HARBOUR INQUIRY

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVII, 6 September 1927, Page 5

HARBOUR INQUIRY

TO-DAY’S PROCEEDINGS

RECLAIMED LAND VALUES

MR J H. OLDHAM’S CROSB- - EXAMINATION.

The Napier Harbour Commission resumed its sitting at Napier this morning. Mr J, S. Barton, S.M.. of Wanganui. presiding. Associated with him were Messrs A. C MacKenzie. harbour engineer, of Melbourne. and J. B. Waters, merchant, of Dunedin. , Mr A. Gray. K.C.. of Wellington, with Mr M. R. Grant, of Napier, ap peared for the Napier Harbour Board while Mr H B. Lusk, of Napier, represented the Marine Department. Mr. J. H. Oldham, land agent, who tendered evidence yesterday in respect to land values, was crossexamined at length by Mr. M. R. Grant. Mr. Grant: I gather from your evidence that you have not a good word to say tor the Glasgow lease system P Hardly that. I said if the whole of the land adjacent to Napier was to be under the Glasgow lease it would be disastrous. You said that it would lessen the evil bv having one-quarter freehold and three-quarters leasehold? —Y'es. The Glasgow lease is an evil then? —No. 1 don’t sav that You are aware that, in the borough of Napier, there are large endowments let under the Glasgow lease ?— Yes. There are large endowments of the Education Department'let under it? —Yes, some are valuable. The Waiapu Board has also let area under such leases?—Y’es.

If a local body desires to retain its endowments it has no other method? No, they have not. How do you account for your assertion that land recently put up by the Harbour Board realised £925, and that it is only worth £800? There was no other land available They were obliged to take up tnis land or else go without. Therefore, in our opinion, they paid more for it than it was worth. The value of land is what it will bring at auction p —Yes. You know that since the auction sale in 1924, nearly al) these sections have again changed hands?—Yes, that shows th* keen demand for building sites. You know that in every'case goodwill has been paid?—Yes' And in one case it was as high as £loo?—Yes.

And that was on one-eighth acre section?—Yes. I don’t think there could be better proof than that for reclamation. That goodwill 'of £lOO is equivalent to the whole value of £BOO that you put on it P—Yes, but it does not alter myopmion that it is not worth it. That is without even taking the value of the land into consideration? —Yes, that is so. You know that a large number of section, at the top end of the North pond have also changed hands since the sale?—Yea. Practically all are built on?—I think the majority are.

There were others near Battery road and Burns road that were taken up at the auction?—l am not sure, but I believe so. They have been built on ?—Most of them.

LATHAM S KNOWLEDGE OF VALUES.

Do you know Mr. Latham ?—Yes. Do you consider that he ha s any knowledge of land values in this district?—Yes. he ought to have. Mr. Latham said when the ponds wero reclaimed there would be a demand for sites, and that he would be willing to pay £l2OO to £l3OO per acre for them. That opinion is en titled to some weight?—Well I would like to know how much would be available for building. Thirty-three acres in the south ponds and about 28 acres in the north?—lf 20 acres is reclaiipftd in the north pond for residential purposes it would not. in my opinion, realise more than £BOO per acre if put on the market all at once You say that in tb« face of the values given for neighbouring land? —You must remember that people don’t go to the port to live unless their work is there. If there were lands available adjacent to Napier South comparatively few at the port would be taken up. You are not overlooking the fact that the ponds, when reclaimed, would be high and dry and that the lands near Napier South would only be de watered?—No Is it not a fact that a number of people working in Napier live at Westshore?—Not very many. Coming to McVay street property; value it at £l2OO per acre?— How much would you expect to get for a n eighth acre freehold section p —I understand that one recently was sold for £3OO.

THE GLASGOW LEASE.

You think that the land under Glasgow lease is only worth half of what it would be under freehold?— No. I don’t aay that. But your figures do?—No, we say two-thirda of the value. Does not the Glasgow lease offer better opportunities than freehold to a man with but little means?—lf you compare it with the sections offered by the Napier South Syndicate it doesn’t. With regard to the leasehold, is it not a fact that a number of houses in Creagh street have been built with borrowed money?—Yes, most of them. You know that building societies are lending freely on leasehold sections?—Only on the value of the borrowings.

Why do you sav that the valuations of West Quay should be only £4OOO per acre when the revaluations were arrived at by the usual method of arbitration?—Don’t you think our reply sufficient? No, and would like to have a little more enlightenment. Do you suggest that the West Quay renewals should never have been at more than the £4OOO per acre?—No, 1 suggest nothing of the sort.

PRICES NEAR THE QUAY

The Harbour Board leases there are ■ll built on?—Yes. Well, don’t they actually bear the value placed on them by the arbi. trators? —Yes. but by reason of long occupation. If there were unoccupied leases on the quay front I am of the opinion that ground rents, on the

basis of £4OOO per acre, would be as much as would be possible to obtain for them. That is as the quay is to-day. Supposing it was made a quay for ocean liners would the values not be more than £4OOO per acre?—No, 1 don’t think so Quite recently you acted as an arbitrator in the revaluation of two sections at West Quay?—Yes. In one case you fixed the value of £BBOO per acre?—Yes. And the other at *-.oOO?—Yes. One was a corner section and the other adjoining. On the opposite corner is a section leased by Williams and Kettle who 21 years ago paid within £5 of the new valuation fixed for Dalgety and Co, on the opposite corner.

Doe, not that suggest to you that prices i n that neighbourhood are becoming fixed?—Just there it may be so. but it does not apply to other sections along the quay front. Do you know the section that the Post and Telegraph Department has acquired at the port near the north pond ?—Yes. Do you know that the price that they are leasing it is based on the value of £2250 per acre?—Yes. Do you know how that price was fixed?—The chairman of the Harbour Board could tell you better than I can.

There was recently a valuation made of six acres for the Railway Department beyond the High School? —Yes

One valuer valued it at £3OO and another £looo?—Yes.

The umpire fixed a price of £750? —Yes.

That iust shows how experts differ p —The Department would not buy, considering the price as being too high. It should be remembered that it needed clearing and also drainage, nor did it have any borough conveniences.

DEVELOPMENT SINCE 1912.

You say that since 1912 the liarb6ur Board has only placed 10 acres on the market?—Yes. Is it not a fact that there was a very large proportion of Napier South not built on in 1912?—Yes. a fair proportion.

There was ample land then to keep Napier going for a few years. There are still vacant sections there?Very tew Is it not a fact that Napier people then had a great prejudice against building at Napier South I'—What prejudice there was was quickly over come.

THE RICHMOND BLOCK

Why did you suggest that the Richmond block should be placed on the market first ?—Because it is morv central. You know that the future of thia block is intimately connected with the Tutaekuri river?—Yes.

You know until the policy of the Rivers Board is settled that it would be extremely difficult to deal with this block?—Yes, that is so, b.ut 1 think that it would realise a higher value than the Awatoto block.

That is not in keeping with you: evidence. You have been deprecating the board receiving high values?—) said that the Richmond block would give a higher -value, Taking into account the requirements of all classes of the community I consider that it would be more advantageous to the board to reclaim on the Rich mond block first.

You will agree that it would be a criminal act on the part of the Napiei Harbour Board to put the Richmond block on the market without adequate protection?—l do.

THE AWATOTO BLOCK

The engineers say that the Awatoto block is the easiest and cheapest to deal with?—lf it is suggested that the board’s policy of putting this block on the market first is dictated by the engineers’ advice as being the easiest protected by Hoods I am glad to hear so good a reason. You will admit that the diversion of the river is a matter for the Rivers Board and not for the Harbour Board?—Yes.

And the work of the diversion of the river into the old bed at the Maraenui township is one of considerable magnitude?—Yes.

You will agree that if the Tutaekuri is to be permanently removed from this locality it would be advisable to keep the bed as shallow as possible?—Yes, it would be.

You win agree that the Harbour Board should get areas on to the market a s soon a 8 possible?—Yes. all things being equal.

THE USEFUL LEASEHOLD.

What is your opinion as to settlers receiving a lease with the right of purchase after 14 years. Would not that class of lease enable a man to put in any form of improvement without having to pay for it later?— Certainly it would be better than nothing. It would tend to popularise the settlement of these areas. I certainly think that the proportion of bne in three i 8 too small.

What is your, own opinion of the Glasgow lease?—lt is the best possible form of leasing where freehold cannot be secured.

The tenant hasn’t got to put any cash down?—No

And he can always sell his goodwill ?—Sometimes.

Mr Barton: Hay and Rochfort state that the Richmond block would cut up into 1250 allotments. Would that have a steadying effect on the market?—Yes, it would

What do you think 'the Harbour Board would obtain from such leases ? — lhey would vary. Assuming that they were put on the market a little ahead of the demand?—l would assume that near Georges Drive the value would be tow per acre, decreasing in value going further back. What would you consider as being a fair average rental for all the allotments?—£s.

Would you consider rentals of £3 to £4 per acre on the rural areas as fair rentals?—Yes.

Hay and Rochfort estimate the post of reclaiming the Richmond block at £124,000, and the interest on that amount would be £7450 Therefore, at its best this block would barely pay the cost of reclamation?—Yes.

You agree that the first 14 years would be the worst?—Yes. Also that it would some day be most valuable and would have a high potential value?—Yes.

PAY TO RECLAIM IT.

And in view of these figures it would pay to reclaim it?—Yes. Mr. Grant here pointed out that out of the £124,000, £91.000 was for roading, etc., up to borough requirements. which would not be expended until necessary. Mr Barton said that in going through the est''mates he was satis-

fled that the Macdonald block would be a liability to the board, being like a baby that had to be carried. The Richmond block for a long period might pay interest on the cost of reclamation, but not much more. The Awatoto and 28-acre blocks would be a little help, but not much. Mr. Oldham: You have taken conservative estimates.

Mr. Barton: No, I have taken the highest values given and also the lowest costs. Regarding the ponds at the port it would all depend on the method of reclamation. It was doubtful if reclaiming them by spoil from the Breakwater bluff would pay interest, but if reclaimed from the harbour there was likely to be a small profit.

COMPREHENSIVE POLICY URGED.

Mr W. Harvey, land agent, stated that in his opinion a comprehensive policy of reclamation should be carried out. The borough had certain facilities, of which advantage could be taken and a comprehensive policy put forward would be the more economical, as it could undoubtedly be dovetailed in with the bdrough facilities. It seemed to him that il it were possible to bring together the Harbour Board, Rivers Board and the Borough Council a workable proposal for reclamation could be brought about for the common good of all. Room for expansion was a vital matter to Napier. In any comprehensive scheme he did not suggest that the market should be flooded but allotments be put up so as to moot the demand. He saw no reason in the event of the local bodies being unable to agree why a comprehensive scheme should not be let by contract oi to a syndicate.

What are the prospects of the local bodies being able to agree on a comprehensive policy?—l think if you could separate the harbour question from that of reclamation you would overcome 75 per cent, of the trouble. Until the land is reclaimed no one is getting any benefit from it. The whole district is being affected as direct routes could be opened up to Taradale and other places. Mr. Grant: Have you ever seen Hay and Rochlort’s plans —Yes. Isn’t that a definite and comprehensive scheme covering the whole area that will pay the Harbour Board to deal with? It is not a piecemeal thing at all.—You have overlooked the fact that there is nothing to provide for it dovetailing in with the borough requirements.

Does not the proposal to spend £91,000 on roading, etc., of the Richmond block dovetail in with borough requirements? What more do you want?—Any policy that will put the 28-acre block, the Awatoto block, and the Richmond block on the market within a reasonable time would be a comprehensive scheme. At this stage Mr. F. W. Furkert, engineer-in-chief to the Public Works Department, was cross-examined by Mr. Gray. Mr. Gray: You said that you were not here to barrack for the Breakwater?—That is sc.

But your reports are entirely in favou of it?—That was after making investigation. Did you form any opinion before making your 1924 report?—Only just the popular opnion that the Breakwater would not be of much use.

ONLY A SMALL PROPORTION

You agree with Mr. ’Maxwell that shingle forms only a small proportion of the material on the beach?— Yes, but not such a small proportion as he saysDo you say that the drift was arrested by the Breakwater?—Yes. And do you say that it lias been re-established?—Yes, 1 do. You say that the Petaue beach is making up?—Yes, since 1924.

Is that with sand or with shingle.—Y’es, both. Do you suggest that it has come round the end of the Breakwater?— It is hard to think anything else. Do you suggest that there are any indications of shingle in the Breakwater harbour?—! don't know.

You say that the shingle on the Petane beach is part of a littorel drift coming round the end of the Breakwater ? —Yes. Do you know that there was a big flood in the Esk river in 1924?— Y’es.

Would not some of that deposit be brought out by the Esk?—Not south of Petane.

Could not a current in the bay have carried it there?—Nothing is impossible.

There was a storm in May, 192-1, when the moles were damaged?—Yes.

You produced a plan showing the accretion on the Westshore beach ?— Y’es. On some of it, but there has been an accretion to the northward. Can you compare the shingle on the Petane beach with that at the root of the Breakwater ?—The Petane beach is more sandy now.

I mean size of the shingle?— Samples taken on the Petane beach would be smaller than that taken from the beach opposite the Napier Baths-

There is practically no shingle on the beach from Coote road to the Breakwater?—! saw shingle there only yesterday.

It is suggested that shingle does not get past the Breakwater because it is ground up in a grinding process?—That is about right. What does get round is mostly sand ?—Yes.

Well, where does the shingle on the Petane beach came from?—Some of it may come down the Tutaekuri while other quantities might be washed up from deeper water in the bay.

You would hardly compare that wearing exjieriment of shingle that you had with the gigantic grinding motion that is going on in the bay? —Y’es.

You said that the sea breaking over the Breakwater would not harm the vessels lying at the wharf being just a manifestation?—Yes.

Would not the washing over of 30 tons, blocks he more than a mere manifestation ?—No.

TREMENDOUS FORCE,

Does that ■ not indicate tremendous force?—Y’es.

And yet you say that such a harbour would be quite safe?—Y’es. Cullen & Keele’s most exposed breakwater harbour in the world?— Yes, it would be safe for large vessels but smaller vessels would jobble about. \\ aves coming round the entrance come in with the effect of the full depth, whereas those coming over the top are only the top or crest of the wave.

With the Glasgow wharf there would be haulage to the “E” shed, and then on to the Government yards?—The new wharf at the Breakwater harbour would have its own sheds where anything requiring sorting would be dealt with, whereas the

Glasgow wharf would be used for outward cargo such as meat, mid inward cargoes like coal, which would go straight to its destination. Do you suggest that vessels loading meat would come to the Glasgow wharf?—Yes, we had evidence of a vessel drawing 26ft coming in. But there is only 26ft at the Breakwater? and you will agree that a vessel drawing 26ft will require more water than that?—Yes, certainly, but the soundings at .the Glasgow wharf show depts varying up to 30ft. And you say that there is enough water for these meat ships to lie there? —Y’es.

What about those captains who said that they wanted at New Plymouth seven feet under their keels? —That did not apply to lying at the berths but for the short steep seas encountered on the West Coast.

You said that the widening of the channel would raise the tidal level oi the lagoon by 18 inches? —Y’es. Do you say that the whole of the rise about mean sea level of 2ft. 3ins. at the entrance is" carried on into the lagoon?—No, certainly not.

Then it is stopped by the embankment?—No, that has no effect.

Then the same amount of water is to be found in the lagoon is the same as it was before the embankment was built?—Yes.

In spite of the bridge?—Y’es. It is dragging a hole for itself to get through.

You say that the deepening and widening of the channel would reduce the current?—Yes.

Do you agree with Cullen and Keefe when they say that it would reduce the velocity to three knots? - No, I thought tbev*iaid it would be reduced to knots. You will admit that there are harbours with dredged channels leading into the open sea?—l haven't heard of any. There are dredged channels but they are protected. What about the ten-miles channel leading from the Mersey river into the Irish Channel. There are no moles protecting it?—No, but there doesn't look to be a etit either.

Mr. Gray: Yes, the plan refers to the dredged channel.—Well, 1 would like to know' the cost of maintaining it. Coming near home is there a dredged channel up to Dunedin?— Y'es. Is not the entrance between the end of the mole and the sitnd bank very narrow?—No, 1 don’t think that it is There is about 750 feet in deep water.

It it being frequently dredged ? Yes. a dredge is practically main tamed there.

In Brisbane and other places where the ports are situated a long wav from the sea there must be times when winds blow across the channel? -Yes.

We heard a lot about the possi bility of the stealing geurs on shipgoing wrong in the Inner Haroour. Does not such accidents happen in the Dunedin channel?—They are likely to happen anywhere. And it doesn’t detract from the usefulness of the channel ?—Not necessarily so.

We have heard a rot to the effect that once the entrance was widened great waves would come in and destroy the safety i.iside. Do you agree with that?—l don’t say that the safety would be destroyed but the range would be destroyed.

Would not a wave trap have a good effect?—Yes, it would.

In evidence you spoke of costs for removing of materials. What is paid tor contract^?—lt i s included in the figures. You know what Armstrong and Whitworth got on the Tauranga railway?—Yes. That is a lot more than you gave ? —Yes, I suppose the Government were satisfied with that?.—l expect so. PRICES OF CONCRETE. Regarding prices for concrete, is it not a fact that the Public Works Department 46 years ago paid between 35/- and 4(1/. a yard?—l could not say.

What is the price now?—Just what I gave yesterday. Has not a well-known firm recently estimated concrete at over £3600 ii yard?—Yes.

When you spoke yesterday of concrete for blocks at the Breakwater where did you expect to get the sand from?—l allowed for carting about 1} miles.

And the shingle?—From the Breakwater.

Do you agree that the material at the Breakwater is not suitable for concrete work?—No, mixed with a little other material it i s most suitable. For reinforced concrete you could not get much better.

Do you propose using spawls in the concrete i~ Yes.

What price did you allow for them? —ss. The borough authorities stats that they get them for 4/6. In ths board’s own quarries they may be got much cheaper.

What price' could such spawls be obtained from the Breakwater quarry?—ss including all costs.

All the private quarries in Napiei have nearly all limestone and little stripping!—That I could not say. Mr Holmes said that at the Breakwater the position was the reverse?— No, he did not say stripping, considering there might be 80 per cent of spoil. What do you think that cement could be obtained for?—About '£s.

What mixture do you suggest?— The sample we used was I—2 —7. The usual mixture is I—2—6 and in concrete in sea water to ensure tightness 1-2 J-5? —Our samples were exceptionally heavy and weight and density is all you want. Y’ou say that your mix of I—2—7 ensures good concerete for Break water purposes —Yes. Porus concrete deteriorates in sea water?—Yes. What is the usual mix! —That de pends upon the engineers. It has been suggested that the cost of cement in a 1—21 —5 mix would ba 20s a yard. You allowed 22s Od per yard so that only leaves 7s 6d a yards for all other costs, such as sand boxing, etc.!—Y’es.