ROAD TO PORT PLAN SUPPORTED.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17995, 4 November 1926, Page 3

ROAD TO PORT PLAN SUPPORTED.

MEETING CONSIDERS PROPOSALS TO IMPROVE PORT COMMUNICATION. A scheme for a tunnel road through to Lyttelton, and a modernised port, received the hearty support of the Tunnel Committee of the Christchurch City Council, which was addressed last night’ by members of the Port and City Committee. The following motion was carried, with only one dissentient voice:— “ That this committee, having considered the present severe disabilities of Lyttelton and of* Christchurch in regard to wharfage and portage facilities, and having considered various proposals for improvement, acting on facts and figures at its disposal, heartily approves of the scheme for a tunnel road and modernised port put forward by the Port and City Committee; and, further, requests the City Council to call a conference of all local bodies, commercial and industrial associations, etc., in Canterbury north of the Rakaia with a view to considering the proposal, and if it is approved to devise ways and means of financing it.” About twelve members of the Tunnel Road Committee, and eight of the Port . and Christchurch Committee, were present. Councillor F. R. Cooke presided. ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR. Opening the case for a tunnel road, Mr F. W. Freeman, of the Port and City Committee, gave the following reasons why such a road should be constructed:—(l) In Lyttelton the City of Christchurch possesses one of the finest natural harbours in the Dominion, capable of admitting and accommodating the largest ships in any conditions of weather and tide. (2) The Port of Lyttelton can be developed as Auckland and Wellington have developed, and could provide a vastly greater volume of import and export trade than is handled at present. (3) For nearly half a century after the passing of the Lyttelton Harbour Board Land Act, 1877, constituting the Lyttelton Harbour Board and giving the Railway Department authority to lay and operate lines on every wharf, jetty, quay and dock in the port, the handling of all cargo in and out of ships at Lyttelton has been and is a monopoly of the Railway Department. The trade of Christchurch and the development of its port on the lines of modern harbour practice and the quick delivery of merchandise from ship’s hold to warehouse and vice versa are throttled by this system, which is inelastic, inconvenient and expensive, and is a curb on themercantile and industrial activities of our community. (4) The LytteltonChristchurch railway and the goods sheds in the city railway yards are virtually part of the Port of Christchurch. No scheme for the development of Lyttelton Harbour that does not provide for quicker , transit and delivery of goods from ship to warehouse and vice versa will remove the handicaps which hamper the trade of the city. Frequently there is from seven to fourteen days’ delay. Always there are many handlings, breakages, pillages and ullages. For these the consumer pays. (5) The Railway Department at present has complete control of cargo handling in and out of ships because it is impracticable to obtain vehicular access to the wharves. The construction of a vehicular^tunnel will remove the sole reason for ihe maintenance of this monopoly. (6) The approximate cost, of the "tunnel is £450,000, and the interest and charges will be met partly by a tunnel rate and partly by a general rate, but this will be more than offset by a saving of at least 2s per ton on incoming cargo, made up of saving in freight handlings and delays, excluding breakages and pilfering. COMPARISON WITH OTHER PORTS. ' ,

Majjjv lantern slides of achievements in harbour and tunnel construction in other parts of the world were shown. They were described by Mr 11. M. Chrystall. The first slide purported to show the future results of an artificial harbour at Sumner and an improvement of the natural harbour at Lyttelton. With an artificial harbour at Sumner there would be a train service to Christchurch without a tunnel. The vehicular tunnel road would run parallel with the Lyttelton tunnel rails, and the road to Christchurch would lead along the present railway lines, along Ferry Road, or along Canada Reserve, Camp Bay, where tons and tons of spoil had been emptied by dredges, was the same depth now as it was years ago, and the speaker maintained that most of the mud was washed back to near Governor’s Bay. A bridge or breakwater across to Quail Island, and the reclaiming of the flats behind it, was a likely proposition. The present reclaimed area near the entrance to the harbour stopped the growth of wharves and prevented the manoeuvring of ships. The only modern apparatus in the harbour was the floating crane, but more cranes were needed to handle the cargo expeditiously. The harbour required to be larger, with a longer breakwater nearer the heads. PROJECT DISCUSSED. The chairman, having thanked the engineers Tor their addresses, Mr W. E. Leadley said he was sorry to note that little progress had been made. He expected something to have been done since the last meeting. Councillor C. P. Agar moved: “ (1) The committee set up to consider the tunnel road scheme begs to report that it is of opinion that the scheme is worthy of Canterbury’s serious consideration, but cannot make any recommendation until costs and figures giving benefits and charges are considered: (2) with the view to obtaining the necessary data, the City Council is re xcommended to convene a conference of the Chamber of Commerce, Progress League, local bodies and all organisations north- of the Rakaia likely to be interested in this matter, with a view to setting up a suitable committee to obtain a report on the merits and demerits of the proposal.” Councillor Agar, in moving his motion, said that in doing so he was not committing his judgment for or against, for he thought that they did not have, data sufficient to form an opinion for the guidance of the council. The whole province of Canterbury was concerned in the matter, which was worthy of serious consideration. Even if a dozen more meetings were held by the committee, he could not conceive how an opinion could be formed before the evidence had been placed before what could be called “semi-experts and business men, who could consider it from all angles. Councillor A. M Kellar. who seconded the motion, said that the scheme affected Christchurch more than Canterbury in general. The motion was a step forward, and it. was necessary to get the best brains ot the country behind it. Wavs and means of financing th« proposal would have' to be oonsidC Mr J. R. Haywood spoke strongly in favour of the tunnel road, and moved an amendment that the committee recommend the council to go ahead as soon as possible with the scheme. It affected Christchurch far more than any other part of Canterbury. Ashbur ton, for instance, was more or less interested in the harbour at Timaru. A tunnel road would save expense on cargo at the rate of 2s a ton. 1 '<Mmnnrull.Qc.-Q. E. Carr.said lia would.

second the amendment provided the wording were altered. He submitted the amendment in the form in which it was finally carried. The only difference between the motions of Councillor Agar and Councillor C. Carr was that the former was negative and the latter positive, involving the confirmation of the scheme. “To the older councillors,” continued the chairman, “ I would say that we will all be dead soon. Let the young men express themselves, for they will bear the future burden. Give the young men a motion in the positive.” Conversion of the public bodies concerned to a favourable view of the scheme was a necessity stressed by Councillor A. W. Beaven, who said that a united Canterbury was essential to such a scheme. In particular, the Lyttelton Harbour Board, upon which Christchurch was not properly represented, would need to be enlisted in support. If Christchurch did not act, Timaru would soon grow to the size of the capital. When the amendment was put to the meeting, Councillor .Agar’s was the only dissenting voice. He said that it must not be inferred that he was against the proposal, but he wished to have more information before deciding upon the scheme.