NOT RECOMMENDED

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 143, 13 December 1935, Page 18

NOT RECOMMENDED

TRAMS TO MORNINGTON

MANAGER'S REPORT.

"CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED"

The general manager of the eily . tramways department, Mr. M. Cable, last night presented to the City Council his report upon the proposal to extend the Brooklyn tramway to Mornington. In Mr. Cable's opinion so heavy an outlay as would be entailed, £29,257, is not warranted, and he accordingly recommended that the proposal should not be proceeded with. Further consideration is to be given the proposal. ''In the event of a line being constructed via Ohiro Road, McKinley Crescent, to Mornington, the City Engineer estimates that the cost of street works would amount to £3856, which, added to the estimate of £17,000 for track and overhead lines and feeders, gives a total of £20,856," states Mr. Cable. "As stated previously, I am of the opinion that in the event of the council deciding to proceed with an extension of the system to Mornington the line should be laid along a diagonal road constructed from the junction of Ohiro Road and McKinley Terrace to Taft Street, in connection with which a certain amount of property has already been purchased. This deviation would obviate the sharp curves in McKinley Terrace and the severe grade in Mornington Road, thereby permitting the cars to maintain a satisfactory speed. TOTAL COST £29,257. "The cost of constructing this diagonal road, including the acquisition of the balance of property required, would amount according to the estimates prepared by the City Engineer and City Valuer to not less than £8893, to which would require to be added the expenditure'on street works, between Cleveland Street and McKinley Terrace, and from Taft Street to the proposed terminus at Farnham Street, amounting to £3364, giving a total of £12,257. Adding to the latter figure the cost of tramway construction amounting, as already stated, to £17,000, the total cost of the extension via the proposed diagonal road would be £29,257. ' "The estimate of £17,000 for tramway work provides for a single track laid on sleepers—the cheapest type of construction—with overhead lines supplied by feeders from the Newtown substation. "Although a ten minutes' service throughout the day would be far in excess of the requirements of the district, the only alternative to running cars at intervals of ten minutes would be to stand alternate cars at Brooklyn for upwards of ten minutes, an uneconomic procedure, as the saving would be confined to power and wear dnd tear. The cost of operating the proposed service to Mornington on the basis of a ten minutes' time-table, exclusive of any allowance towards capital charges, is estimated at £5000. NOT AT PRESENT JUSTIFIED. "It is unlikely that the revenue from tramway operation would reach £2000 per annum for the first few years after the extension was opened, in view of the fact that the bus revenue during the past,year did not exceed £825; and that with a through tram service .the residents served would take full advantage of the standard concession ticket. • As the present traffic is inadequate to support the running of a bus service for a limited number of hours daily, the expenditure of a considerable sum on a tramway extension cannot in my opinion be justified at the present time, particularly when consideration is given to the straitened position of the department's finances. "As it has been stated that a number of lines now serving populated districts were constructed and operated for years at a loss, I would point out that there is no justification for this course being followed today when transport can be provided without the heavy cost of track and road improvements associated with tramway operation. Unless it can be shown in the case of any extension under consideration that there is sufficient traffic to warrant at least a fifteen-minutes' service, the construction of a tramway should not be favourably viewed by the council." Councillor P. M. Butler said that the report was practically the same, as that which came before the council on a previous occasion. The general manager had repeatedly stated that the tramway offered the best means of city passenger transport, but in the final paragraph of the present report contradicted his previous, repeated statements: he could not have it both ways. He moved that the report should go back to the committee for further consideration, with a recommendation that the service should be approved. The council was not being given the details which should be given, and he suggested that when anything was wanted a low estimate was put in, and when it was not a high estimate was prepared. Even though the service might not pay, the people of Mornington were isolated and had for long been promised the service. Councillor Butler asked why the question of the diagonal road,had not been taken into account when the original lay-out of the roading was being made. Councillor W. Duncan, seconding Councillor Butler's amendment, said that the congested state of the city ■warranted additional trams to where there was space to live. THREE TRAMWAY PROPOSALS. The Mayor (Mr. T. C. A. Hislop) said that the matter had been gone into very fully, and the report was recommended for adoption. The point was that to complete the line would cost £30,000. Apart from that the estimated loss of running the service was approximately £3000 a year. Three big tramway proposals had to be dealt with, the western access, the work in front of the new railway station, and the proposal under discussion. Combined, these involved a lot of money, and it was. a question of doing the .most imperative work: To put in a track would cost thousands of pounds, whereas by an improved bus service needs could be met, and a tramway put in when circumstances warranted it. There could be no argument that putting on a bus service was better than running a tram service at a loss of £3000. Councillor M. F. Luckie: It is a very poor bus service now. The Mayor said that the present bus service was losing £"800 a year. It would therefore pay the council to double the present bus service rather than lose £3000 in running a tram service. Councillor A. Black deprecated a report which merely turned down a pro-! posal without giving some alternative. He suggested that the report go back for the addition of a report on some alternative service, The Mayor said that he was cyiite prepared to take the clause back, but not with the recommendation that the service should be approved. This course was agreed to, _