THE DOCK.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 927, 21 September 1910, Page 7

THE DOCK.

| CONTRACTORS ASK FOR RELEASE. I ACTION BY BOARD. | FRESH LEGISLATION NECESSARY. t A special meeting of ~the Wellington i Harbour Board was held at 2 o'clock [yesterday, afternoon, to consider the question of the partly-constructed dock, i in regard to -which a difficulty has been experienced in getting the cement to set. properly. There were present: Messrs. Robqrt. Flotcher,' (chairman), Mi Cohen, J. W. M'Ewan, H. C. Tewsley, J. G. Harkness, T. M; Wilford, M;P. (Mayor), W. T. Hildroth, F. G. Bolton, and the Hon. >T. Kennedy Macdonald, M.L.C.. • Leave of 'absence was granted to Mr. Daniells, owing to illness,, and to Mr. Jones, who was absent from the city.; •On, tho motion of the chairman, the board went into committee' to consider several: matters'.' , : , On the board resuming, the chairman explained that tho board had considered in committee some correspondence': with regard to - the dock. The- difficulties thathad arisen were fairly, well known, and thecontractors had /seen, fit to send a letter to the. board intimating their intention ■■to abandon the work. The resolution passed by the committee was as follows: — ' -"While the board; has - been ad- , vised;thatthe contract .entered into:. • between the 'board and the. coni tractor is quite capable of perform-. 'V ance, ..the board resolves that in view •of the. letter' receivedfrom tho contractors, the board 'will,- if the necessary legislative authority •. be obtained freeing the-board from . - all responsibility and : liability, release the contractors and their sureties, the contractors. making no / ; claim against tho board,„ such . re- :.. lease to be;immediat-ely entefed into;, and held until tho necessary legis-, lation is' passed!" The resolution was then put to the mooting, and passed, Mr. Bolton alone dissenting. ; J Mr.'., Bolton: I desire my_ dissent to be recorded,; for reasons - given:.by' me ih. committee, 'one of them, being that 1 do not- think this resolution should coine- before the' board at tho present time, as a board. .;; . Mr. Wilford: I would like to Bay, as late, chairman': of ibis board, ;t>hat 'this matter has caused a lot of trouble to the Harbour Board during the last year of my chairmanship, and Mr.- Fletcher's term. Tho position has' • been v very carefully guarded arid looked into'; and the attitude-that- has. been adopted has been tho cause'of giving the board an opportunity of coming, to the resolution/at present .before us. I. congratulate the chainriari-on: the work that ho has done, and it has only - borne out what, this - board: has, believed all along that the' work -is possible of perfomi Mr. Tewsley: I desire to support the romarks made -by Mr.: Wilford, and I must say that I think" the '.chairman 'has' brought a lot; of 'care - and attention to bear , on- this very : difficult, question, and is to be congratulated by .the. citizens : of: Wellington ■■ on 'what he has done in this' connection. • : ,. ]j Following ,is, the letter received tfrpm. the Contractors: —:. . ' .

; ' "V; Wellington,' September 2, : 1910. " ■ ' Dear Sir,—We are' in'receipt :' of-your, letter- of August 25, the contents ;of: which we have noted. ' In repljv we. beg to state ,that ; we have 'given, the matter; of: our contract, still . further and we .have reluctantly fcome': to,•. the boncluaioii that an extension of time for-comple-tion .will bring us no nearer 1 to -absolution ■of -the unfor.tunate difficulty ".which has arisen, nor,'.will it, enable.usto. fulfil a contract,- which,in our opinion, 'cannot, be carried,out in the manner iontemplated.;and .specifiedunder the 'present conditions and specifications., by ■ force ; . of.. circumstances: beyond ' our control,..ive now notify you that we abandon to the board-our,-contract for the; con•struction ;of. the dock'.. In doing 60 we :oan only.' repeat'-, the r'made by .'us: in our : previous 'letters',»to,;the: effect that we are satisfied that' the dock be constructed iii. the manner specified: in the existing specifications,' and .that any further attempt ;,'on.our -part to do so would result in a useless waste hoth of !timo and money. Your board is already aware, of the'enormous loss, wo: have susitainedin endeavouring to carry, out what', iin-our opinion, is ; an, impossible contract, : and we would earnestly 'urge ,it : to take -our. position into : its most favourable consideration, "with :a view' of affording us seme relief and . . lightening:, our Joss as :much, as possible, having due' regard for the interests ;, of -all concerned. - With every reliance"that .the board will conEider the matter in a fair, and' equitable ■'spirit,r- ; J : ■ ■ •, We aTe, Tours faithfully,' ', (Sgd.) JOHN M'LEAN AND SON. 1 'The .- chairman, : "subsequently " announced'that ho had been in negotiation with the Premier.; in regard' to prospective legislation—the existing Act of Parliament making the carrying out of the work mandatory on the board—and had' just received the following letter:— : Wellington, September 20, 1910. • Deair Sir,—l am'in receipt of your, letter' of.the: 19th-ultimo, and' in reply thereto' desire to say that if the Harbohr Board - is : desirous, of . legislating. in order to enable it;to take overhand construct the graving dock,, making, it, optional instead of .mandatory, I will be glad to render Jlie board every assistance to-do so. Yours, etc., - : (Signed) J. G..WAED. i v Asked as to whether he ' was able to to throw any further light on the subr ject at the present juncture, the chairman expressed his inability to do bo. ' <

HISTORY OF THE DOCK. DIFFICULTIES AND' DELAYS. ■: The history of the proposed Wellington Graving Dock > dates back over ; a considerable span of years. It had long been a pet scheme of the late Mr. George Fisher, M.H.R., and the agitation for its construction finally materialised in the passing of the Wellington Harbour Board Empowering Act, 1902, which, inter alia, required the-board to carry out all preliminary work for. and within eighteen: months from the dateof the Act, begin • tho construction of the works for the dock. |. In pursuance of ;this . enactment, the board let a contract, in March, 1903; to Messrs. John M'Lean and Son for the sum of £9253 17s. 103;, for. the construction of about 500 ft. of concreteface' wall' along the 1 sea front ofthe proposed Te Aro reclamation, carrying the wall from its. termination, where completed in 1900 by the same firm, to ■th«S western' end of the special works to bei: constructed in connection with the dock. Tho work of dredging had, as fail as possible, been carried out by the board's plant, and the- completion of this' contract left a., gap of 300 ft. between its eastern end and the western end of the. wall completed by Mr. Pulley, which was to be closed by the dock, works and entrance. This contract was one of the preliminary works essential to be completed beforo the dock works could be commenced; but although it was to have been finished by April 30, 1904, delay occasioned by the nonarrival of concrete-mixing plant ordered by the "contractors from America threw the completion back until 1905; Twelve borings were made at tho instance of the Marino Department, which showed that the foundations would be in strata of a uniform character of clayey silt, and that rock was nowhere touohed. . After the completion of the dredging for the dock area, at the end of September, 1906, the final contract plans

were completed, and tenders called in January, 1907, and tho contract was let to Messrs. John M'Lean and Son for £196,201 ss. 4d., after but slight competition. Delay, however, seemed to dog tho progress of the undertaking, arising, it was stated, from the contractors' difficulty in obtaining delivery of the long piles required for the temporary staging work. Tho amount spent during that financial year out of the dock 'loan of £'250,000 was but £295. : The Harbour Board's engineer, in his annual report for the year 1907, stated: —"It is proposed to construct tho dock by the deposition of tho concrete of which it is to bo built into the water so as to form a first cast or roughly formed dock, and to similarly build the pumping station. After the first cast is in place it is proposed to surround the roughly-formed dock with clay filling, and to build a coffer dam across tho entrance, to erect the permanent pumping plant in the station, which would be temporarily pumped out for tho purpose, and to Use the permanent pumps to iinwater the dock and keep it dry whilst the final internal skin and shape is given to the dock. It is anticipated that when the first cast is pumped'out there may be considerable leakage through the conorete that has been deposited under water, but only to such an extent as - can' be. kept down and staunched during the construction of the finished, work. By the adoption of this method of construction by the deposition of concrete in the water it is believed that as good work will lie obtained as if the work had been constructed in the dry, and the great cost of coffer dams to enclose the area and of pumping during the operation has been avoided.. Provision has been made m the contract : for. the construction. in the sea-wall of an entrance 68 feet wide and 21 feet 6 inches below ordinary low water level,vso 'that at a. future time it smaller graying dock can be built alongside the larger one and served by the same pumping plant/ cranes, etc. It is to be regretted that the board's funds did not warrant the construction of this dock at the. same time, as the larger one,; a_s the cost' of construction hereafter, if it be ever built, will be materially increased. In. the meantime: the entrance will be closed by a retaining Wall. > '• ..' : i. - 'Tho work proceeded' slowly, as vre fifld the board's engineer again referring to the matter in his annual report for the period ending September 30, 1909, in the following terms: "The contractors completed. their staging, . and erected' storage bins, mixing plant, tramways and craneways during .tlio: year, . and commenced depositing concrete' in JNovember, 1908.'" Up to date, 8291 cubic yards have been deposited. The - work done includes. tho face. wall, , portion , of the first cast concrete in .'the iloor slab extending for about 60 feet, and part of the side walls. The rate of progress has been so slow that the date, of completion must be considerably over the contract time. >. The. plant - provided is-. inadequate .to' enable the construction to proceed as rapidly as it ought to. The contractor, has experienced a good deal of 'difficulty in dealing with the. silt and laitance, which lias to bo removed from the bottom before concrete can be deposited. The pumps originally provided, were.'too -small, but large pumps have been procured, and. better .progress is now being made. V Some of the concrete in the first, cast of, the floor , slab- has been, found riot to be setting 'satisfactorily, and is unsound. It'is essential that this portion of : the work be thoroughly, solid. It is difficult to deposit large -quantities of concrete .in mass ; in deep water and obtain sound work. Experiments are being made to , ? , , OU V ■ possible, what is the Cause ot : the , trouble. Portions of the' face .wall have had/to' be out out and -replaced' with' fino concrete. Payments 'Si s'ear amount to nii'nn i' . additions to contract, ±.bd_l<ss.-; leaving a liability of £184,367 9s. 2d. :;■ - . ' ■ The unsuitability of the site chosen was brought under notice early.'in'. 1908 by • the; present chairman of the board, whomoved the rescission :'of' the ; resoliifcion authorising its construction at Olydo Quay, and the selection of a more advantageous . position in proximity to the Patent Slip at Evans Bay, but his motion was ruled' out of order Further resolutions tabled by Mr. Fletcher in favour of a. change of site , were defeated. ' ■- Towards the end of. last year it became, public property: that something wa | wrong with the construction works, and finally the information was/disclosed tpat the conorete would not set.' oince then -_numerous experiments have been tried in .connection with, the methods of mixing and laying the concrete, but none of these appear;to have realised expectations. The proceedings at yesterday s meeting of , the Harbour Board do not shed much light on tho reasons which ultimately actuated the board to take steps to terminate the contract. '