THE TE ARO GOODS-SHED (FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO).

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1892 Session I, D-08a

D.—Ba

1892. NEW ZEALAND.

THE TE ARO GOODS-SHED (FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO).

Return to an Order of the House of Representatives dated 18th August, 1892. Ordered, " That there be laid before this House any additional correspondence or reports relating to the Te Aro ■Goods-shed subsequent to the 21st July last."—(Mr. Weight.)

No. 1. Mr C. Napieb Bell, M.lnst.O.E., to the Hon. the Minister for Public Works. Wellington, 25th July, 1892. g IB _ 2'c Aro Station.—Beport on Accommodation for Goods-station. Acting on your instructions to report to you on the feasibility of placing a, goode-station on the reclaimed land at Te Aro, I proceeded to read all the correspondence on thisi since 1886 to the present time, and, finding that there was much discussion on the question of extending the railway to Newtown, and even to Island Bay, I went over the ground with a plan marked P W.D. 15,002, on which was shown the several proposed lines. Taking this extension first into consideration for the reason that it might possibly affect he position of the station at Te Aro, I examined the several lines shown on the plan as fa .bb the summit of the hill at Newtown, and, under the existing circumstances of land _budt over, aod sections occupied, I came to the conclusion that a line indicated by the Under-Secretary Mr Blow which I have shown on a map of the town submitted with this report, was the best both as to the physical features of the ground and the amount of properties which would be disturbed V y I could only judge of the features of the ground by a number of levels written on the plan, and, judging by them, the line recommended would have no gradients steeper than 1 in 66 or 70 from Te Arc>toNewtown Station. Beyond Newtown Station the line in red on pan marked _P W.D 15,002 would be followed as far as Island Bay , but without a survey I could ™t give an^^r on the suitability of the line from Newtown Station to Island Bay , but I presume it has been marked out with a knowledge of the ground it passes over , . , • The line which I consider most suitable would leave the passenger-line at Iβ Aro and curving round by the corner of the Corporation yard, would enter Kent Terrace It would Terrace on the boundary-line between the Avenue and the west side of the terrace until it comes to Section 286. Here it would curve, and follow the east side of Basm Reserve Passing through Section 678, it would take a line of street which bounds the east side of Sections to 745 but rf it were not advisable to take the street-line, it might_ pass through Sections 17 to 14 and again curving it would pass through Sections 759 to 768, and in these sections the Newtown Station would be placed, havingaccess from Riddiford and Mem Streets. This line appears ground to be the best that could be chosen, and if the disappropriation of the land it.passes; through tere taken in hand at once the amount of compensation to be paid would be very moderate but if it is left over for some years this may cease to be the case, as no one can say when sections now vacant will be built over, and inferior houses be replaced by valuable ones. In taking the line up Kent Terrace, and at the side ot the Basin Reserve, I assume that the railway will be a suburban-passenger line, and will travel at the speed of a horse-tram, and that it Will central for a station for Newtown Ido not think there is a better It is in the lowest part of the valley , an extensive district o^^-^ 6 . 8 , 8 ?™^ x * levels than the station, and when the whole is built over the station will be m the centre of a POPU As U to d the nlture of the passenger traffic lam not in a position to give a correct opi™n but I do not think this extension of the railway would have much effect on the traffic by cabs, omnibuses,

P.—Ba

2

or the trams, which are far more convenient for local traffic, and would always be preferred by passengers. But in the case of holiday trips to the country, and of passengers travelling long distances, there would be a material saving to the people of trouble and expense if they could get into the train at Newtown, instead of taking omnibus or cabs to get to the station at Te Aro or Thorndon. In a communication to the Minister for Public Works dated the 4th day of May, 1889, theCommissioners for Railways acknowledge that Newtown and districts beyond are likely to become populous, and will prove advantageous to connect by railway, but they do not favour taking the line through busy parts of the town, such as through the Basin Reserve. They recommend going by the Town Belt, through Constable Street and Newtown Park. This line would be over half a mile longer than the one by Kent Terrace, there would be 60 chains of tunnel, and, passing through very rough ground, it would be costly Seeing how many populous towns have railways and steamtrams in the streets, I do not think there would be any inconvenience in taking the line up Kent Terrace, and a station at the Basin Reserve would still further accommodate the public, being just half-way between Newtown Station and the reclaimed land. The late Mr W N Blair also recommended the line up Kent Terrace, and along Adelaide Road. I do not recommend taking the line up Adelaide Road, as I consider the line I have described as preferable. In regard to the station at Te Aro, I have examined the ground and taken note of the voluminous discussion that has passed on the subject. I found it also necessary to cpnsult the plans for harbour extension adopted by the Harbour Board in 1884, which might be affected by the proposed railway-stations. I find that the ground at present reclaimed is only enough for a roomy and commodious passenger-station, and I should not advise anything of the nature of a makeshift being built with the idea of saving the space existing at present. If the station is necessary it should be provided with every facility for doing the large passenger traffic which is expected to arise in the future. It follows that to accommodate a goods-station also more land must be reclaimed, and I have shown how a goods-station may be placed, requiring 14,900 square yards of additional space, which will take about 80,000 cubic yards of filling. The breastwork of timber must also be re-erected, or else the new slopes must be pitched with rock. I should think this work would take considerably over a year to complete, as there are now more difficulties in the way of getting material to fill up new reclamations than formerly To satisfy myself as to the best use that could be made of the existing space at the reclaimed land, I have drawn on the plan a passenger-station, which is somewhat similar to the stations at Hobart and Launceston, with double platform and road access on both sides. The goods-station on the opposite side of the station-yard would face the wide road to be laid out along the dock and tidal basin, thus preserving the features of the design adopted by the Harbour Board in 1884. It was proposed by Mr Blow, in a communication dated the 2ist May, 1886, to place the passenger-station for Te Aro between Cambridge and Kent Terraces, and to have the goods-station only on the reclaimed land. I have made a plan showing how this may be done (see Fig. 2) and also showing the goods-station only at the reclaimed land (see Fig. 3) The passenger-station at Kent Terrace is a good and sufficient one, and quite as convenient for access to the public as that on the reclaimed land. The objections to it are that it entirely takes up the Avenue and right-of-way between the terraces. Kent Terrace will be made narrower at the station-building, and communication will be cut off across the terraces between Pirie and Vivian Streets. I might be allowed to suggest that the Mayor and City Council should be consulted before deciding, as this is a subject that calls for full discussion by persons intimate with the requirements of the travelling public of the Te Aro end of the town. The advantages of placing the passenger-station in Kent Terrace appear to be that the reclaimed land now existing would in that case be amply sufficient for a commodious goods-station,, and new reclamation would not be required at present, as it will be if both goods and passengers are placed on the reclaimed land. Also, the reclaimed land would be reserved for warehouses and business premises round about the dock and tidal basin, and the goods-station would have all its accommodation of space devoted to the merchandise traffic of the wharves and dock, which will bemuch required in the future when the shipping and coastal trade is largely increased. It is to be observed that during a heavy north-west wind the spray flies over the reclaimed land in clouds, and a passenger-station must be protected by a close fence 12ft. or more high, which would be an unsightly obstruction to the view of the harbour. Of course, when the dock and its. enclosing roads are formed this annoyance will be abated, but it may be many years before these are carried out. On the plan herewith the two proposed sites for passenger-station are clearly shown, as well asthe line which would extend to Newtown and on a separate map of the town the line to Newtown and the site for its station is indicated in a red line. I am inclined to recommend the site at Kent Terrace for passenger-station, provided the Mayor and City Council see no objection to it, as I believe the sites on the reclaimed land would be more advantageously reserved for business traffic at the water-frontage , and passenger traffic would bein the way of the business accommodation required in the future. There is, of course, the extra expense to be considered of dividing the stations—the goods at the reclaimed land, and the passenger at Kent Terrace this and the convenience or otherwise for existing circumstances of the arrangement are questions which the Commissioners for Railways are best able to judge of, and should be considered together with the suitability of the position for the■convenience of the travelling public. I have, &c, C. Napiee Bell, M.lnst.C.B. The Hon. the Minister for Public Works, Wellington. P.S.—I have not made out an estimate of works shown on plans herewith, as your Engineer would be more familiar with the cost of such work in Wellington than I am.

3

D.—Ba

No. 2. The Hon. the Ministek for Public Woeks to the Railway Commissionbks. Public Works Office, Wellington, Ist August, 1892. The Proposed Goods- and Passenger-station at Te Aro. Memorandum for the Eailway Commissioners. I have the honour to forward herewith for your information copy of a report by Mr C. Napier Bell, M.lnst.C.E., on the above-mentioned subject, and to request that the Commissioners will kindly favour the Government with their opinion on the same. E. J Seddon, Minister for Public Works.

No. 3. The Eailway Commissionbbs to the Hon. the Minister for Public Wobks. Head Office, Wellington, New Zealand, 9th August, 1892. Proposed Goods- and Passenger-station at Te Aro. — Report by Mr C. N Bell. Memorandum to the Hon. the Minister for Public Works. The Commissioners have the honour to express their opinion on Mr C. N Bell's report, asrequested by you in your letter of the Ist instant. The report deals with the question of the location of a station or stations at Te Aro, and the subject of the extension of the line to Newtown. In the first place, as regards the extension to Newtown, we think the proposal to carry the railway through the city objectionable. In the United States, where such practices have been pursued on an extensive scale, millions of money are being spent by the railways, States, and municipalities to abate the evils which have arisen, and which have been found intolerable. We should be warned by experience elsewhere, and not attempt to carry the railway along and across the chief thoroughfares, the tramway, and the Basin Reserve in the manner proposed. With personal knowledge of the practice in many large cities in Europe and the United States, the Commissioners do not know of any precedent for working mixed traffic with stations at such short intervals located as shown on the plan submitted. We think Mr Bell must have had in his mind lines for purely passenger purposes when he refers to steam-tramways, &c. A line for city-passenger traffic should Be upon an entirely different basis to one intended to foi'm the terminal portion of a main trunk line carrying mixed traffic such as this Newtown extension would be. If no other route than that through the Basin Beserve were possible we think it would be better to abandon any further extension. A good route is, however, obtainable on the outskirts of the town by travelling the Mount Victoria Eange, and approaching Newtown by the Constable Street Saddle. A terminus to the main trunk line for Newtown and Island Bay could thus be obtained without the many evils and difficulties surrounding the route through the city In our opinion, it is not necessary to construct a railway for city passenger traffic, which can be better served by the tramways and busses. . , The passenger-station proposed at the foot of Tory Street properly provides for two platforms but according to the plan they would not be available for the object for which they would be needed.. The Commissioners' plan, forwarded to you with their letter of the 24th February last, is a simpler and cheaper one, and will answer the purpose for which it is required, and we do not think Mr Bell's proposal desirable. We do not favour the proposal for a station at Kent Terrace. Among other objections, such an extension, while it would add materially to the cost of the line, would be unlikely to secure any more passenger-traffic than one at Tory Street. The location of a goods-station at the foot of Tory Street as indicated would prove an obstruction to the conduct of the traffic of the section, and increase the expenses without giving any corresponding increase in traffic. With regard to the future development of the harbour-works and basin, and the supposed utility of the sidings and shed which Mr Bell has indicated, speaking with a great many years' departmental experience, we consider that the sidings and accommodation proposed would not be of any use in dealing with ships' goods. As regards protection from the north-west winds, the station must, of course, be fenced and roofed. If a goods-station were placed further out in the harbour, as proposed, such protection would be still more necessary In our opinion, therefore, none of Mr Bell's proposals should be adopted. We see nothing to alter our opinion that the plan for a station at Tory Street, forwarded to you with our memorandum of the 24th February last, is the most suitable for the accommodation of the railway traffic. James McKeebow, Chief Commissioner Approximate Cost of Pαper.— Preparation, nil; printing (1,160 copies) £2 2a.

By Authority: Geobqe Didsbuby, Government Printer, Wellington.—lB92. Price 3d.]

WELLINGTON HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL PLAN

Sketch of PROPOSED TE ARO STATION YARD -Scale 300Ft-1 Inch.-

PART OF THE CITY OF W ELLINGTON