Dunedin the Deep Sea Port

Evening Star, Issue 20253, 14 August 1929, Page 6

Dunedin the Deep Sea Port

Board Reaffirms Harbour Policy Lower Harbour Proposals Rejected Further Meeting to Discuss Victoria Wharf Problems ■ V. '■ iu ' . 1 , "-"TTr rr.. : - : i . ■ ■ ■■■■ ■ By eight votes to throe, the Otago Harbour Board last night reaffirmed its policy of malting Dunedin the deep sea port of Otago. The old controversy, Port Chalmers v. Dunedin, was raised by a motion by Mr T. Scollay, who asked that the board should concen-, irate on improving the channel and the approaches to the Port Chalmers wharves to allow of the largest vessels trading to New Zealand boing berthed and despatched on fully loaded draughts. His motion was defeated. A voluminous report on ,the linking up of the Victoria whartf by railway and the installation of cranes was submitted by the engineer,* but on Mr H. E. Mollor asking for further information the meeting was adjourned to a date to ; be. fixed by the chairman.

Mr Walter GW presided, and the members present were 1 : Captain Coll McDonald, Messrs H, M. Driver H. ;f‘l. Moller, 11. C. Campbell, J. M‘C. Dickson, T. Scollay, D, F. H. Sharpe, j. H. Duncan, John Loudon, J). Larnach, and W. Bogg. THE CHAIRMAN'S POLICY. Supplementing his statement, which he submitted again to the meeting, Mr Cow said the first purpose of the statement was to set out the policy of the board, demanded by a member and the public, through the Press. He asked members to see his view of the policy and the carrying out of the policy, which had to be comprehensive and stated in broad terns, unhampered by details of method of. operation. He had been careful not to mention the method. But ho now asked the board to accept the policy of 1915, reaffirmed at the time of the purchase of the Port Chalmers wharves. He was justified in thinking the 1915 policy remained. Mr Loudon: ’What about the 1925 ■policy ? Mr Gow: It is not a policy. The Chairman ruled that his original statement did not permit of a discussion. Mr H. C. Campbell expressed his support of the chairman’s statement, which he moved be accepted and approved. Mr Moller seconded. Mr Dickson said he would not like it to go out that at was the policy of the hoard. Policies had to be altered to suit the conditions. Mr Scollay; If a member does not Vote against this motion, does it mean he endorses the statement ? The Chairman: Not necessarily. Mr Larnach; Silence means consent. THE 1925 SCHEME. Mr Loudon remarked that the policy of 1925 was the board’s policy. Mr Gowr The scheme adopted in 1925 was the method of carrying out the policy of 1915. “ What is this meeting for? ” asked Mr Loudon when he was called to order for persisting in his statement. The Chairman put the motion. ! Mr Loudon: “I object.’’ He declared that it was clearly understood in 1925 that the policy of the hoard was %o make Dunedin the port of Otago. Mr Gow: Would you be good enough to accept my ruling? Yours was not a policy, but a performance of policy. Mr Loudon : Will T

M HOLLER'S QUESTIONS At ibo previous meeting of the hoard Mr M'oller moved, and it was carried: — “That the engineer supply, urgently, replies to the following questions :— : “I. That the engineer report (with plans) on what provision is necessary, and how much it will cost, to connect the Victoria wharf with the railway' service.” (Note. —The Railway Department to work cargo like at Birch street wharf.) “2. How i-soon the scheme could be brought in operation. “.d. Whether any additional sheds would bo required and cost of same, in concrete and in iron..

“4. Whether it would be possible to repair the Birch street - wharf, so that it would suffice for, say, five or six years, also cost of same. (Note. —-My purpose in asking question 4 is to ascertain -' if the money allotted to this wharf under the recent loan Act could be diverted to the Victoria wharf, and if it is practicable, and the board approves, we could get this incorporated in the Bill we are to have before this session of Parliament).” ENGINEER’S REPORT A .summary of the report of tho engineer (Mr J. M'G. Wilkie) on Mr Moller’s questions was as follows; —• Question I. Briefly stated, the provision necessary to connect the Victoria wharf with the railway service depends upon the amount of traffic to be handled. If tho quantity is small it is considered that two lines will afford reasonable dispatch. "With the use of capstans the scope of the two tracks can bo increased. For ,a largo quantity of both export and import cargo at least three tracks will be required to afford a reasonable degree of continuity of working. Costs: for two tracks, £22,767; for three tracks, £31,483; for provision - of lie lines and capstans add to each (extra). £6,846. Question 2.—Two lines can bo made ready fifteen montlis from date of order of necessary material. Three lines would be ready in eighteen months. _ Question 3.—1 do not consider additional shed accommodation is essential at present time. Costs of various types of sheds; 1, £23,400; 2. £18,600: 3, £15,567; 4, £13,394; o, £12,324. Question 4.—lt ..would be possible to repair the Birch street wharf at a cost of £2,000 to last, say, five years; but I do not guarantee that other repairs would not bo necessary during that period. These answers are qualified bycontext of the report. Reporting in detail on the questions, Mr Wilkie stated: —

“Put a little more pep into your speech. Mr Chairman,” suggested Mr Larnach. Tho Chairman; All hi favour of the motion ?

“ 1 say I have tho right to speak on it,” reiterated Mr Loudon. The Chairman: You will have the right to speak on any matter brought up by Mr Scollay’s_ motion. Mr London: All right, then. I want to submit that the policy of 1925 Mr Gow: I cannot allow that. MR LOUDON SUCCEEDS. Mr Loudon said he was surprised recently to find members saying the board had no defined policy. He contended a policy was in existence to make Dunedin the port of Otago. They could not possibly have two ports. “ I want to say straight out that if we attempt to make Port Chalmers the port it will mean embarking on a very large system of reclamation for accommodation at a cost which will bo' a tremendous shock to tho members of this board and the public generally,” said Mr Loudon. Mr Moller; 1 rise to a point of order. We arc at present considering the chairman’s statement. Mr Gow ruled Mr Loudon out of order. He said he did not want to be Unreasonably. Mr Loudon: I don’t want to be unreasonable to other people. Are we going to have an opportunity to discuss the policy of the board? If wo accept your motion the meeting is ended. Mr Gow: I only ask the board to accept the broad policy of 1915 as tho policy of the board. Captain M'Donald: I cannot accept jihat policy. I have been five years an the board, and the policy has never been brought up. The only policy was the one brought down by Mr Loudon, but it has been torn to pieces. The Chairman : It is not a policy. Captain M'Donald; It has taken‘the place of the policy you have mentioned, which was only words. Nothing was in existence. The board has done nothing towards that policy in the last five years. “Except the mole, perhaps,” -remarked Mr Gow.

“ Question 1: ' That the engineer report with plans on what provision is necessary and how much it will cost to connect the Victoria wharf, with the railway service.’ (Note. —‘ The Hailway Department to work cargo like at Birch street wharf.’) “ The proposed route of railway connection to Victoria wharf is outlined on the accompanying plan. From the railway siding at I’ehcliet Bay the track follows Wickiilfo street, utilising the route of the Milburn Lime and Cement Company’s siding and the track serving the oil companies’ bulk stores. A back shunt, about 600fb long, on the seaward side of the Milburu Lime and Cement Company’s section permits of railway wagons being pushed on to the Victoria wharf, the track following close to the seaward boundary of Fryatt street. From a point about 400ffc distant from the end of 1 the wharf the track must be ramped up to wharf level, and a grade of 1 in 200 has been adopted. “It is proposed to carry the track from solid ground to the end of the wharf, partly on an embankment, and partly on trestle work which would fit in with future wharf extension.

“ The present width of Victoria wharf does not permit of the provision of more than, two railway tracks, on account of the necessary clearance between railway lines, and the crane legs. Provision for extra tracks would involve either the widening of the wharf on the seaward ..side, or the cutting back’of the storage sheds and the construction of a platform on the landward side. The suggestion for a third line on the landward side of the wharf is shown in dotted lines on the plan, and an elevation indicates the curtailment in width of the storage sheds. “The total length of Victoria wharf Is approximately 1,950 ft, providing berthage accommodation for at least three vessels of 450 ft in length, and although ib is improbable that at the present time three vessels would be loading or discharging merchandise from or into railway wagons, this possibility has been taken into _ consideration in determining, the positions of the various cross-overs.

After Mr Loudon had .again asked if a discussion on policy would be allowed, Mi* Dickson asked a similar question! Mr Larnach rose to a (point of order. Was it a committee or a board mooting? The Chairman: It is a board meeting. Mr Larnach: But Mr Dickson has fjpoken already. Mr Dickson: I am asking a question. Mr Larnach: I knew j - ou would put it that way. STATEMENT REJECTED. Air Dickson said he presumed, as the chairman’s statement outlined the policy, that the whole subject weald be open for discussion. If not, members should have been told before they sjioke so that they could have discussed the policy. Mr Gow: You will be at liberty to discuss anything appertaining to Mr gcollay’s motion when it comes up. Mr Dickson; That will be a very diffi■y- .cult matter to decide. _ On Mr Campbell’s motion being put only Messrs Campbell, Moller, and Sharpe voted for it, Messrs Larnach, Loudon, Duncan, Scollay, M'Donald, and Sharps being the dissentients. “ All right. H’nijhh’s”m s ” jvas Mr fisa’s cpmroejai.

LIKELIHOOD OF INCONVENIENCE “ Without some knowledge of the volume of rail traffic to he anticipated at this wharf it is possible to show only a general outline of tracks and cross-overs, and the lay-out as shown may require considerable alteration when the information which the secretary ■ is kindly endeavouring. to obtain comes to hand. It is annarent that, when two or more ships are working vail cargo at the same time, inconvenience and. delays would result during shunting operations if only two tracks are available; but it is thought that delays would not he of a serious nature if a small amount of cargo only is to be anticipated. The employment of capstans would facilitate the movement of railway wagons on the wharf and their installa tion, in conjunction with the lie lines beyond the end of the wharf, would certainly increase ±he volume of cargo

that could be handled on two.linos, and would also reduce the time lost during slnlnting operations. It is not anticipated that the volume of rail traffic will warrant tho Victoria wharf being sot aside as a purely railway wharf, and as long as both cargo to rail and cargo to shed is being worked at the same time, either by ono skip or several ships, delays will bo unavoidable during tho time occupied in the movement of wagons to and from the vessels’ sides. ..

vides for tho cost of relaying a. 531 b track on tho site of tho present Milburn siding, but does not include any purchase price of these two tracks. Provision lor four lie-lines on foreshore, to accommodate empty and full trucks, £1,74G. Four electrically-driven 'capstans and four loose running heads on Victoria wharf, £3,000. Possible installation of one capstan and two running heads to servo the lie-lines, £I.OOO.

Total (two tracks on wharf, including lie-lines and capstans), £29,113. Estimate for third track on’ landward .side of wharf—-(1) Erection of platform, £(5,845; (2) coat of thirtyone tons rails,, and .crossings, including laying, £701; (3) alterations to sheds, ramps, etc., £l,llO. (Sraud total, £37,829, Question 2.—Mow soon the scheme could he brought into operation. Tho time necessary to complete the works enumerated is more or less dependent upon date of delivery of the necessary timber from Australia, and our recent experiences show that, considerable delay is likely to occur. Assuming, however, that all necessary material can bo delivered within six months from date of order, then it is considered that the whole of the work in connection with two siding lines could bo completed within fifteen months from that date-

The question of railway connection to' tho Victoria wharf was discussed with Mr Benzoin, District Railway Engineer, and Mr Sword, Traffic Manager, who commented upon the difficulties, to bo anticipated in handling traffic from this wharf through the passenger yard to the goods yard, or vice versa. There is no track available through the passenger yard which could bo utilised solely lor tho Victoria wharf shunting operations, and they fear that delays ■■would be of frequent occurrence in providing an adequate supply of empties or in removing tho full trucks. Although Mr Sword expressed doubt about bis ability to handle largo quantities of goods with only two tracks on the wharf, lie considered that, with suit-ably-placed turnouts, a small volume of traffic presented no gr.eat difficulties. Until given some idea, of the number of wagons per day to bo handled both gentlemen refrain from making any definite pronouncement as to the possibilities of the suggestions contained on tho plan No. 2,897. CROSS-OVERS OR TURN-OUTS. It will \hc noticed that the usual “ scissor ” crossing is not adopted as a means of transferring wagons from one lino to the other, the roiison being that the presence of tho crane rail between the railway tracks necessitates a complicated junction where the crane rad meets the scissor crossing. The Junetion with the single cross-over will be of a similar type, but so far the Railway Department have not indicated their entire agreement with this method of working the wharf. THIRD RAILWAY TRACK ON WHARF.

erection of tho platform and ilio cutting back of the sheds to make provision for a third track would take an additional three months—-i.e., assuming this work proceeded in conjunction with the other.

_ “ Question 3: Whether any additional sheds would he required and the cost of same in concrete and iron. When * P ’ shed, is completed it is my opinion, that there will be sufficient slic’d accommodation to meet the requirements of the port at present, fiowpresence of railway access on the Victoria wharf may cause a greater demand for these berths by coastal and intercolonial in which case more shed accommodation would be required at this wharf. “The opinion of the wharfinger should ho sought upon this question, but, as instructed, comparative costs for various classes of sheds have been taken out and are given below. The high cost of storage sheds on insecure ground at the edge of the- water, as compared with tho - cost of a similar shod on solid land, is due to the necessity for expensive foundations. ESTIMATED COSTS OF SHEDS.

The' provision, for a third track on the landward side of the wharf would involve the cutting back of the present storage sheds on the wharf lor a distance of Bft, and the construction of ix platform to carry «2te siding pis shown on cross-section on plan No. 2.897. This work would involve eon-* siderable expenditure, and unless the sheds wore extended on the roadside a considerable loss of floor space. Details of the work arc as follow: — ’ The construction of a platiomi Sit in width of similar construction to tho present wharf deck, of a total length of 1,950 ft. No further long piles would be necessary, the present wharf caps 1 being extended landwards and supported from the ground by short struts or packing pieces. Four now beams per bay are required, surmounted by sleepers and close docking, ALTERATIONS TO SHEDS. The storage sheds—T, I), V, W, and X—would require to bo cut back by Bft from the present edge of the wharf, i Sheds T, V. and X would not present | any great difficulty, the front wall be- j lug moved back in sections and recreated on the new lino Provision I would have to bo made for carrying the I roof principals at the .second panel, j point, the remaining portion of the roof being cantilevered over the third railway track. Certain alterations would be necessary to the roof trusses to convert tension members into compression. This would leave the roof itself unaltered. The foundations under the new position of the walls would require strengthening with additional beams and piles. Shed II: The roof of this shed has the roof principals parallel to tho lino of the wharf, and alterations to this shed would necessitate the cutting back of the roof as well as tho walls—i.e., the roof could not bo left as a verandah as in tho other sheds. Shed W: This shed would not involve any difficulty, being at present open. Tho actual loss of floor space in tho various sheds involved by the proposed alterations is as follows: — Shed T: Total area, 11,400 square feet; area lost, 1,216 square feet: 10-6 per cent, loss. Shed 0: Total area, 9,150 square feet; area lost, 976 square feet; 10.6 per cent. loss. Shed V: Total area, 11,850 square feet; area lost, ,1.264 square feet; 10.6 per cent, loss. Shed X: To tad area , 13,650 square feet; area lost, 1,456 .square ioet; 10.6 per cent. loss. The special mooring bollards behind the wharf would require alteration or removal, and various small sheds, urinals, and ramps would require to bo shifted back. COST OF RAILWAY CONNECTION. I

_ “Tho accompanying plan shows a possible position for a storage shed 400 ft in length by 82ft in width. This length may he increased towards ‘ X ’ shed if desirable; but it is not thought advisable to extend northwards, as this open space would form a suitable dump for timber cargoes. In fact, it is the only remaining space which will adequately serve for • lar*> cargoes of timber. “(1) Shed 400 ft x 82ft with reinforced concrete foundations carried on timber piles, reinforced concrete floor, braced steel columns 24ft high with provision for traversing crane, one span steel roof principals, corrugated asbestos roof supported on steel purlins, and walls covered with protected metal. This design is similar to that of tho now railway workshops. Estimated cost, £23.400

; “ (2) Shod 400 ft x 82ft, similar in design to ‘I) ’ shed. Reinforced concrete ; floor and foundations supported on 1 timber piles, reinforced concrete walls 1 loft high, steel plate sliding doors, steel roof principals in two spans, covered with corrugated asbestos roofing supported on timber purlins.. Estimated cost, £18,600.

The following estimates include the cost of the work from Pelichet Bay railway yard to the Rattray street end of’ the Victoria Wharf, although it is not suggested that tho board should be responsible for the whole of the works enumerated. Then question of proportional cost should form the subject of negotiation with the Railway DepartmentVictoria Wharf.—-As it is considered necessary to provide for the trucking of goods across the wharf to storage sheds, a wharf deck flush with the top of the rails is essential, and this double decking adds very materially to tho cost or the work. Certain portions of the structure enumerated below must be strengthened to carry the ’railway loading, and as additional beams will be required to carry the crane loading the cost of both’these works has been included in the estimate. The accompanying plan indicates the positions of the various sections of wharf referred to:—• ’

Section A (Bays 1-50). —Crane strengthening, timber, and labour, £095.

Section B (Bays 51-70). —Removal concrete slab and timber decking, place new beams for crane and railway loading, £I,OOB. Section C (Bays 71-90). —Removal concrete slab and timber decking, place new* beams for crane and railway loading, £1,523. .

Section D (Bays 90-120). —Removal old timber deck, and place now’ beams for crane and railway loading, £797. Sections C, D, .and B (Bays 51-120). —Timber and construction of new timber deck, carried on sleepers, total cost, £7,300. Sections B, C, and D—Timber and labour,, now r timber caps, 12ft by 6ft (iron hark w’here necessary). £I,OBO. Section B (Bays 120-128).—-160ft new extension timber, and labour for extra crane strengthening, £395. Section P (Bays 129-136). Total construction as previously estimated, £4,600.

Section G (Completed).—Crane rails to_ complete, 15.3 tons, £276; railwayrails, £490; general contingencies and cartage (5 per cent.), £903! Points arid Crossings.—Seven crossings at £l4O, say,/£I,OOO. Total for Victoria wharf, £20,067. The 1928-29 estimate was £18,885 (£14,135,. wharf reconstruction; £4,750, 160 ft newextension). The present estimate is £20,067Additional .Expenses-:—Tracks from Polichet Bay to Victoria wharf (approximately fifty chains of single track, with the necessary formation). 120 ft stone embankment, 80ft trestle work, and three sets points, , £2,700. This estimate assumes that use is made of the present Oil Company’s line in Wicklift'e street as a loop haa, and also pro-

“ (3) Shed 400 ft x 82ft, concrete floor and foundations supported on timber piles, steel columns 15ft high, with walls covered with protected metal, two span steel roof principals covered with corrugated asbestos roofing supported on timber purlins. Estimated cost, £15,567. ‘‘ (4) Shed 400 ft x 82ft, concrete floor and foundations supported on timber piles, steel columns 15ft high, with walls covered with corrugated galvanised iron, two span steel roof principals covered with corrugated galvanised iron supported on timber purlins. Estimated cost, £13.394. Note.—Nos. 2,3, find 4 arc identical in size, and tho costs may he taken as comparative.

“ (5) Shed 4.00 ft x 82ft timber floor and foundations supported from ground level by sills, short piles, and pile plates, framed timber walls 15ft high covered with corrugated galvanised iron, framed timber doors, two span steel roof principals covered with corrugated galvanised iron supported on timber purlins. Estimated cost, £12,324. _ “‘Question 4: Whether it would be possible to repair tho Birch street wharf so that it would suffice for, say, five or six years, also cost of same.’ In reply to this question I quote, verbatim, report by Mr Swanson, who made a thorough examination of this wharf- in 1928, and with whoso views I am i n accord :

“ * Tn September-, 1928, following the receipt of a letter from' the district railway engineer, , stating that the Birch street- wharf would require strengthening to carry the department’s proposed now shunting engine, as the present small engine could not be main-, tained for use on this wharf, a detailed inspection was made of the structure; The object of the inspection was to ascertain what temporary repairs were necessary to enable the wharf to be used for a few years and to meet- with the Railway Department’s requirements

“ ‘ Except for the lust thirty-four bays at the Kitchener street end, the survey showed that the structure was in a bud state of disrepair. Many of the piles of the outside row have been badly knocked about by shipping, being split and broken above the water line. A considerable number of the inside piles have rotted away at low water mark, and many are supported by. bracing from the adjoining piles with iron bark and blnogum timbers, others have been Cut- off and supported on concrete blocks founded on tbc stone wall beneath the wharf. On the outside the structure has a row of close piling for a considerable distance, providing an excellent fender, but structurally giving only a false idea of security. ■‘‘The original system of branches and walings has entirely failed, being rotted away between high and low water mark. The deck beams have been renewed in many places, but much of the old timbering, consisting of soft wood, is still carrying the railway tracks and requires replacing. The decking is badly worn and decayed in many places. Altogether, the wharf has reached that stage when further repair’s are practically useless, and any work would only be of a temporary nature, enabling the structure to be used for a limited period. Tim expenditure involved in renewing nil the defective piles and timbers would closely approach the cost of an entirely new structure, but should the board still wish to have temporary repair's carried out to enable the wharf to be used for about five years and to provide for railway loading during that! period, the following estimate gives the minimum amount of expenditure possible to that object, but as a sound engineering proposition the work is not recommended. ' ‘“The estimated cost of such temporary work is £2,000, comprising the renewal of twenty-two piles, the placing of 173 newdeck ■ beams to carry the railway loading, the renewal of 50ft x 20ft of decking, and the reconstruction or eight chains of timber sheathing between the- railway rails fronting G, H, X, and <X storage sheds.’

STARTLING FIGURES Mr Holler proceeded'To review the report of the engineer. He said he took it that the policy of the board was going to be entirely Changed since the board now owned tho wharves at Port Chalmers. After dealing with the figures of the engineer Mr Holler said lie would like further information; he would like the engineer' to tell them the coat of bringing vessels di’awing 25ft up to Dunedin and the time it would take, also the coat of bringing up vessels drawing 80ft, the time it would take with their new dredge. The figures of the engineer were startling, lie suggested that the harbour niasteT and the engineer should give their views on what was best for shipping in Otago Harbour. Tile members of the board were laymen in these matters, and he thought they should get tho views of experts A further question he woliki like answered was; What would it cost to bring ships drawing 35ft j to Port Chalmers? If ;che above questions were answered the board would see where it was getting, to. He would guarantee that it would take more than half a million to make Dunedin the port of call. He was strongly in favour of being able to bring boats drawing 2oft up to Dunedin. If they were able to bring boats drawing 25ft up to Dunedin, then they would ho able to do so with ninety-nine out of 100 ships without any further trouble. When they talked about ,30ft he thought the proposition was out of the question. It would take twenty years to get 30ft. It had taken forty years to get 23ft. If 30ft were wanted it would also mean mailing the channel twice as wide. Ho would further like to point cut that the Shaw, Savill Company intended to build a now dumping shed at Port Chalmers. The poliev. of the board seemed, to be in the melting pot. Captain M‘Donald had some years ago suggested a lock system. Mr London : That was not adopted by tho board. Mr Moller said au attempt was made to have it adopted. Captain M'Donald: Not till a survey was completed. That survey is' not .finished yet. ■ “ CAN’T BE DONE ’’ Mr Moller: You can talk about Port Chalmers. In 100 years it won’t bo clone. It can’t bo done. He suggested that later on the board should adjourn and meet again, when, his questions being answered, the board would know exactly what to speak about. He moved that the further questions he had put he answered. Mr T. Scollay seconded the motion. Mr Duncan - said lie agreed with the suggestion of Mr Moller that the whole matter should he adjourned till the members got more information. He thought it was a pity members of the board did not get copies of the engineer’s report before the meeting. m LOUDON FAVOURS DUNEDIN Mr Loudon said he thought the cost of making Dunedin the port of Otago would lie about one-tenth of the cost of making Port Chalmers the port. They could got three or four more feet extra in the Victoria Channel. . Mr Moller: That is where tho pinch C °Mr & Loudon; It could all be,done by our new dredge. Mr Dickson: Three or 41t would he of no use. , . ~ Mr Loudon said that of the 2b() overseas vessels that came to the harbour in 1924 to 1928 a total of 234 were safely accommodated _at Dunedin, if thev had another 3ft in the channel practically all the boats, with the exception of about three or four, would he brought; up to Dunedin. There" was some discussion between Mr Sharpe and tho chairman as to whether Mr Loudon was in order. Ir Loudon said he the meeting was for the purpose of discussing the whole question of policy. Mr Moller, he said, had spoken at large. Mr Moller; I followed you. Mr Campbell asked that the secretary should find out what was the average depth for the last live veal's of vessels leaving New Zealand on their Homeward loading. It was agreed to add this to Mr' Moller’s questions. The motion was carried. HEADS TO FORT GHALiERS Mr Scollay’s notice of motion read: — That tlic channel depth at the entrance of the harbour be extended inwards to the board’s wharves at Port Chalmers; that both the deep water berths at Port Chalmers be made capable of accommodating leeo draught; that one of tho two electric cranes about to be provided for the Victoria wharf be diverted tot least temporarily) to the George .. street wharf: that tho Railway Department be asked to complete the duplication of tho line between the city’ and Port Chalmers; that the foregoing be included in the active policy of the board.”

The engineer’s report stated: — Lower Channel Depths and Widths. — All depths mentioned in this report refer to a measurement from low-tide level to the bottom of the channel. From tbc tail of the sandbank to the Mole end, a distance of about one mile, the least mater on the line of leads is 37ft. This entrance channel has a width ranging from 1,500 ft at the outer end to 450 ft at the Mole end, with depths ranging from 50ft to 37ft in the centre, and not less than 36ft at the sides. From the Mole end to Harrington point the width of 36ft of water gradually increases from 4,50 ft at the Mole end to 760fb opposite Harrington .Point. Opposite the Kaik the portion of the channel known as Harrington Point Bend carries not less than 36ft over a width of 250 ft, and not less than 30ft over a width of 400 ft. This is the portion of the channel which was deepened and straightened by the construction of stone groynes built "out fiom the southern shore. From the Kaik to Pulling Point, a distance of about two and a-half miles, the channel has a width ranging from 520 ft to J,looft, with a least depth of 36ft. Towards the upper end of this stretch a tongue of sand projects into tho marked channel from the southern side, and it is advisable that some dredging should be undertaken in this locality in the near future. At Hamilton Bay there is a shoal patch carrying 28ft" which restricts the navigable 30ft channel to a width of 400 ft. From Pulling Point to Rocky Point the dredged cut known as Deborah Bay Bend lias a least width of 300 ft and a, least depth of 30ft. From Rocky Point to the Port Chalmers wharves the channel is between 500 ft and 600 ft wide, with a least water depth of 30ft. Approaches to Wharves.-—Off the George street wharf the swinging room for vessels is sgmewhat restricted', and some dredging ds required to give more freedom in manoeuvring vessels at the various berths. PORT CHALMERS BERTHS.

George Street Pier.—Tho south side of George street has au available

berthage length of SOOft, and was dredged to 33ft in depth. At present the depths close to the edge of the pier range from ,32ft to 29ft, and at a distance of 25ft off tho wtiarf' they vary from 34ft to 32ft. year? ago the pier was widened on this side, a cut being dredged 38ft deep, into which the outer piles were driven. North Side.—On the north side the depths close to the pier range from 27ft at the outer end to 13ft at the shore end, and from 31ft to 17tt at*a distance of 25ft off the wharf. On this side there is doubt about the lengtn of the outer piles, and it may oe neces sary to widen the pier' before a berthage depth of 33ft can he attained. Between this pier and the Union Steam Ship Company’s wharf and about 150 ft, from the shore, soundings of 16ft are obtained on a rock bottom, Bowen Pier. —Bowen pier is about 770 ft long on the north side, and has berthage depths ranging from 25ft to 13ft, and on the south side from 21ft to 13ft. There is no information regarding the lengths of tho old piles in this whark, and further deepening of berths would be attended by risk of collapse. EXPORT WHARF. At the outer end the depths alongside the wharf vary from 201 ft to I4ft, and at a distance of 25ft out from 26ft to 21ft. The available berthage accommodation at Port Chalmers may be stated shortly as follows; —George street pier: North side, one berth 30ft. one berth 20ft; south side, one berth 82ft, one berth 30ft. Bowen pier: North side, one berth 25ft; south side, one berth 23ft. Export wharf: One berth 19ft; berthage for small vessels. ELECTRIC CRANES. The rail gauge of the electric cranes now under construction for the Victoria wharf is 14ft, and the placing of one of these cranes on the George street pier would involve the shifting and replacing of the three railway tracks on one side of the pier. Also, an additional two 15in x 9iu beams (or equal) per bay would be required to carry tbe crane loading. As one crane rail would fall between two railway tracks, special crossings would be required at the points where the crane rail met the rails of the turnouts between the two tracks, and it is evident that a crane with an under-carriage which spanned the three railway tracks would be more suitable for this pier. CONDITION OF WHARVES, George street pier has been well maintained, and this structure is sound; but botli Bowen pier and the export wharf would require considerable repairs to bring them up to the standard of George street pier. Before deciding upon the channel depths which are necessary to permit of the port of Otago being made a final port of departure it seems essential to have some knowledge of the maximum permitted mean draughts of vessels trading to New Zealand. At schedule of maximum draughts, although incomplete, is attached for information.

MOTION TALKED OUT “ I feel that my motion has been talked out. Members seem to think I want to block the Victoria channel, but you should wait till I read my statement,” said Mr Scollay, preparatory to moving his motion. He had no idea of raising the Dunedin v. Port Chalmers issue. “At tbe last board meeting but one,” said Mr Scollay, “ the chairman intimated that the board’s policy of harbour development was to start at tho entrance and work to the top of the harbour. The purpose of this motion is to define that policy so far as the development of the Lower Harbour is concerned, and to get the work put in hand. The whole problem of harbour development has changed in certain respects during the past two u three years, and there are three distinct factors responsible for the change. The first of these is the deepening and scouring of the entrance channel _at the Heads by means of reconstruction of the mole. There was vision behind the decision to carry out that important work, for it will ihake the bar hour easily accessible to big vessels for the next twenty years or more. “The second factor referred to is tho board’s recent purchase of the railway wharves at Port Chalmers. The possession of these wharves will cnab.a the board to take advantage of the increased depth at tho harbour entrance, and to make deeper wharf berthage almots immediately available to shipping. Those wharves, being situated oompara tively near to the entrance cl the harbour, the greater depth can thus oe secured with tho minimum of channel dredging. ENTRANCE FOR BIG LINERS.

“Tho third factor of recent i ;e in tho harbour problem is the now class of New Zealand trader, of which the motor ship Rangitiki is the forerunner. That remarkable vessel is the first of the new type of mail and passenger liner. Other similar ships are being built. Such liners must be able to trade to Otago Harbour without any handicap, without any_ question of accessability or accommodation being involved. It can be done. That very desirable and necessary state of affairs can, I believe, be achieved by the board concentrating its activities on the development of the Lower Harbour tor the next two year's. It will be necessary to have at least two deep water berths made available with a depth of not less than 36ft at low water. The berthage is already there, and the depth can be secured by the removal of mud and sand. The deepening of the-Lower Harbour as outlined in the motion would give the dredge Otakou a good opportunity to “ run in ’’ her new machinery in easily-worked material. “The policy of the board must be to obtain the best results in the most economical way in order that harbour dues may be lightened. The present time, therefore, is not opportune to duplicate the export facilities already available in the Lower Harbour. In Liverpool (England), for instance, there are ten miles of docks, and the deep draught vessels berth at those nearest the entrance of that harbour. Our smaller , ports are now competing for our exports, and also to some extent in regard to imports. OTAGO’S FUTURE. “ Some time in the future Otago Harbour will practically be a free port, but the trade of the port must be conserved meanwhile. In tbo past there has often arisen the question as to whether big vessels could come to Otago Harbour, That should henceforth be made wholly a thing of the past. It need not recur.” Mr Gow: I suppose you are aware, Mr Scollay, that the depth at the entrance to Otago Harbour is greater than at Wellington. Mr Scollay: I will refer to that later. ■ “ Everything points to the present as being the right time to tackle the undertaking seriously, and with a fixed determination to see it through. It is mostly a matter of removing sand, and we have a new dredge arriving here before the end of the year. We here in Otago are in a better position to provide adequate accommodation for the bigger ships that are conuna than are

either Auckland or Wellington, both of which, I understand, hare reached the limit of harbour depth. , The former port, it is stated, has reached its limit of depth until a reef of rock* across the harbour is removed. Wellington is in a similar position in regard to the rock formation across tho entrance of the harbour. Compared to those conditions Otago Harbour is extremely fortunate in that practically any depth can be secured from the harbour entrance to the board’s wharves at Port Chalmers by simply removing sand. “ If instead of developing the Lowei Harbour, as indicated, the board decides to first extend the present depth at Port Chalmers through to Dunedin, the progress of the port as a whole '■'ill be thereby delayed for a number ol years. It would probably take ten years 'to do the necessary dredging, and in addition to the delay the cosl would handicap our trade. Further, tc duplicate in Dunedin at the present time the export facilities already available at the board’s wharves at Port Chalmers would be very costly, and would tend to increase rather than decrease harbour dues. At present 80 pci cent, of our imports are landed at Dunedin, and it would not injure the trade of‘the port for the other 20 pei cent, to continue to be landed at Pori Chalmers for another two years, especially if the duplication of the railway line to the city were pushed on and the delay in delivery eliminated. In 1900 the steamer Glenbnrn navigated the Victoria Channel on a draught oi 20ft lOin. To-day _ the maximum draught for vessels using the Victoria Channel is 23ft under the most favourabe conditions. That shows that the increase of navigable depth has been increased less than lin per year during the past twenty-nine years. Therefore it would not appreciably affect the Victoria Channel for it to wait for two years while the Lower Harbour is cleaned out. Let us develop' the harbour methodically, and do the Port Chalmers section first, because it happens to be tho nearest to the entrance of the harbour. The width and depth of the entrance channel at tho Heads has been improving since the reconstruction of the mole was undertaken. It will continue to improve for some time after the reconstruction is completed. Let us make a practical use oi it and remove tho stigma of limited depth in Otago Harbour. In two years we should be able to say that any big steamer that can enter Wellington Harbour can more easily and safely berth in Otago Harbour. It is worth an effort. There are five and a-half miles of channel from the mole to the board’s wharves at Port Chalmers, and all oi it sandy bottom except for a few hundred feet of mud and clay near the wharves. INEFFECTIVE DREDGING. “From the Port Chalmers wharves to the city wharves th© length of the channel is eight miles, and the bottom is practically all hard clay, rotten rock, and occasional boulder patches. That formation is infinitely more difficult tc remove than the sand in the Lower Harbour. Two years’ dredging in the Lower Harbour will be more effective for depth than twenty years’ dredging in the Upper Harbour. As cost is a factor demanding consideration, the logical and practical thing to do is to make the berthage nearest the entrance of the harbour most readily accessible to big liners, because after all it _is more important that the big ships should be able to freely enter the harbour than they should berth at any particular part of the harbour. In conclusion I hope that the proposal I am making will be adopted, although it may involve some change in direction of the board’s activities for the next two years. The change would make for the lightening of harbour dues, the increasing of our overseas trade, and the enhancing of the reputation of the Otago Harbour.”

THE BOARD'S FiiIAMCES Mr Dickson seconded thß motion. Fault could not be found with any part of the motions by members who had the interest of the port at heart. .Perhaps the only part which should be held over was that referring to cranes as the plant ordered for Dunedin would not be suitable for Port Chalmers. He decried any idea to raise the Port v. Dunedin bogey. By the talk they would infer that a second port was proposed at Waikouaiti or some other place. Mr Begg: At Portobello! Mr Dickson: You are very witty tonight, He said no argument could be raised against Mr Scollay’s suggestion that the channel to Port Chalmers should be at a depth to allow of its being navigable by the largest vessels coming to New Zealand. Some forty years ago the policy was originated, and a loan of £350,000 was raised. The board and its engineer were then satisfied that the sum would be sufficient to deepen the channel to Dunedin to enable all vessels of that time to come to Dunedin. The indebtedness bad teen increased until, when the present loan authorised under the Empowering Bill, £1,343,800 would have been borrowed. To-day the board was paying interest at the rate of £57,916 yearly, and since the first loan was raised about £2,000,000 had been paid in interest. The principal was still owing, and the interest would be increased by the latest loan. The board’s income last year was £169,211. The importers paid £47,611, possibly passing it on to the public, and £9,948 had to be added lor receiving and delivery' charges. The export dues had amounted to £23,380. Exporters and importers had paid about £BO,OOO. No provision was originally made for sinking fund, but a reserve fund was later created. Only £73,000 stood to the credit of the reserve account to meet the liability; that reserve had been built up by the secretary, often without the knowledge of the members of the board. Dredge 222 last year cost the board £19,000, and the dredge Vulcan over £7,000. The figures could be taken as a guide over the period of twenty-nine years, yet the channel had been deepened by only lin a year, according to Mr Scollay.

ESTIMATE FOR LOWER HARBOUR The etndeavoui of the board should be to make the port of Otago the first and last port for overseas steamers trading to the dominion. The bulk of them ranged from 29ft up to 31ft, with one exceeding a draught of over 32ft. How much would it be necessary to spend on the Lower Harbour to enable vessels drawing 35ft to work the harbour? The engineer and harbour master should be able to give that information. Mr Blair Mason had once stated that 40ft of water could be obtained in the Lower Harbour for £50,000. Mr Low; i suggest that you get your figures checked before they are printed. X have the official figures before me, and they do not agree with your figures. Mr Dickson: X took my figures from the balance-sheet. CAPTAIN OPPOSITION i “ At the last meeting of this board I said that betwixt and between a lot of water would pass under the bridge before wo met again,’ ; said Captain M'Donald. “ Well, sir, I hope all that has passed vail make as all realists

more fully that this board is in existence to give free and willing servic® to all the people living within tha province of Otago, and not to any section. I am more than surprisd than such a motion as this should 'bo brought before the board, because in my opinino it is an attempt to throw overboard all that has been done in the Upper Harboui and make Port. Chalmers the port of Otago However, now that this board, on behalf of the people living within the province of Otago, control the whole harbour, pottering and bickering over Port Chalmers and Dunedin should cease, and in my opinion as a member, we should hurry with all speed with the improvements now in hand in the Upper Harbour. “ I cannot understand why this hoard does not stick to a concrete policy that can be covered by tho board’s resources. This was done by Mr Loudon in 1925, and agreed to by the board; but somehow or other attempts are being made to hinder this useml policy to the port. Through such methods the securing of the new dredge has been put back for two years, while, in my opinion as a practical man, the board should have secured an up-to-date dredge twenty years ago. If it, had, the position in tho Upper harbour would bo different to-day. But instead, the board has been working with a useless plant which cost mor- than its original value in upkeep during the last ton years, besides being out of action for long periods for repairs. As far as lam concerned. I wish the 222 had been on th© scrap neap twenty years ago. _ I also say that Dunedin should be aimed a« tho main place for landing cargo, and overy effort should bo made towards that end. But until such end i.< reached, the two deep-water berths at George street pier, Port should be kept in fit order until you can take all ships up to Dunedin, and I say that it won’t take many years to do so if the board leave the engineer and harbour master to push oi> with the work in hand. “ Now, gentlemen, L cannot sec tb» value of this motion which Mr Scollay has before the board at the present stage of its activity. I, however, will deal separately with the three matters mentioned; —No. 1: Extending double line to Port.—This is.no part of the board’s function But all the bays along the west shore should be failed in. No 2; Cranes on Port Chalmers wharves. —I have no objection whatever to crane oil George street pier when the hoard has the money to do so. But to transfer one of tho cranes ordered for Victoria wharf is a matter to which the mover could not have given serious thought, because to get. one of tho cranes under order to ht at Port Chalmers tho whole of the railway system on George street pici would have to be altered, at a cost, that would give my friend a shock, besides the time the wharf would be out of action. No 3- Depth at entrance extended to Port Chalmers wharves.— Well, 1 am afraid that the mover has not given this matter the necessary thought either, because, in the first place, we cannot take heavy draught* ships across the bar without allowing a far greater margin of safety than wo require after passing inside the_ Heads. I will not mention the -margin that should lie allowed on the bar all tho year round, but I will say that if '™ hold what wo have in the Lower llai - hour at present wo shall do very well until we got tho result of the sinvey that has to be carried out, but we should, of course, make tho bends in the Lower Harbour easier to negotiate by heavy-draught vessels. “ Why should this board make Dunedin the landing spot for the cargo brought to’ the province of Otago. Well, because it lias been the exponence ot tho whole world to avoid transhipping goods. Why, did tb(3 Clyaa Trust spend a million in deepening tlm river Clyde from Greenock to Glasgow? Why, to avoid tho double handling of goods. Why was tho Manchester ship canal made? To avoid transhipping. Why did Brisbane spend so much on dredging out tho Brisbane River? Why, to avoid double handding. Why did the Marine Board of Victoria dredge the river Yarra out to take oversea ships to the city? Whj, to avoid transhipping. I could go on for a long time pointing out the experience of the world in this direction, but surely it is not necessary for mo to do sos Why should we have ships discharge goods on to rail at Port Chalmers when we have the means at our disposal tc land at the door of the consignees, which is the desire of the commercial world? For tins reason short railway lines do not pay. “ Before closing my remarks, I would like to pray to this board to appoint a small committee of three, along with tho engineer and harbour master, who would bo continually in touch with tho work in the channel, which is the mam artery to the province of Otago as long as we depend on overseas market,” Mr Larnaeh said Mr Dickson had forgotten to tell the board that the expenditure had been remunerative, Mr Dickson: In what way? Mr Larnaeh: In reclamation and tho rents from th© work. LONG-DELAYED PROPOSAL Air Driver supported the motion, which, lie considered, should have come before the board years ago. More revenue in every way would be obtained from tho scheme proposed. Mr Larnaeh; Never in your life! Mr Driver said more dredging of tho Victoria Channel would mean more reclamation and rentals. No matter what was done, big ships would not bo brought to Dunedin. Money would be spent all tho time without all the big vessels being navigated to the Dunedin wharves. He did not take much notice of Captain M'Donald’s mention of what other ports had done. Conditions were probably different. Mr Dickson Yes; it is a question of population. The motion was opposed by Mr Sharpe, who said that one crane at Dunedin would bo of no use. Further, the policy of the board should be dictated by the finance.

WITHIN STRIKING DISTANCE Mr Loudon said he intended to oppose the motion. They were now within striking distance of getting all the ships up to Dunedin. Mr Driver: You never will. Mr Loudon said he remembered iii<; time when the Penguin and other small vessels struck in the channel. It was a splendid tiling nowadays to see mm U larger vessels coming up th-j channel to Dunedin. It would be a most retrograde thing to neglect making Dunedin the deep-sea frontage of .he por' of Otago Mr Dickson had pai -t-i far too gloomy a picture of the debt of the board. The board had a largo revenue-, producing estate, with a rent roll of £21,000. With the southern endowment and othe land the hoard ba-l :t w'onderful estate. - Bristol. Liverpool; i nd other places had nn io great efforts to do away with the double handling of goods Irani ship to sto e. Probably it would be right to ucep iwo vlumes at Port Chalmers for exceptional ships, but there wag no reason why 96 or 9S per-cent, of the ships should not be brought to Dunedin.

FURTHER OPPOSITION Mr Campbell opposed the motion. He said that the harbour master was willing to bring up to Dunedin most el the ships which stayed at Port ulnl mors, and tho board should eudcavom to make it known. While ho cougrai iItaed the Railway Department on elm fine’ work done in handling cargo on the wharves at Port Chalmers, there wa* not the same quick despatch as in tno case of cargo discharged direct at Dun-. . Duncan, in opposing the motion, said he did not think the shipping companies would raise any objection to working Dunedin if tho facilities were ' provided here. As Mr Dickson had pointed out, the financial position o tho board was very precarious. Members: No. Mr Moller said the plan prepared by the engineer showed that there was a very fine passage from the Heads to Port Chalmers, and that any boats conun o' to the dominion could be brought there. Ho was totally opposed to takiim one of the cranes from Dunedin to Port Chalmers. Mr Begg also spoke against the motion. CHAIRMAN'S SURPRISE “ After listening to members, 1 cannot, for the life of me, understand how they turned down my statement, which is precisely to the effect that the board should go on with the Victoria Channel but keep a deep water channel through to Port Chalmers,” said Mr Gow. “ However. 1 am not worrying about it being turned down, but it is a peculiar thing. The public will realise when it reads tho discussion that my statement - was fair and adequate.” Mr Scollay, who replied to the speakers, strongly contended that the proper policy was to improve tho Lower Harbour first, the dredge then being- available for work on the Victoria Channel. Wiuh a minimum of time and cost the harbour could bo improved. His plan was not to bloc V ictoi ia Cimuuel but . in * attempt to enhance the facilities nt the Jiarbom. tie was not at all won ief< that the motion would not be cawed, as it was only a matter ol tune. Messrs Scollay, Driver, and Dickson voted lor Uit motion. Those against were;—Captain M‘Donald Messrs'Begg* Larnach, Moller, Duncan, London, Sharpe, and Campbell. Tilt motion was lost. CAPSTANS TO BE INSTALLED *■ it my opinion capstans are to be preferred *to horses for the purpose of moving wagons on tno v nuoua unari especially as tho wharf deck is of jarrah timber, which would be quickly worn by the special' caulks on the horess’ shoes,” reported Mr Wilkie. “As stated in the report of the Bth instant re siding, connection to Victoria wharf. I considei that the utility of two tracks on the wharf could be greatly increased by the installation of capstans. The number of capstans required would, of course, depend upon the amount of rail cargo, to be handled and the number of vessels loading or discharging rail cargo at tho one time.” The Lyttelton Harbour Board Engineer wrote: “ Our electric capstans are capable ol exerting a pull of one ton at a speed of ISUft per minute. This will deal with a gross load of eighty to TOO tons.' They have given satisfaction to all concerned, and have very greatly facilitated the handling of trucks ou the wharves, the saving of time being very great compared with the former system of using horses for this work. We are, of course, operating on three-phase, 400 volts, 50 cycles. The slip-ring motors are of 22 h.p., with contractor-type controllers. The last capstans purchased in May, 1927, cost £3OO each. “ With reference to our capstans, I desire to say that wo have found them to be very satisfactory in every way, in moving* full .and empty wagons during loading and discharging of vessels, and shipping linns appreciate the quicker handling of cargo since they were installed,” advised the engineer of the Timaru Board. “The harbour master uses them for setting up vessels and handling hawsers, etc., on the wharves. Wo also find them very useful when carrying out repairs, etc. We have six capstans altogether, two on each of the three wharves. The last two capstans were installed in 1923, and the total cost complete, including foundations and wiring, was £1,970, or £9BB each. At that time prices were much higher, and I think they would probably be from £2OO to £3OO each less at the present time. Lyttelton has a large number installed, and some quite recently, so that you would bo able to get a better ,idea From \them as to the present day costs. Our capstans are operated by D.C. current, ami are rated at one-toh jnili at a speed of 180 ft per minute. 'The motors arc 20 b.h.p., with a speed of 720 r.p.in.” In reply to Mr Sharpe, the chairman said Mr Wilkie’s report was very open i on the question of the cost of the capstans. The Lyttelton cost was of_ tho capstan alone, and additional considerable expense was incurred by installing. .The'engineer bad been safe in : estimating the cost on the higher scale. Air Duncan said the Lyttelton Board had bought and installed the capstans for £4OO each. : Mr.Gow; It cost Timaru £9OO. Air Diver : That was years ago. On the suggestion or the chairman, ..Mr Sharpe moved that, when the railway is extended to the Victoria wharf, capstans be installed. The motion was seconded by Mr Duncan and carried. WATERFRONT COMMITTEE HOT WANTED “There is a fueling, 1 take.it, that we are not carrying out the work on the waterfront,” said Mr Aloller, when, following Captain McDonald's suggestion in the, main discussion, he moved that Messrs Al’Donald, Campbell, and Duncan be the committee to confer with the engineer and harbour master. Air Gow expressed the opinion that the. proposed step was inadvisable. Air Dickson opposed the motion. Years ago the board abandoned its committees and decided to deal with all questions in Standing Committee. The expenditure of public money bad to be gone into carefully. Economy would have to be followed. “1 can safely say that the board will not get permission from the Local Bodies Loans Board to borrow any more money for tho next fifty years,” said Air Dickson. ~ , Air Gow. I think it would be wise— Mr Dickson ; I know it! Air Aloller. We have a good Government in now Tho motirn lapsed. The board then adjourned to a date to be fixed by the chairman.. The raeeti ing will probably be held ou August 22.