CANAL OR TUNNEL?

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16728, 10 January 1920, Page 8

CANAL OR TUNNEL?

« ESTIMATED COST.

A statement was recently made to "The Press" by tho Mayor to the effect that lio had received an estimate from Messrs Smith, Timms, and Kidman, the Australian contractors, for tho construction of Port Christchurch, according to tho published plans, and that tho figures were astonishingly moderate, being loss than half tho cost of tho proposed construction of tho Tunnol road. Mr L. M. Sandston, consulting engineer to tho firm of Smith, Timms, and Kidman, informs us that 3>r. Thacker mil'st 1» under a misapprehension regarding tho position. From tho necessarily cursoiy inspection of the site of tho proposed canal, and of tho comparatively mcompleto and second-hand information obtainable, it was impossible to arrivo at anything near as definite a prico for the canal as for tho tunnel. Tho position was that Mr Jichcll's approximate estimate was £725,000, while that of Smith, Timms, and Kidman was £1.150,000, which made Dr. Thacker's statement that tho canal would rost only half as much as tho Tunnel road incorrect Tt was estimated that tho cost of the tunnel would Ikj in the neighbourhood of £700,000, a ronsidcrablv less amount.