THE OUTER HARBOR.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2331, 26 October 1908, Page 2

THE OUTER HARBOR.

MR. MARCHANT’S SCHEPVSE.

REPORT OF FINANCE COMMITTEE. -

The report following, which has been kindly supplied by the chairman of the Board (Mr. J- . Townley), is that of the finance Committee of the Harbor Board, which will bo presented, to the Board on Tuesday, at then; meeting. The report,, however, is not a unanimous one, and it- is understood that the minority may subsequently present an independent report or -their own. Your committee have carefully considered the position both in regard to the proposed work and finances, and Uoir to renort as follows: 1. 'as TO THE HAH BOR SCHEME. The scheme has been subjected to close inquiry and investigation by Messrs. Goode, Sons, and Matthews, and by Mr. Leslie Reynolds and your committee, while assured by all engineers that the Pali Hill she is the best, think it necessary to direct the Board’s attention to various matters in regard to which the several engineers differ, and about which, if the scheme is to bo submitted to the ratepayers for adoption, they should have definite information placed before them. Notes on Mr. Marchant’s own report of February, 1907: —(a) As to harbor bottom, Mr. Marchant says: “Within the proposed harbor area the sea bottom is papa rock. It- is bare and somewhat uneven from a lowwater depth of 24ft. shorewards. Seawards of that depth it is almost perfectly fiat and overlaid with a covering of silt. One point bearing on the nature of the sea bottom here was raised during the progress of the survey, that was, whether the bottom would afford sufficiently good anchorage for largo vessels in the harbor. This is a, question for experienced nautical men to decide after probing the bottom. My opinion is, that while the anchorage cannot be said to be first-class, it can be said to be sufficiently good. If, however, there should be a doubt about after trial, remedies can be applied at moderate cost to loosen the bottom .within the harbor entrance sufficiently to make the anchorage above suspicion.” The length of the proposed breakwater is 4700 ft. (b) The mound or rubble work: Mr. Marchant proposes that the seaward slope shall he 2-j to 1. (c) The whole of the stone required —both quality and quantity—he assures, can be got from Wailiirere, including blocks from 15 tons and over, but if experience shows that this cannot be realised then he suggests as follows:—“If, however, there should nob bo a sufficiency of heavy natural blocks, then these must be supplemented by the addition of 30 ton concrete blocks laid on the surface of tho breakwater, which will jmobably be the cheapest method to pursue. If, however, a very large quantity of such concrete blocks were required, then a composite breakwater, of set concrete blocks on a rubble foundation’ with a concrete block breakwater would be more economical.” (d) As to the: range or sccnd of waves in bad weather. No observation on this is made by Mr. Marchant in his official report. . In his notes on Goode and Co.’s report he refers to the subject as follows :— ‘ ‘ln all these breakwater harbors the great- bugbear of shipping is “range,” that is, oscillation of the water which prevents vessels from Ij'ing quietly besides the wlnrvcs. Having experienced the great drawbacks of this motion at three breakwater harbors with which I have been or still am professionally connected, I consider that everything possible should be done to eliminate this undesirable factor. With this view I “hooked” the outer arm to give the swell running round! the end of the breakwater room to expand and consequently reduce itself in the sheltered, area I do not wish to unduly press the question of range, and admit that where a rubble breakwater exists, its effect is nothing like so strong and harmful as the reflections which take place from the lee-side of a solid concrete breakwater; but everyone who lias had experience of the greatdisadvantage of a harbor subject to range would agree that everything possible should he done to reduce it.” (e) The cost of the No. 1. scheme is estimated by Mr. Marchant at £331,000, plus £BOOO contingencies omitted by him, total £339,00Q.; but if concrete work be required as per above quotation in (c) then there is to be added £32,400 more. He, however, in his notes on Goode and Co.’s report says:—“l advise the Board to accept the consulting engineer’s estimate of £408,000 for loan purposes. With proper and experienced engineering, I believe the work can be carried out on my plan for much less than my estimate of £331,000, plus £BOOO contingency fund omitted.” (f) Generally in said notes he adds:—“The fact is that in many directions marine engineering is of necessity very experimental. One never really knows what he can or cannot do with breakwater work until he tries; there are too many unknown quantities and disturbing factors to allow of absolute certainty. It is, however, always safe and permissible to argue from the results of similar works which have been built under approximately similar conditions in the same country.” With considerable reservations and modifications both as to work and cost, Messrs. Goode and Co. adopt generally Mr. March ant’s site and scheme, (a) Breakwater: “There can be no question but that heavy seas from the south-east are experienced at Gisborne. Mr. Marchant states, in liis report, that the sda bottom consists of hare papa rock up to a depth of 24 feet. This would indicate a considerable sea disturbance. Moreover, deep water is found in the immediate vicinity seaward of the proposed harbor. We should therefore anticipate that the breakwater mould would, in heavy south-easterly gales, experience" a very considerable wave stroke. For this re'ason we consider that it would- be advisable to provide for a sea slope of 3 to 1, extending to a depth of 15 feet .below low-water of spring tides, " Blocks from 15 to 25 tons should be used exclusively upon tlie top of the mould and upon- the sea slope as shown upon the crosssection given upon drawing No. 3, accompanying this report. We should not advise filling in the intersicess between the stones forming the top with concrete; as advised by Mr, Mar-

chant.” (b) Anchorage in harbor: They say this is of prime importance, but they have not the information to form an opinion (paragraph 20). (c) They differ as to the mode of construction of works, and say that instead of using staging, a powerful travelling crane should be used for depositing heavy’ blocks (paragraph 26). (d) They consider that the enclosed" ground should be carefully “swept” so as to ascertain pinnacle rocks, in order to their removal as dangerous to vessels (see paragraphs 27 and '29). .(e) They consider tho quarry plant proposed insufficient, and estimate tlie cost of the necessary plant at £48,000 (paragraph 32). (f) Then* estimate lor works (assuming as they do 3s per ton for stone, as put by Mr. Marchant) totals £408,000, and should future extension be required they estimate the additional cost at £127,000. 3. Mr Leslie Reynolds on the scheme of Mr. Marchant and Messrs. Coodo and Co., largely differs from both, and remarke generally that the wave force being very heavy the breakwater must be thoroughly and the alignment designed as far as possible to eliminate range inside, •‘he tendency of wave sccnd, in my opinion, is of vital importance in connection with any outer harbor scheme.” (a)- He approves of tho locality site chosen by Mr. Merchant as the best under existing circumstances, as the cost of a harbor between the position marked “foul ground” on the Admiralty chart and a point about half a mile eastward of the present breakwater (which he considers the best site for a harbor) is out of the question, as a million pounds would be required for its construction. (b) He has “grave objections” to the area of deep water .in Mr. Marchant’s scheme, and to the “width of entrance which would be exposed to westerly seas, as also to the scend or undulation which would enter during southerly weather and ground swell.” He says: “I am .satisfied that in terms of the proposed width of entrance, the area, which would bo available in the scheme submitted by Mr. Marchant and Messrs. Goode, Sou and .Matthews’ amendment thereon, is insufficient to admit or large vessels entering or leaving during heavy weather without- considerable risk, or of their lying at the berthage without inconvenience from range due to southwesterly seas, and also those from any other quarter round to the southeast.” (c) Breakwater stone : He says that when the Waihirere quarry is opened up he is satisfied that there will be found to be “a very considerable per centage so soft and friable as to be useless for the work, and that heavy blocks from 10 to 25 tons in weight required for the seaward slope of tho breakwater will be comparatively difficult to obtain.” And he estimates the value of the rubble “at 4s per ton, or 6s per cubic yard including interstices, instead of of 3s per ton as allowed by Ml*. Marchant.” (d) Slope of Mound.—He agrees with Messrs Goode and Co. that 3 to 1 is the slope that should be worked on. (e) He approves of 'Messrs Goode and Co.’s suggestion of depositing stone by a crane, but of larger reach than 4oft arm, viz., a “Titan,” with 80ft radius at a cost of £16,000. (f) Schemes compared.— He is satisfied that Mr. Marchant’s scheme or any less scheme than the one he proposes “would prove a disappointment-,” and he adds: “That if your Board are not prepared to undertake suc-li a work at the present juncture, the question of constructing an outer harbor should -be deferred until such time as the settlement of the district will admit of such works being undertaken, bearing in view that in the construction of an outer harbor for Gisborne no half measures will satisfy the legitimate demands which your Board and the public may expect.” He estimates the cost of the several schemes -as follows: —

Mr. Mxreliant’s scheme ... 457,000 Messrs Cootie and Co.’s schemo 430,000 Mr. Reynold’s scheme ... 570,730 It is apparent at once that the differences are very serious, and that in view of such differences whatever scheme is adopted, if any, the whole work must be largely experimental. And it further appears to your Committee that without a mole,.as shown in Mr. Reynolds’ plan, being ram out from the Pah Hill in the direction of the toe of the breakwater, there is no provision made to minimise or to prevent serious range. lI.—FINANCE.

1. All the statements of revenue and expenditure (estimated) and . other data from time to time laid before your Board have been referred to the secretary and the auditor to examine and report on, and they have also been asked to show the actual revenue. The result of their enquiries and examination are stated in their report annexed hereto. Those results your Committee are satisfied may be accepted as reliable. 2. The Board may see proper to add prospective increases of revenue, upon estimate, to the results arrived at by the auditor and secretary, hut in the opinion of your Committee lenders will he disposed to discount such estimated revenue in arranging a loan.

3. The Act of 1907 contemplates that out of the. authorised loan of £400,000 the Board shall provide for repayment of the amoaant owing on the debentures of the £200,000 loan not yet provided for. At this date the amount not yet provided for approaches nearly £BO,OOO, and your Committee -are of opinion that the new lenders will stipulate that, say, £BO,000 shall be held and ear-marked as .a- special reserve for that purpose, and so avoid all questions. The Board will," of course, have the investment of the £BO,OOO till it is required for repayment. Then the Act further contemplates that the first year’s interest (£18,000) and sinking fund £2000) are to be paid out of loan. So that in all £IOO,OOO may he taken as appropriated. And, therefore^—assuming that the Board would be able to borrow at 4J per cent, interest by instalments —the first instalment will ho mot less than £200.to enable the Board to proceed with the works. . ' 4. The estimate of cost by the several engineers being so largely different, the cost, in your " Committee’s opinion, may be set down 'as certainly largely in excess of the ’ amount authorised to be borrowed. And trhe {Board will have to consider whether in such circumstances they are justified in submitting to the ratepayers any proposal to §apotioa til? ’authorised loan.

Because the works once started the Board may not obtain further power to borrow for their completion. The Board’s operations in harbor building have been once stopped when half done, and that may occur again. -Statement of Estimated' Ordinary Receipts and Expenditure for the Eight Years 1909 to 1916 inclusive, on the basis of q. New Loan of £400,000 being raised under tlie Board’s Act of 1907 in six annual instalments ort £60,000 each, and one of £40,000.

ißeceints, 1909. £ Wharfages, pilotage and port charges ••• ••• 18,000 Rents ... -••• ••• 792 Sundries " ... ... . ••• 700 Balanco forward ... ... SO? £20,300 Expenditure 1909. £ Debit balanco from ISOS 1,500 Harbor expenditure ... 8,800 Interest on old loan ... 10,000 Interest on £60,000 of inew loan (paid out of loan) ... 18,800 £20,300 Receipts, 1910. £ Wharfages, pilotages, and port charges ... 19,000 Rents 792 Sundries ... ... 700 Balance forward ... ... 2,116 £22,608 Exeenditure, 1910. , £ Debit balance from 1909 ... 808 Harbor maintenance and improvements - ... ••• S,BOO Interest old loan •••_ 10,000 Interest on £60,000 out of £120,000 new loan ... 3,000 £22,608 Receipts, 1911. £ Wharfages,- etc. ••• 20,000 Rents as above ... 792 Rents, increase Tauw-haropa-rae for 6 months ... 2,034 Sundries ... 700 Balance forward ... ... 3,390 £26.916 •Expenditure, 1911. £ Debit balance from 1910 ... 2,116 Harbor expenditure ... 8,800 Interest- old loan ... 10,000 Interest on £120,000 out of £IBO,OOO of now loan ... 6,000 £26,916 Receipts, 1912. Sj "Wharfages, etc. •••. 21,000 Rent (including increase _of Tauvrhareparac to £4500 per annum) 4,860 Sundries ... ••• 700 Balance forward ... 4,630 £31,190 Exnendituro, 1912. £ Debit balanco from 1911 ... 3 390 Harbor expenditure ... S.SOO Interest old loan 10,000 Interest on £ISO.OOO out of £240,000 of new loan ... 9,000 £31,190 Receipts, 1913. £ Wharfages, etc. ... ... 22.000 Rents .., 4,860 Sundries ••• ••• „ 700 Balanco forward ••• 7,870 £35,430 Expenditure, 1913. £ Debit balance from 1912 ... 4,630 Harbor expenditure ••• 8,800 Interest on old loan ••• 10,000 Interest on £240,000 out of £300,000 new loan ... 12,000 £35,430 Receipts, 1914. Wharfages, etc. ••• 23,000 Rents 4,860 Sundries 700 Balanco forward ••• 13,110 £41,670 Expenditure, 1914. Debit balance from 1913 ... 7,870 Harbor expenditure 8,800 Interest on old loan ... 10,000 Interest on £300,000 out of £360,000 of new loan ... 15,000 £41,670 Receipts, 1915. Wharfages, etc. ••• 24,000 Rents ... ••• 4,860 Sundries ••• ••• 700 Balance forward ••• 20,350 £49.910 Expenditure, 1915. Debit balance from 1914 ... 13,110 Harbor expenditure ... 8,800 Interest on old loan ... 10,000 Interest on £360,000 out of £400,000 of new loan ... 18,000 £49,9-10 Receipts, 1916. Wharfages, etc. ••• 25,000 Rents ••• ••• 4..560 Sundries _ ... ••• 700 Allow for increase port charges on. completion of new harbor ••• ••• 5,000 Balance forward 14,i90 £50,350 Expenditure, 1916. Debit balance from 1915 ■Harbor maintenance for river 6,000 New harbor expenses ... 4,000 Interest on new loan £400,000 20,000 £50,350 - 1917. £ Debit balanco from 1916 ... 14,790 STATEMENT OF WHARFAGES. Statement compiled from the Board’s statistical records showing what the wharfages collected by the Board on actual transactions during the five years 1903-1907 would have amounted to had they boon collected on tbo tariff of 1907, iaud showing tlie increase or decrease on each year: —- g. g ?? g o ■ f“*« q rt as§ ® t £ £ £ £ £ 1903 ... 3662 4080 7742 1904 ... 3899 3489. 7388 354 1905 ... 4588 3417 8005 617 1906 .... 5396 3959 9385 1380 1907 ... 6330 4264 10594 1209 ■lncrease 3206 Decrease 354 354 23875 19239 43114 2852 t ■Average annual increase, £2852 -divided by 4—£713, A—

SPECIAL FINANCE REPORT. Following is tbo report of Messrs T. A. Coleman and J’. YV. "Witty, who were asked by the Finance Committee to prepare an estimate of the Boa rd’s ordinary receipts and expenditure for tho next eight years, 1909 to 1916 inclusive. It- may ho added that this report has been accepted by the Finance Committee as a whole. PROPOSED LOAN OF £400,000. Pursuant to your Committee's instructions we have tho honor- hand you herewith our estimate of tho Board’s ordinary receipts and expenditure for the eight years from 1909 to 1916 inclusive, and in connection therewith beg to submit the following for your consideration. , WHARFAGES, ETC.

On the basis of tho receipts for tho present year we estimate Uiat the revenue under this heading for next year will amount to £IB,OOO, and after careful analysis and comparisonof the receipts on this account- and the Trade Statistical Returns compiled in this office, from the Ist January 1903, to date, wo have allowed for an average annual increase of £I,OOO. Judging by the above returns of former years we think it probable that this increase may not be realised regularly each year, but on." the whole period the estimate should be justified. PORT CHARGES.

Under date of 1916 we have estimated the further receipt of £5,000 under this heading on the assumption that the New Harbor will, by that date, be completed and available tor shipping. RENTS.

The estimates of tlie-sc up to 1911 are based on present rentals. We hare assumed tiiat on tlio expiry or tho existing Tauwhareparao leases that property will bo re-let at much higher rentals. We have based our cstimato on the present ■Government valuation of the property, £105,289, less the estimated amount of the lessees’ interest in the improvements £15,393, £89,896 net, say £90,000 nearly, which at 5 per cent would yield £4-500 per annum. Possibly the next valuation may be at a higher figure, but we consider £4500 a fair estimate at tho present time. EXPENDITURE ON -PRESENT

HARBOR WORKS We estimate the annual expenditure on this account at £BBOO until 1915. In doing so wo assume that the Board will not undertake any new works in tho river, but v. ill simply continde to use its present plant. On completion of the new harbor this expenditure would probably be reduced by about £3,000, and on tno other hand the expense of management of the new breakwater Avould probably amount to £4,000. OLD LOAN OF £200,000. Wo have allowed for payment of interest on this loan up to 1915, by which date we estimate that the I üblic Trustee will have in hand about £160,000 available for tho purpose- of redeeming the debentures. Ihe balance, about £40,000, will bo a first charge on the proposed new loan or £400,000. At the present time the Public Trustee holds funds belonging to the Board amounting t<> about £120,000. If it should be necesssarv for tho protection of the debenture holders to at once set aside and eai - mark the £BO,OOO difference between the amount of this fund and the amount of the old loan that amount will have to be raised as part of the first instalment of the new loan. This however, will not alter our statement, as tho money could, in the hands of the Public Trustee, earn enough to pay its own interest charges. NEW LOAN OF £400,000.

Wc assumed that the Board will raise the amount of this loan by instalments as required, say in six sums of £OO,OOO each, and one of £40,000. And we have also assumed that the Board will avail itself of the provision's of Section 2, Clause 0, of the Enabling Act, which authorises the payment of the first year’s interest of the loan. This amounts to £20,000 principal. This amounts to £20,000 anil if it, and the £40,000 for redemption of the old loan, be deducted from the £400,000 there will remain a sum of £340,000 available for the new harbor works. BALANCE. Our estimate shows a debit balance on the eight years dealt with of £14,790. RATE. We have assumed that the Board will not strike any rate during these eight years. On the present Government Valuations a rate of one penny in the £ in the borough, a half-penny in the £ on the County within the new harbor district, would amount to over £15,000 per annum.