors had thought possible, and the promise of the Government of a subsidy upon money spent on the approaches, as unemployment relief works, made the outlook easier. ■'' The Access Commission, it will be remembered, made definite recommendations as to the approach works, advising that a new diagonal road should be constructed to give approach ■on the city side, but the council, in order to keep the cost of the complete job as nearly as possible to the amount of loan money available, determined to depart radically from this recommendation. • The Access Commission's recommendation for the western approach road was as follows:— The construction of a diagonal approach road on a grade of 1 in 18.8 from the intersection of Dufferin and Ellice street to the intersection of • Brougham and Patterson street, and . thence on the southern side of Patterson street to the western portal. This street would have an overall width of 66ft to Brougham street and 64ft in;Patterson street. The northern part of Patterson street would remain at existing grade,- but would 1 be decreased in width to 26ft until the tunnel portal is reached. THE COUNCIL'S PROPOSAL^ The council's decision was that this expensive diagonal approach should stand aside for the time being, and that traffic, both vehicular and tramway, should follow the present roads, i.e., should run up Ellico street, turn at right angles into Brougham street, and turn again, at right angles, to Patterson street. Instead of having to purchase a considerable block of valuabla land between Dufferin and Brougham streets to drive through the new Tpadway, the council would merely have to acquire small areas to make possible the easing of corners to allow of an easier traffic flow. Obviously the,difference in property costs would be great. Moreover, were a new diagonal road constructed there must bo hea.vy expenditure upon roading construction, whereas, were the ElliceBrougham street route taken to Patterson street, the expenditure upon new roading work would be comparatively little. Even so, the financial position was not easy. The total estimated cost of the scheme, as amended by the council, has been stated as £193,431. It was also indicated that were the tramway work, left out of consideration, the 1920 authorisation would cover tunnel and approaches, leaving, in fact, a balance of about £6000 from the full amount (£177,375), which could bo raised. The tramway aspect has never been made very clear, and there have been suggestions that tram track work may have to wait. "Whether the ballot papers of 1920 said tramway tunnel or not—the item appeared "New tunnel through Mount Victoria" —the general understanding was definitely that the tunnel was to be a general traffic and tramway tunnel. LOANS BOARD'S PROVISO. In order to obtain the additional • finance required the council, as already stated, decided to carry out the approach works as unemployment relief works, and with that end in viow applied to the Loans Board for permission to raise a loan of £15,000, upon which the Government subsidy would be claimable, and in respect of which loan no poll of the ratepayers would be required. The Loans Board, it is understood, expressed the opinion that a;loan of lesser amount would meet the council's needs, but ultimately agreed to a loan of the amount asked for, but upon the condition that the council followed the Access Commission's recommendations regarding the western approach. :■' ■ The estimate drawn up. by the Commission of the cost of this approach was £39,000, including property acquisition, but excluding tramway work. The City Engineer's estimate of the works between Dufferin street and the "western portal, excluding both property acquisition and tramw y work, was £11,480, so that the difference is very considerable, something between £20,000 and £30,000. The manner in which this additional money is to be found, if the Loans Board insists upon the diagonal approach, whether by application for an unemployment reli9f work loan of still larger amount (requiring no poll of the ratepayers), whether by a street widening loan (also requiring no poll of the ratepayers), or whether tramway work, shall stand over and possibly be the subject of a separate loan proposal (requiring a poll of ratepayers) in the future, has seemingly yet to be decided.