HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 26 June 1926, Page 9

HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS.

BOARD'S RESOLUTION NOT UNDERSTOOD. CRJTiCISAIS REPLIED TO. At a meeting of the Timani Harbour Board held on May 28th, plans and a report on a scheme of harbour improvements as prepared by tho resident engineer, Mr E. IV. Clarice, were submitted to the Minister of Marine with a request, “That the same be submitted to a Royal Commission for a report on the whole scheme, part of same, or any alternative.’'’ At yesterday’s meeting of tho Board a communication was received from tho Minister, tho Hon. CL J. Anderson, in which he asked the Board, in order to avoid any misunderstanding, to advise him exactly what the Board’s resolution was intended to mean. The Minister also stated that in tho “Timaru Herald’’ of the 29th ultimo, there was an account of a mooting of the Board, at which the chairman was reported to have said: “.Mr Anderson seemed to think it was the Government's business to determino whether or not tho district could afford the improvements.” He wished to take the opportunity of stating most- emphatically that if tho chairman’s remarks, as mentioned above, were correctly reported, his statement was contrary to fact, as lie had not at any time expressed any opinion as to whether or net the district could afford tlie suggested improvements to the harbour.

Tho chairman (Mr IV. Hay-man) said that the Minister did say so, and that Air Bitchcncr and tho Hon. F. J. Bolieston also heard him pass the remark referred to. Mr H. B. S. Johnstone said that tho Board had gone to a lor or dmo and tioublo in order to try and find out what was in tho mind of the Commission. It .seemed that at tho previous meeting they l ad made a mistake in the wording of the resolution. On a previous occasion they had beeh told that they should have made their resolution wider, now the Minister told them they must not make it wider.

The chairman: “The Commission will now have to sit on Mr Clarke’s scheme and no other.” Air Johnstone said that the Board •n anted all the information it could obtain, and it seemed a pity if the Commission,, who might have another teheme in view, were debarred from reporting on it also. That was the reason why he had supported the resolution to make the request as wide as possible. Referring to tho criticism that had recently appeared in the “Herald” regarding the proposed improvements, Air IV. T. Ritchie said that although he had the greatest admiration for Air Cray, he could not approve of his ideas regarding tho possibility of making Timaru a second Bournemouth Personally he did not want to see Timaru made into' a place for hathchairs and invalids, but at tho same time the Board would have to take into consideration tho criticism that would arise from any interference with the Bay. He considered chat, if possible, some alteration should he made to the scheme in regard to tho Bay. and that the Board should moe rarcmlly in the matter, and meet criticism to the extent of refraining from encroaching upon the Bay as much as possible.

Tho chairman: “If we take in a. smaller area. 1 it will not reduce the cost.”

Air Ritchie: “It is not the cost, but the influence it will have on the ratepayers.” The chairman: “Anything which people might say in interviews or in letters to the papers will not affect the Commission in tho least.” Air Ritchie: “It will affect the ratepavers though.” Air A. F. Campbell asked whether Air Clarke’s scheme had to bo submitted as it stood, or whether modifications could ho made. The chairman said that the Board could submit modifications of Air Clarko’s scheme, but could not exceed it.

Mr Ritchie: “Wo should mako it quite clear to tlie Commission that the spur Trail might not bo needed.” Mr T. B. Garrick: “You can say what you like, but the Bay business is going to affect the ratepayers.” Mr Ritchie concurred. lie said that speaking to residents, ho had been continually asked what was going to happen to the Bay . He considered that no honest man could tell them Mr G. J. Wallace: “Ninety-five per cc-nt oi' the Tirnaru residents will turn it down.” Mr W. H. Orbell said that it was very interesting to turn up the old newspaper files and see the criticism that was directed against iho harbour works proposed years before. Those that bad opposed the Eastern Extension scheme had afterwards turned round when it had pioved niece: sful. Mr Johnstone said that a great deal of discussion had been caused, and personally lie considered that it was just ns well that interest was being taken in harbour matters.

Air E. R. Isaac said that apparently the resolution moved at the former meeting was not in order. Ho would move that it be rescinded. In reply to Air Garrick, the chairman said that the Alinister apparently would not accept it, and wanted something more definite. A member: “AVe want a new Alinister.” Tlio following motion was then moved by Air Isaac : “That the scliemo prepared by the Board’s resident engineer, Air F. 4V. Clarke, for the improvement of Timaru Harbour bo .submitted to a Roy;# Commission for its consideration and report.” Afr J. Kennedy seconded tho motion.

Air Johnstone said that the Comniis•ion had previously reported on two schemes. Ho considered that a modified scheme should also he obtained from Air Clarke.

'Mr Clarke, the resident engineer, was then consulted regarding the possibility of a modified scheme. He said that in his opinion there would always lie sand coming in to the Bay, but lie did not think it would ever be blocked up either by sand or shingle. As regarding the modified .scheme, members could always submit their ideas to the Commission. Mr Johnstono said that the Commission would only report on the scheme asked for. That is why lie »lso wanted a modified scheme included Bn an alternative. Mr Wallace asked whether the increased accommodation provided for in the .scheme was necessary. The chairman stated that bigger boats were being built. and it was essential that accommodation should bo Erovidcd for them, and also adequate sndling facilities. Mr Isaac .said that it should be understood that the cost of the scheme would possibly not exceed £150,00!). In his mind that expenditure would cover what was required. One of the Jeans would full due in about 1933, when a sinking fund amounting to approximately L' 10.000 should have accumulated. AH that tin l Hoard would require "would bo an extra CIU.OOO a year. At present ihe channel held about 300,000 tons of sill annually, wliile the dredge could lift. approximately •! 00.000 tons annually. It might be possible to lay the dredge lip for" a year every two or three years, Ct a saving of CIiOOO each year iL was out of commission. Mr Kennedy said that the Board had been advised by its harbourmaster and engineer that improvements were badly

needed. Opposition would, of course, he experienced, hut lie considered that it would he time enough to combat that and placo the position before tho ratepayers when the time was ready. Even if the ratepayers then turned down tho proposal the Board would have done its duty to the primary producers of tlio district.

Air A. F. Campbell asked if tho cost of dredging the increased area had been taken into consideration.

Air Isaac said that no dredging would he required in tho increased area, with the exception of some fifteen months’ dredging in making a new cut in the channel. Tn the enclosed area tliero would bo 27 feet available at spring tide low water, which'would ho ample. There would bo n.o need to dredge that area until they wanted to build tho new wharves. When that time arrived extra income would he derived. Air Garrick : “According to that you won’t want to use all of tho new harbour. What do you want it for?” Air Tsaac said that part. of it would not eo wanted for some. time.. Tlio chairman said that with tho bigger area tho Board would have loss dredging. , , ~ . . The engineer said that tlio swinging area would have to ho dredged. After the harbour was completed, approximately £4OOO-or £6OOO would he saveu annually on dredging. AI Johnstone said ho had every faith in tlio Board’s engineer and Ins plan. Tlio only question that was troubling him was whether the Board could arrive at an equivalent resu.t with less expenditure. Ho would liko to see the scheme held up for a nioiitn in order to see if a modified scliemo could be prepared. Air Wallace tsked what evidence there was to show' that the lange was now greater than, what it was ten vears ago. Ho did not flunk that at tho present there, was any shortage of accommodation. The only reason on which he would support tne scheme would he on account of mcreas<M 1.0 <M know whether there was any increase in the .range, but larger vessels weic beiim built and consequently they wcie more’ difficult to hold at the moorings. Air AVallace said that ho could say wlMinnt fear of contradiction that when he was on tho Board before t.ierc was more damage caused to fencieis and hawsers than during the last ten G T Dawson said that Mr Cray had gone into the question of harbour improvements, but ho had not said anythin- concerning the. range and ! extra length or the vessels now being built. The shipping company were now building much larger vessels in some cases over 500 feet in length, and they could see that it • ■ much cheaper to handle cargo with bigger boats. If those vessels could not come into Timaru it would moan that the companies would either tranship at Wellington or rail goods on from Lyttelton, which won.d result in extra freight chargos. .If the Boaut did not take steps to accommodate the lar-er vessels the port would quickly become a back luimhei’. It would take at least six or seven yearn before the proposed scheme eould he completed, while one company in particular was now building > larger vessels which would he available for the-. New Zealand trade within two years’ time. He considered it was the duty of Board to put- its house in order, ot-ner-wise its port would he a hack number in four years’ time. He also considered that the various critics had not had the whole facts in mind when writing on flic scheme. Mr J. S. AlcCVirt agreed Hint the harbour must be maintained up to an efficient standard. ‘He said it was problematical, however, whether the big vessels mentioned hv the. last j speaker would he reining to Timaru. i nnd whether the results vould justify j the expenditure. | AL- Johnstone then moved as an | amendment: „ , . “That tlio matter of applying for a Royal Commission to report unoir Air I Clarke’s scheme he he'd over for ope I month, and llv't in +he me-nUme a ; roport bn for from CiiUnO j upon a modification of the scheme as , suggested that dnv.” The amendment, rvas’scee-ded by Air' Wallace. Speaking In the amendment. Mr Johnstone said that he thought ilia I: the neressnrv residfs could bo attanmd ■"it.hnut middle-- the harbour so lug. | Me considered that the more /-ebonies j brought forward and the more d'seu-'- i sion that arose. (fie heller would be the final result. Tt was neeessary to do something, and be considered that the harbour must either go forward er -o back. It could not remain as it Upen being put to the meeting, the amendment was defeated by seven Vlffes l,i four. Mr Isaar'.s motion was (hen carried.