POWER-HOUSE SITE

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160725, 11 August 1920, Page 6

POWER-HOUSE SITE

COUNCIL MIKES FINAL CHOICE SELECTED BY NARROW MAJORITY. A matter which has been causing the Borough Council some concern has been the question of providing a suitable site for the new tramway power-house. Three sites have been under consideration, the present one, a site on the foreshore below the railway engine sheds, and on the Borough reserve on the opposite side of Taupo Quay extension. The financial aspect of all three sites was discussed in a joint report submitted to the Borough Council last night by the Tramways Engineer (Mr F. P. Talboys) and the Borough Engineer (Mr N. C. Staveley). This report follows: POWER-HOUSE SITES. • We submit a report on the relative economic merits of the three sites which"'we understand are, or can be made, available for the new station housing the steam plant. These are: (1) The present car shed site. (2) The site on the foreshore on the river side of Taupo Quay, offered on lease by the Harbour Board. (3) The site on Taupo Quay opposite No. 2 on the Borough land now leased' to Messrs F. R. Jackson and Co. The capital cost involved on each of these sites may be summarised as follows, it being assumed that the cost of the structure itself apart from extra cost for piling and additional. foundations, will be the same in each case, and is-therefore omitted:— PRESENT SITE. £ Pipe for condensing water from river 2,85 0 Pumping station and staging 1,000 Feeder line to pumping stn. 250 4100 Excavation at 700 Add for new car shed, say 12,000 £16,800 FORESHORE SITE. £ Pipe for condensing water 2,400 Pumping Stn. & line to same 1,05 0 Extra foundations ' 12,000 Main feeder extension .... 2,500 Additions to existing car shed 5,000 £22,950 TAUPO QUAY EXTENSION. (Assuming pile foundations not required.) £ Pipe line for condens’g water 3,600 Pumping Stn., staging & line 1,075 Excavation 700 Extra distance of main feeder cables 2,500 7875 Present car shed altered and enlarged, say 5,000 £12,875 “In view of the probability that the steam plant will in the future become a standby or auxiliary for the hydroelectric supply (whether the latter isfrom Government mains or local scheme) it is not advisable to expend more on accessories such as wharf and conveyors to the new station thin is absolutely necessary; therefore the provision cf these items is omitted, particularly )n view of the fact that coal cam be move cheaply delivered by the ex-, biting wharf and rope-way to a hopper on Taupo Quay, thence by motor lorry or trucking from an extension of the ('a.-thvhlf line in the case of the last two sites.

•‘The annual consumption of coal for the plant when .developing. a moan output .-d ICC’) h.ji. will be approximately ft:): v-ns. Ti " test per ton of handling this on I ho present wire-rope may be taken at (id and the ccst of delivering (lu'-iiee iiv motor to the powerhouse ]-.; trial Is tsd, or ,£6OO per annum. 0 s'.-.-iurg that ell coal were sea borne and V.s, re landed at a now wharf, the tost would be (id per ton, plus standing c-urges 2s Gd; total 3s, or £l2o’) ' per amiuii-. The standing char-res arc computed at 71 per cent, ir.fe!e-1 and sinking fund on an outlay of £ in,400 for rope-way and £3OOO foV win*. H, cr £1(105, which on SOuO tons. 2s (id per ton. “With icgard to the disposal of ashes the .r'vaat me is with (ho No. 2 and 3 sites, saiamsbig that these can be deposited lor reclamation behind the training wall, but the item is in any case not a heavy ore. Supposing all the ashes had to bo carted to spoil, the cost of so doing would amount to about. £430 per annum-, at* least half ox which would be saved if the other method wove adopted. The other annual running costs will be very nearly similar on any of the sites “W r o therefore recommend the No. 3 site as the most suitable, provided that piling is not required on same under the bxxilding, and chat possession can reasonably be obtained. It must oe noted that the proposed .goods railway line in continuation of the suggested line on the racecourse is shown pass ino- through this section, but wc consider that' this difficulty is not insuperable.” , , , Cr. Luxford said that the report and the estimated cost were all in favour of No. 3 site. The section was occupied at present by Jackson and Co., and if the Racecourse railway proposal were adopted, the new line would go through it, but there would be room for the powerhouse as well. It seemed most unlikely that any piling would be. required for the foundations. The wharf proposal had been deleted, because At was thought that befoie long the steam-plant would become,a stand-by for a hydro-electric plant. Cr. Luxford declared that it was absolutely necessary to come to a decision quickly to enable the work to proceed. The machinery would be coming to hand shortly, and he was quite sure that the Council would not bo waiting upon the machinery. but the machinery would be waiting for the power-house. The Mayor said that, as far as he knew, No." 3 site was composed mainly of pumice. Mr Ford, the Council’s architect, stated that apart from the piling, No.. 2 site was the cheapest, and it was absolutely necessary to have the piling for

prevention of flood damage. He had consulted one of the leading engineers in the- Dominion, Mr G. Fitzgerald, of Wellington, on this point, and that gentleman had confirmed his views. So far as he could judge, without taking borings, it would not be necessary to have piling on No. 3 site; it may be required for the chimney stack. The same conditions would also apply to the present site.

The Mayor moved a motion approving of No. 3 site. He said that finance was the main consideration, and it was wise to do anything which would relieve the Council -of extra cost. He stressed the need for prompt action, and suggested that the Special Committee should interview the holders of the lease in the morning. Cr, Luxford seconded the motion. He said that the foreshore site, if adopted, would have meant a delay from three to six months. The coal delivery question had also been settled.

Cr. Burnett moved an amendment approving of No. 1 site. He said that no arguments had been adduced against it, and on the score of it economy, it was the cheaper by three thousand pounds, eliminating the cost of the new car barns. There was no question that the barns should be put, in Ridgway Street. There was no doubt that this street would have to he opened and cars extended along it, and ultimately the barns would have to be built there. It would be better to have the plant .under one control than to have two separate powerhouses and two stalls. He pointed out that the cost on No, 1 site included the erection of new car barns. The Mayor said that time was the essence of the work, .-if No. 1 site were adopted, it would mean that the car barns would have to be built first, and that would take six to nine months, it was necessary to have the machinery housed as quickly as‘possible. Cr. Aitken seconded the motion.

Cr. Thompson favoured No.T site. He said that he saw no reason why a temporary barn could not be ut up for the cars, also why the Council could not make a start on No. 1 immediately.

Cr. Liffiton said that the _ engineers were unanimous in recommeding No. 3 site. He supported the Mayor, holding the view that the Council should bo i guided by its experts. Cr. Spriggens supported No. 3 site. Cr. Sig'ley said that Mr Hutchinson had stated that any of the sites would suit him! The reason why he (the speaked) had supported the foreshore scheme was on account of the possibility of a simple gravitation water supply. But that was now impossible on account of cost. He was inclined to favour No. .1 site, for he had been advised that both plants would have to be run together. If this were so, it would be better to have them under one roof. It was stated by Mr Talboys that it was not possible to run the gas plant in conjunction with the steam plant, because of the difference in current that would be generated by the latter. So far as a stand-by was concerned, provision would be made for this at the new powerhouse.

Cr. Gower supported the Mayor's motion, but he hoped there would be no more delay. Ho added that the cost of the power-house would have to he added - to the figures before the Council. Cr. Sharpe said that he favoured No, 1 site, not only for the reasons stated,

but because he favoured putting the car barns on Ridgway Street. The Council seemed unable to settle the question, and he thought it should go outside and get the advice of the very best expert it could get. Cr. Donaldson said that he regretted the Council had committed'the ratepayers to such a large sum as .£140,000, which, he thought, would be larger. If it were possible to cut down expenditure, it should be clone. He had expected the Auckland experts would have assisted the Council in coming to a decis l ion. Personally, he favoured the waterfront, because although the cost was greater, it would be cheaper in the enS; but, as this was not possible, he was compelled, to accept the recommendation" of the engineers, although the site did not appeal to him. Cr. Richardson said that he had favoured No. 1 site all along, and he had no argument to convince him to the contrary. In reply to Cr. Siglcy, Mr Talboys stated that the now car barn -would have to be erected first if No. 1 site were adopted, for the power-house would be erected on the site of the present car' barn. Mr Staveley- remarked that there was very little difference between any of the sites. A good deal of informal discussion took place, the councillors seeking information from its officials, also the representatives of the National Electrical Co,, who were preseht. Ultimately the matter went to the vote, when it was seen that the Council was evenly divided. The d-ivison was: For the amendment: Crs Aitken, Richardson, bigley, Burnett, Thompson and Sharpe. Aganst: Crs. Luxford, L.iffiton, Gower, Spriggens, Donaldson, and the Mayor. The Mayor said that he was prepared’ to give his casting vote against the amendment, but ho wanted the assurance

of councillors that they would allow the decision to remain. Cr. Burnett; I intend to give notice of motion to rescind it. The Mayor: You see the difficulty. If notice of motion were given, it would still further delay the work, Cr. Sharpe, in order to find a way out of the deadlock, moved an amendment that the Council engage an outside expert. This was lost by eight to four, the majority of the councillors considcrino 1 that no additional help could be given by an outsider. The motion was finally put to the meeting, and was declared carried' by seven to live, Cr. Aitkcu this time voting for it. . intimation was given that the councillors would accept the decision, and would try to-push forward the construction of the power-house. The Special Committee was given power to negotiate with the owners of the lease. Mr Battle was also instructed to proceed with plans for the alteration and additions to the car barn.