UNDERGROUND RAILWAY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20177, 11 February 1929, Page 11

UNDERGROUND RAILWAY

PROJECT FOR AUCKLAND.

, NEW INTEREST AROUSED.

MINISTER TO INVESTIGATE.

HISTORY OF THE SCHEME.

Without bringing io its train any promises of more vigorous prosecution of the Morningside tunnel scheme, the visit paid to Auckland during the week-end by the Minister of Railways, tho Hon. W. B. Taverner, has revived interest in the project. Tho Minister stated ho would further investigate this matter when ho returned lo Auckland, possibly in a few weeks, but until then, and until the. Government had more closely examined the situation in detail, nothing in tho nature l»f a policy announcement could be made. Tho schemo had its origin at least as frarlv as 1912, the claim being made by tho Northern Railway League that it devised the proposal in that year. In 3924, (lie chief engineer to the Railway Department included it in proposals which gained tho approval of Parliament end a start was later promised for 1928. The report upon the electrification of railways, presented to Parliament in 1924, stated that tlie Government was then obtaining from Messrs. Merz and McLollan, consulting engineers, London, a comprehensive report upon tho suggested electrification of tho suburban sections at the four main centres. A scheme for the duplication of the New-

market-New Lynn lino was detailed in the report to Parliament, but the general manager and chief engineer also presented details of an alternative route from the projected new Auckland station to Morningside, crossing Beach Road bv an overhead bridge and entering a tunnel under the city for 116 chains.

having Time and Money. The duplication between Newmarket and New Lynn was estimated to cost £300,000, as against the duplication tunnel scheme costing Auckland to Morningside, £449.000: Morningside-New Lynn duplication, £167,000; total, £616,000. It was stated the tunnel route would reduce the distance from Auckland city to Morningside by approximately one mile and a-half, arid tho travelling time by about 15 minutes. Tho bulk of the suburban traffic to and from that direction would be much better provided for by the alternative tunnel route than by the then existing tram and bus facilities. An underground station would be required in the vicinity of the Town Hall. The having decided to adopt the major scheme, it remained for ■the section to be reported upon by Messrs. Merz and McLellan. Apart from the matter of electrification, it was estimated the saving in working expenses would almost pay intez'est upon the full cost, of construction. Thus it was submitted on tho traffic figures as they then stood, that 50 trains a day saving one and a-half miles each, represented a saving of 23,745 train miles yearly at a little over 10s a mile, or equal to £12,000 a year. The difference in cost of the schemes was £316.000 and at four per cent, this equalled £12.640, leaving an estimated deficiency of only £640 a year.

Time Strengthens Argument. That was considering the matter without regard to the great increase in traffic and revenue, which was certain to accrue from such speedy and clean services. It is patent that now, four years later, the saving in working costs which would be effected bv less traffic over the steep Newmavket grades would be still greater, while the capital charges remain relatively the same.

It was submitted to Parliament in 1924, as a further argument in favour of tho tunnel scheme, that whereas haulage over the Newmarket-New Lynn line involved running over grades of 1 in 40, tho maximum grade through the tunnel would be 1 in 100, with a' stretch of 1 in 80 in the open nearing Morningside. Tho engineers deemed it axiomatic that any such tunnel line should be electrified, and they presumed that in such case the whole of the lines in tho Auckland suburban area would be electrified at the same time.

In their report, Messrs. Merz and McLellan suggested that ali tho Auckland suburban area should be electrified at a gross capital outlay of £840,900, or £672,500 allowing for credit on steam locomotives released from service. The annual saving would be £66.200, giving a return capital of 9.35 per cent. Since then, and more particularly in the last two years, this project for the construction of a double track tunnel line has been given a deal of publicity and thought in Auckland. and the announcement of the Government's intention to start funnel boring during 1928, appeared to bring realisation within vision.

Financing the Only Delay. In 1927, the lit. Hon. J. G. Coates, at (he lime Minister of Railways, said on'v financial difficulties could delay the scheme. Jlo said further that its importance was such that it would only he delayed if it were found necessary to postpone other portions of the department scheme of general improvements as well.

About the middle of last year prominence was given the departmental statement that a second station on the tunnel line would lie constructed on portion of the Newton Central school property. The Government's inability to finance more than preliminary survey and investigation work then postponed the commencement of actual construction until some time this year, and there the matter stands.

In the meantime, there has proceeded the intensive survey operations necessary to an undertaking of such magnitude. The construction of an underground railway through tho heart of the city, beneath some of its greatest buildings, is a matter demanding exhaustive and sound groundwork. It was not long ago stated bv Mr. E. Casey, divisional superintendent of railways, that, experience in such undertakings showed that every crack or fault in buildings within, a-cjuarter of a mile of tunnelling had an effect on operations. That alone affords a wide field for investigation, and one demanding more consideration is the matter of the value of properties which will directly bo affected by the construction of line.