HARBOUR IMPROVEMENT

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXX, Issue 20165, 20 July 1935, Page 18

HARBOUR IMPROVEMENT

BOARD ADOPTS POLICY ENGINEER TO BE APPOINTED By nine votes to four, the Timaru Harbour Board yesterday adopted a report brought down by a special committee set up to consider the problem of harbour improvements. The committee recommended the adoption of improvements as set out by the harbourmaster (Captain H. C. White) some time ago, and also recommended the appointment of an engineer. The special committee comprised Messrs W. T. Ritchie (convener), T. B. Garrick, R. S. Goodman, D. C. Turnbull, I. J. Bradley, F. R. Flatman and W. H. Orbell,

Committee's Report. The report of the special committee stated that Mr F. W. Clarke (former engineer) had been interviewed, and Captain Charman, Superintendent of the Shaw, Savill and Albion Co. had also been heard. Although it had been extremely difficult to get any relevant information as to costs beyond what had already been set before the Board, the following points appeared to stand out clearly:— (1) There was a definite anxiety amongst the masters and representatives of owners of overseas ships when entering and leaving the port, especially when conditions were not too favourable. * '■*» (2) Although centralisation of shipping might not be an immediate fear, still the possibilities were there, and the longer the delay in improving the harbour, the more chance there was of the port, its owners, the ratepayers, suffering from such a happening. (3) Although most of the overseas ships could and did call at Timaru, they often had to carefully map out their routine, at times necessitating the retracing of their course owing to the limits of draft. (4) Owing to the angle of entrance to the harbour, No. 1 wharf was the only berth to which an overseas ship could be moored expeditiously from lack of swinging room, except under very favourable circumstances. (5) That an extensive and continued plan of dredging will overcome the draft difficulty within .2 or 3 years, this dredging being mostly within the shelter of the Eastern Extension, 28ft being considered sufficient without that limit. (6) The alteration to the harbour mouth suggested by Captain White would overcome the difficulties mentioned in paragraph 4, and would allay all anxiety mentioned in paragraph 1. (7) The burden entailed by such work would not create any undue hardship on the ratepayers, but would, on the contrary, be a comparatively cheap insurance against what might be a much greater and more permanent hardship. (8) The cost of htis work had been in the committee’s opinion magnified, because of the lack of exact technical knowledge as to cost of lifting a mole Mr Clarke_ acknowledged it was possible the cost of lifting might be considerably less. , (9) The proposed alterations were considered as sound by the technical adviser, Mr G. A. Lee, engaged to report on same. His only adverse comment was in connection with a phase of the problem which the committee considered was outside the province of his report, as it considered the members of the Board were, with the Harbour Master, best fitted to decide whether the alterations are sufficiently comprehensive for present and future requirements. (10) The committee considered that the alterations if carried out would in no way interfere with future developments, and none of the work contemplated would have to be undone when future developments were necessary. The committee therefore considered that it was imperative that immediate steps be taken to have the work proceeded with, and that the first step should be the appointment of a Board Engineer. ■ Before discussing the report, members made a tour of inspection, which lasted about an hour. Harbourmaster Called In. Mr D. C. Turnbull moved that the harbourmaster be called in during the discussion of the report, as they mig.it want to ask him questions. Mr A. R. Guild asked if'.it was intended to have Captain White in while the discussion was in progress. Mr Turnbull: It is an open meeting. The motion was carried,. Messrs Kidd, Whatman and Guild dissenting. The chairman (Mr T. B. Garrick) said that it had been very hard to bring down the report, especially as regards costs. The chief point of trouble had been in regard to the cost of lifting the North Mole wall. Mr Clarke could not say whether the estimate of £BO,OOO was excessive or not. Another point was how much dredging would have to be done to make a new channel, if the wall was lifted. If j dredging hod to be done, he did not see how the two things could be dors together. To dredge a new channel would mean taking the dredge off her ordinary work. The question of an engineer had been fully discussed at the last meeting, and it had been decided to hold the matter over. Mr W. T. Ritchie said that as being the convener of the committee, he was more or less responsible for the report. He did not wish to repeat what had already been said, but he did want members to realise the great adv ntages that would accrue if the improvements were put in hand. It had been shown that in the past the dredge had not worked at Timaru more than six months in the year, and that being so she should be able to do the dredging of the new channel and still cope with the routine work. If they could agree on that point, they would have 1500 feet of channel less to dredge, and with the mole being taken further out, there would not be the same amount of silting in the channel as in the past. He still thought that £IOO,OOO, the increased cost to the ratepayers, was so small to the individual ratepayers that they could look on it as a definite insurance against what might happen. They knew what Captain Charman had said, and they knew that on certain occasions the shipping companies were worried over coming into the port. He urged that the port should be brought up to that state of perfection which would eliminate all anxiety. They had seen the North Mole that day, and it had been apparent that with the slanting entrance, vessels had to come in very slowly. If they had a straight run in they would feel more confident, and further than that, the improvements would make all their wharves easy of access for overseas vessels. The improvements would make the harbour very much more ship shape, and with the rapidly mounting up of shingle on the south side of the Extension, thj

harbour was rapidly becoming a natural one, and there was no reason why it should not become one of the finest in the South Island. The ships were becoming larger, and if the Board gave their customers the facilities they were entitled to, there was no reason why Timaru should ever be side-tracked. Captain Charman had told them that dredging outside the extension was not so necessary, and he had been pleased to hear that from a man who had been a mariner. The question of costs had been a difficult one, but the certainty was that it was not going to cost more than had been stated, and the probability was that the cost would be less. He would move that the report be adopted. Danger of Silting. Mr D. C. Turnbull seconded the motion. He said that apart from the question of lifting the mole, they had seen for themselves that there was an ever-pressing danger of sand from the Bay filling up the channel. The high water mark was creeping out every year, and this could not go on indefinitely. The drift was from Dashing Rocks round to the end of the North Mole, and it then made for the channel. Mr Scott: Do you propose having the report passed in its entirety? Mr Ritchie: Oh yes. I did not mention the engineer, because it seemed to me to be perfectly obvious. If we go ahead with improvements, the first thing we have to do is to get an engineer. Mr Scott said that they had heard what Captain Charman had said, and he had emphasised the necessity of dredging. That would take two or three years, and when they rer -bed that point they could consider the lifting of the bend and the appointment of an engineer. He would support improvements if they decided to complete their dredging programme first. Mr W. H. Orbell pointed out that the dredging must go with the lifting of the mole. The one was no good without the other. He went on to say that when the proposed alterations were carried out, they would save £IBOO a year in dredging, for they would have a much shorter channel. The alteration would also stop the silting at the point which was giving the most trouble at the present time. When the improvement was carried out, the old channel would catch the silt and stop it from going into the new channel. Last year they had 46 overseas ships in Timaru, and the average cost of them was £650,000. The total value of the ships was £29,900,000, and the shipping companies were asking them to spend £IOO,OOO to make the port safe for these vessels. The improvements, to his mind, would make the port safe for a very long time. If a big ship came in, and in a nautical expression, a fresh nor’-wester was blowing, they could not bring another overseas ship in until the wind abated. Producers were demanding that their produce should be sent Home under the best conditions, but what had the Board done in the last 20 years? The Board had received a good deal of revenue from overseas ships, but where would they be if the ships did not come. Mr Scott: But we are not going to lose them. In reply to Mr Scott, Captain White said that if a nor’-wester was blowing, he would not be silly enough to bring a big ship in and attempt to take her to No. 3 wharf. He would never be able to turn her, for she would be blown on to the concrete wharf. Shallow Water. In reply to Mr Lindsay, Captain White said that once round the Extension, a vessel had to run in 1500 feet of shallow water before she reached the deeper water of the channel. With the new channel she would run into deep water immediately. Mr Lindsay: What is the depth in the channel now? Captain White: 25 feet. ' The chairman: If the improvements are carried out, would the port be usable at any time. Captain White: It all depends on the weather. The chairman: The improvements would not meke the port more mobile? Captain White: They would give the ships more latitude. The chairman: Say anything happened to the engines of a boat, could you throw out the anchors? Captain White: Not if she had too much way on. You would tear the windlass out of her. Mr Turnbull: She might ride over the anchor anyway. The chairman: How much water would you require under a vessel in such circumstances? Captain White: As much as I could get. The chairman: Well, how much would that be? Captain White: About eight or ten feet at least. In reply to Mr Whatman, Captain White said that the least depth of water at the moment on a straight run in was 19 feet. On the present channel they had 21 feet on the sides. Mr Whatman said that they were indebted to the committee for their work, but they would like to know how long it would take the dredge, working in her spare time, to cut the new channel. Mr W. R. Hayne, dredgemaster, was called in to the meeting, and he said it took them three months to make a cut, and they were from 120 to 140 feet wide. Mr Whatman asked how long it would take to cut a new channel, and Mr Hayne said that it would take about 12 months, as part of the present channel would come into it. Mr A. R. Guild produced a plan drawn two years ago, and this showed that on parts of a line drawn from the end of the Extension to the proposed new entrance, that the water was only 17 feet deep. There had been no dredging in these places, and so the depth to-day would be even less.

In the course of further discussion the chairman said that Mr Hayne considered that the dredging of the chan-

nel was an 18 months or two years’ job. It cost £IOOO a month to run the dredge. Mr Mackenzie: £12,000 a year. Save South Canterbury Mr I. J. Bradley said that he had had years of experience of the harbour, and he had had many conversations with masters of ships, and they were all agreed that it was necessary to improve the harbour and the entrance. If they looked back over the last 50 years, they would recall the discussions “shingle shifters versus* non-shingle-shifters,” and what a godsend the Extension had proved. He also asked them to look ahead 50 years, and see whether they were going to be left behind i by others north and south of them. The cost was a mere quibble, and he asked members to do something to save South Canterbury. Mr Mackenzie said that he had come on the Board with an open mind, and he had listened to all the arguments, and it seemed to him that it was necessary to do something. The users of the port had to be considered the same as the users of the road, and some notice should be taken of them. The question should go before the ratepayers. If they stood still and did nothing, the harbour would go back, and he thought the time had arrived when the ratepayers should be given a say in the matter. Mr Lindsay said that he was rather disappointed in the report, because he had been looking forward to the cost, and what the rating would be. He moved that the report be referred back for a statement as to cost and what it would cost the ratepayers. It was all very well to talk about the ruin of South Canterbury, but there were flourishing towns hundreds of miles away from the sea. Mr Mackenzie had suggested a wise thing, that the matter should be referred to the ratepayers, but they would want to know what it was going to cost. Mr Ritchie: I have already told them that. Rate of One-Eighth Pence Mr Goodman said that he had gone into the cost. They must have money to do the work, and that would mean a loan They could raise a loan of £50,000. and that would mean a rate of l-Bd. A rate of l-8d would produce £10,400 a year, and that would cover a full dredging programme. During the last two or three years they had not had an l-8d rate, which he considered they should have had all along, and they would then have had one of the best ports in the South Island. Mr Lee had told them that he considered the proposed improvements would cost £BO,OOO, but it had been very hard to understand how he had arrived at that figure. Mr Ritchie had put it down at £IOO,OOO. which would cover the dredging, and he agreed with him. If the Board borrowed £50,000 and went ahead, they would still be able to do a little out of revenue, and at the end of the job all they would have on their books was a loan of £50,000. By that time the dredge would have completed the new channel, and possibly conditions generally would have altered, and the Board might be able to do with a rate less than l-Bd. The year 1933 was a good shipping year, and if the Board had had a rate of l-Bd, instead of less than l-16d, they could have gone ahead with a full dredging programme, and still come out with a credit of £2,900. They would have carried that forward into 1934, which was not a good shipping year, and yet they had come out with a credit of £ISOO. He felt confident that the proposed works would not increase the rate to more than l-Bd, and this was well within the reach of the ratepayers. Even if they had to stretch it another l-32d it would be well worth while. Even if they did ndt go on with the job, it was essential that they should have an engineer to look after their business. He could go into the scheme and report as to costs. The original stone on the Eastern Extension cost 2/11 a ton, and 450 feet of the Extension had been widened at a cost of £17,000. There had been 78,000 tons of stone put into the work, yet Mr Lee had told them that the proposed extension of the North Mole would require 78,000 tons, and he had put this down at a very high figure. Why he had done this, the speaker did not know. He felt that the whole thing was well within the means of ratepayers, and he appealed to members to adopt the report, and place it before the ratepayers, who were only itching for the opportunity of allowing the Board to go on with the work. Divided Body Mr Guild said that he thought there were a number of people who thought they were a divided body, and they were not far wrong. They were only laymen, but he was prepared to give the scheme a pop. There was certain machinery to go through, and the scheme might never go before the ratepayers, but at the same time they should do something. No. 1 wharf in the future would have to carry more than it had been carrying, as was evidenced by the talk about electric cranes, and apparently it was the only wharf which would could be used for the purpose.

Mr P. R. Flatman said that someone had to prepare the scheme, and if they did not have their own engineer, they would have to call in an outsider. They had a safeguard in the ratepayers, and if they were not prepared to stand

behind the scheme, then it could not be said that the board had not done its best. The cost would work out at £1 6s o|d in every £SOOO of capital value in South Canterbury, and that was not beyond them. He would sooner see every piece of road work in South Canterbury stopped rather than have their harbour go back. Mr A. F. Campbell said that he had relaxed somewhat in his opposition to harbour schemes. He had opposed the present scheme because he thought they were building on too narrow a foundation, but now that it had been shown that Evans Bay could be used in future for the construction of wharves, he had become converted. Until that day, he had not realised that the bend on the North Mole was so narrow. He could not see how the lifting of the bend and the dredging could be done separately. He thought the big expense would be the dredging outside the Extension, but Captain Charman had assured them that this was not necessary. He thought, after having seen the position on the spot, that they had no further reason for opposition. The cost would not be very great, even though some difficulty might be experienced in collecting the money.

Mr Whatman said they were all pretty well agreed that some improvements were necessary. It was only a question as to what they should do first, and whether they would get value for the money it was proposed to spend. The saddest part of the scheme was that although they proposed to spend £IOO.OOO they could not look for a penny more in revenue. Mr Bradley: Question.

Mr Whatman said that there was no cargo being held up now, and if they went in for a comprehensive scheme of dredging, there would be no need for them to worry for a long time. He said that if the scheme was carried, he would have to move at the next meeting that the harbour improvement rate be reinstated.

Mr D. C. Kidd: Could you tell me what the contributing local bodies would have to pay. The secretary: A quarter more than they are paying now. Mr Kidd said that he represented a Scotch county, and unfortunately in the Mackenzie County they had had an accident which would cost them over £2OOO, and on top of that the Hospital Board was raising a big building loan. The matter was not a town v. country one; it was a national one, but he agreed with Mr Whatman that they should concentrate on the dredging. At the end of two years the ratepayers might be better able to stand the burden. It was not good business to put heavy burdens on to the already over-burdened ratepayers. It appeared that at the present time the local bodies were imbued wrth a spirit of spend, spend, spend. Mr Ritchie Replies Mr Ritchie, in reply to the debate, said that he was pleased to see that some members had swung to their way of thinking. If they were in agreement with the report, then they would have to have an engineer immediately. The dredging and the lifting of the mole would have to go on together, and so it was essential to have an engineer. A suggestion had been made that if they had an engineer, he would want an increased staff, but members who said this had not been on the Board when they had an engineer, and to-day they did not have an additional man on the staff. Mr Whatman wanted a return in £ s d, and yet he admitted that if something was not done there was a possibility of trade decreasing. Captain Charman had said that if improvements were made, he would send the Akaroa here, and that was extra revenue for a start. Mr Whatman proposed a tax on those who directly benefited, but he would point out that the country people were the ones who would derive the benefit, and they would have to pay for it. Mr Ritchie said -hat he had had to fight for his seat on the Board, and he was back again. He had put the facts in their true light, and the ratepayers had put him back. He asked Mr Whatman, Mr Lindsay and Mr Scott i" they knew what their ratepayers wanted. Were they stating their own opinions or those of their County Councils? If someone was put up against them at an election, they would know what the ratepayers wanted. Mr Whatman: We would t: prepared to contest an election if necessary. Mr Ritchie: You might, but I say that you can’t possibly be speaking the minds of the ratepayers, because you don’t know. The motion was then put to the meeting, and was declared carried by the chairman by nine votes to four. The voting was as under: — For: Messrs Goodman, Ritchie, Mackenzie, Orbell, Flatman, Guild, Bradley, Turnbull and Campbell. Against: Messrs Scott, Whatman, Lindsay and Kidd. Chairman Does Not Vote Mr Turnbull: Excuse me Mr Chairman, how did you vote? The chairman: I did not vote. I was not called on to vote. Mr Turnbull: Oh. The chairman: You can’t trap me. I did not come down in the last shower. Mr Turnbull then moved, and Mr Orbell seconded, “That the Member for Timaru be asked to take charge of a Bill to take steps to give the Timaru Harbour Board the right to make improvements or raise loans on exactly the same terms as other artificial harbour boards, and that the South Canterbury Members of Parlia-

ment be asked to co-operate with him.” Speaking to his motion, Mr Turnbull said that it was simply to try to do away with the necessity of having a Royal Commission. There, were six artificial harbours in New Zealand, and those boards had the right to raise loans without going to a Royal Commission. He thought Timaru should be on the same footing. They were the only board which had to have a Commission. The chairman: There are others. Mr Whatman said that there were not many harbours which had rating powers the same as Timaru. It was a safeguard for the country people, who did not know much about the technicalities of harbour finance, and he did not think they had any chance of getting a vote carried without the safeguard. Mr Orbell said that since the Act was passed, an extra board of experts had been set up, and he did not think that a Royal Commission was necessary. Mr Goodman said that he had a feeling that the matter could be got over. He thought that there was a clause in the Harbours Act which was almost identical with one in the Timaru Harbour Board Act relating to alterations. If the work could be classed as alterations, there would be no necessity for a Commission. He suggested that Mr Turnbull should withdraw his motion, so that inquiries could be made. Mr Turnbull agreed to withdraw his motion. On the motion of Mr Ritchie, seconded by Mr Orbell, it was agreed to call for applications for an engineer at a salary of £450 a year. CAPTAIN WHITE’S SCHEME The scheme suggested by Captain White, and which was approved by the Board, may briefly be described as follows:—Extension of the North Mole in a direct line for a distance of 600 feet, then curving for 425 feet in an easterly direction to overlap the South Mole, leaving an entrance width of 400 feet. The removal of 600 feet of the outer end of the North Mole and the construction of a spur wall commencing at a point 400 feet from the end of the extension of the North Mole and carried out 100 feet in a northerly direction. The scheme also provides for the dredging of a straight channel from the end of the Extension into the harbour, thus giving vessels a straight run into the port.