The Daily News. TUESDAY, JUNE 8. THE NEW HARBOR PLANS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 109, 8 June 1909, Page 2

The Daily News. TUESDAY, JUNE 8. THE NEW HARBOR PLANS.

- is a matter for regret that an attempt as been made to iniluentv public opinion gainst the improved plans for harbor evelopnient adopted by the Harbor oard. Were there sound reasons for jndemning the plans—reasons supported y expert opinion, even if not ill conormity with the sound judgment of the »ractical conimonsense of laymen—we night understand the views expressed, or instance, by our contemporary. >Vhen, however, we state that the board's decision was based on the adrice of its experts, and that tile new iehenie is, moreover, unquestionably superior, even to the lay mind, to limt which it litis superseded, it seems to us that the attempt to embarrass the Board is dictated more from ulterior motives tliau by souud judgment.. Were it not, therefore, that there is reason to believe the bogus objections raised by our contemporary may be takeu Seriously in some quarters,. we should not consider it necessary to defend the now plans with their manifold and selfevident advantages. The amount actually available ior ex penditure as pointed out by -Mr Marchant in his report, will be 1)100,59/ These figures can scarcely be open tc correction as assumed by the Herald The statement laid before' the Board al lowed £12,.">U0 for payment of the first year's interest; our contemporary givii? the amount at £12.jJ70, but forgot Ct allow the best part of £2OO for ex change. Also the cost of lloating the loan is very easy to ascertain. At pai the loan would produce £375,000. 'lh< Board is getting 1)8 nett, or £200,500 leaving £5500 as the cost of tlie lo:tn That is simple enough. But it is wit) the more important question of tin harbor plans that we are conoernei just now—with the assertion of the Her aid that " the Board has made a serious blunder." Our contemporary lays grca stress on the fact that the plans ac cording to which the Board has beei working during the last few years liavi been radically deviated from, but wi think it can easily be shown that tin is not the Jirst occasion on which tin Board has followed this course. It- wil perhaps be remembered that when Mi Marchant designed the extensions he pro vided for a 10001't. breakwater, buil right down to solid bottom, and fo 400 feet wharf extension in a straigli line, which would keep the berthag close in under tlie breakwater. He pre fcMedto dredge one berth on the slior wharf extension down' t the Board tumbled rock o: accumulation, without an dredging, with the result that the break water is being built on a comparativel; shallow sand foundation instead of , solid bottom. And while we admit tlm Mr. MaVchant's scheme was superior t tliat wliieh the Board adopted, we als contend that the Board's scheme is pel fectly safe, and is cheaper, always pre yided that dredging is not resorted to i CLOSE proximity to the breakwatei For the reason, therefore, that th stability pf the breakwater would I' ' endangered if the wharf were exteude in a straight line, and dredged, as pr i ginally planned by M/. :\l'archant uade 1 breakwater scheme, the whar plans were also abandoned, and it wa j proposed to extend the wharf at a eor 1 sfderahle angle from the present oik This was necessary, if the wharf was t be extended putwards at all, so as t keep away from the breakwater an allowing of deep dredging with absolut safety. It is perfectly clear to us tha at that time the idea of extending t'n harbor inshore, instead of seaward, h.n not been taken into account by tiie en gineer. Jt having become impossible i< extend the wharf in a straight 'inc. therefore, and a peculiar-shaped wharf to say the least of it, having been oiler ed as tiie only alternative hi a sea-war extension, the Board, with cominendabh wisdom, decided to seek the opinion o an expert seaman respecting the merit; of the new scheme. Captain Bone was accordingly -consulted, and,' siflter -ex haustive examination, unreservedly con dcriwed the proposal, and gave cogonl and unanswerable reasons for so doing With these reasons the Board's consulting engineer agreed, eUe he would never have altered his plans.

The reasons, moreover, are obvious to the veriest tyro ou the subject lint tile principal one should be sulficient to convince anyone who has the interests of the port at heart, namely, that whereas ocean-going boats under the old plan could only work at the wharf in fine weather, under Liu* new scheme tliM port and the wharf could be worked by such boats in any weather. Besides such definite expert assertion all otliearguments in favur of the new selienu 1 pale to insignificance. But these further arguments, which we cannot traverse ill detail in the course of this article, are equally as effective in favor of the new scheme. Some of the arguments may, however, be summarised us ,'.nlows:—

The inshore scheme insures .safe berthing in all' weathers for ocean boats; the outer scheme would not. The inshore scheme insures facility in working and quick despatch; the outer would at all time* be inconvenient, and would when the inshoiv berths were occupied be greatly hampered or altogether closed.

Inshore would proviiif sufficient berth-

I age, available ;i t ail times to full capacity in ail weathers: the oilier, though providing imnv actual berthage 1 face, would not provide any more for practical purposes, as the outer berths . could not be worked while the inner berths were occupied, and vice-versa. l Inshore would provide facilities for transhipment and shed aecomnwifution; the outer would provide none and make transhipment, impossible except at the cost of railing outward and inward. Despite the Herald's ridiculous contention that it will take live years to provide accommodation for ocean boats under flic new scheme, we. affirm that under the inshore scheme such accommodation will be provide sooner than under the outer stw.a., 4 or the reasons that work inshore can be carried on without interruption oy weather or traffic, whereas the outer scheme would be subject to continuous interruption from both causes. Jleeause also, of the greater proximity to and much greater facility in getting at plant and materia!,; whereas, through the length and narrowness of the present wharf its complete occupation by rails, trucks, etc., and its remoteness from storage of timber and plant, work on the outer scheme would be most seriously hampered. Further, the maintenance of the inshore wharf will he very much.less, while repairs can be carried out with much greater facility. • The inshore scheme, moreover, will provide sufficient room for many years with conveniences, and will in no way hamper or interfere with future works; the outer, whilst not for practical purposes increasing the berthage over the present, will not only hamper but make almost impossible further accommodation in future, j The dredging would W> practically the | 1 sainc under either scheme—notwith- ' standing the Herald's nightmare "red, ( whjeh we can assure our readers is ah- ; y solutely iion-existeit. If anything, ■ dredging under the new si-Jicme will !>" : les-a, fn- t'i-. reason that the berthing , ar'a is mm-lt more protected. Ju cither , e:ne, hard crust lias to be broken i Hi-ougl), and we challenge our co-iie;!!- j I po-vry to honestly s!,ute that it knows J c of the existence of a reef that would | make dredging impossible inshore, W« ' a

lmllenge the Herald further to state h;it a reef of rock exists at nil. j To conclude for tho present, therefore, j va affirm that the whole of the present vharf accommodation can be dredged without serious impediment; that it can )e done as quickly, if not mure so. than uidei; the previous proposal; that the widening of the wharf can he carried Jut as expeditiously, if not more so, than the wharf extension proposal, and that accommodation for omm-going joatb will be available as soon as, if not sooner, than would have been possible under the long spider-legged wharf scheme. We shall then also have the basis of a harbor for future extension; We shall have a sheltered harbor, available for Home-going boats in ail weathers—the only commercial one on the west coast of New Zealand. And we shall have a CHEAPER harbor than that originally proposed. The argument that the Hoard should have awaited the arrival of the chairman aud treasurer from London is not a strong one to advance, because, in our opinion, Messrs. King and Connett, as practical men, are certain to espouse the new plans, adopted on the recommendation of the expert whose «uvwc they sought; and, also, delay in deciding on a course of action would have oniy meant delaying by at least turec month* the time wheu ocean boats will trade to this port. We do not say that the plans now adopted admit of no modilication, If the funds are available it might be found advisable to slightly extend tin presently widened wharf in a straight line; but we believe that if funds art available within the "*'xt few years ; they should be expended in enclosing the harbor bv an eastern retaining wall additional wharves and * reclamation works. We have already overrun oui space, and have merely touched 011 the fringe of the subject, which we hope U return to very shortly. 02s TIIE FOURTH PAGE. Commercial. District News. The Toll Cities. Modern Robinson Crusoe. T-arauaki County Council.