Y 90
710
alignment the same as proposed by the Consulting Engineers but only building a wall similar to that now being built at the Northern end of the Yard, which would allow junks to lie alongside at high water or bow on at low water.
The cost of these various schemes are approximately:
Scheme (a).....$751,000
(b).....$692,000
(c).....$642,000
(d).....$130,000
I could not advise the Government to adopt either "b" or "c", the difference between either of these and "a" being too small to make it worth while building temporary walls, as "b" and "c" must necessarily be when a permanent wall such as scheme "a" provides could be built for such a small amount more.
It therefore lies between "a" and "d". If money were forthcoming I would certainly advise "a" as I feel confident that the port will develop to such an extent in a few years' time as to make provision for berthing many more vessels alongside wharves a necessity,
As regards scheme "d" I can quite easily design a yard to suit this scheme, which while not interfering with the future construction of scheme "a", would very easily be enlarged to suit at any future date the larger scheme.
A deep sea wall such as proposed in scheme "a" would take the best part of 24 years to build and would if decided on now be just ready for use when the line is opened for traffic. The Government ought therefore to decide at once whether it is prepared to spend the $751,000 on this scheme and be ready for any emergencies which the trade of the Colony might require or be content with the smaller scheme "d" for the present requirements.
I have etc.,
(sd.) G. W. Xves,
Chief Resident Engineer.