NAPIER HARBOURS

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 81, 2 October 1924, Page 6

NAPIER HARBOURS

MR. F. W. FURKERT'S REPORT

ADVICE TO THE BOARD.

Mr. F. W. Furkert, Engineer-in-Chief, has furnished the Minister of Marine with a most comprehensive report on the alternative propositions of the inner and outer harbours at Napier. In a short telegram, published last evening, _it was stated that he condemned the inner harbour and recommended the completion of the breakwater.

In the course of his comprehensive survey of the position at ' Napier, the Engineer-in-Chief says the board could not have had the essential figures, from an economic standpoint, before it when it embarked on the inner harbour project, otherwise it would never have undertaken the task of constructing a harbour which for its original cost and permanent maintenance would be far beyond the means of th^s community. Even when constructed, he says, the ultimate success of the inner harbour, from an engineering standpoint, is problematical. Mr. Furkert has investigated the various points in connection with the inner harbour from' an engineering standpoint, and he gives concrete reasons for his conclusions that in attempting to carry out this work the Napier Harbour Board has undertaken an impossible task. He says the board has embarked on a scheme far beyond its original anticipations, and probably far beyond its reasonable resources. "Answering my own question of whether it has proceeded in a business-like way," he says, "I think that I must conclude, it has not."

Summarising his lengthy observations on the inner harbour scheme, he says : —"It would not be such a port as the importance of Hawkes Bay seems to warrant, and its expense, both for construction and upkeep, would be far too great to contemplate, considering the resources of the territory which must support it, and its use will always be attended by considerable and unjustifiable risks to. the shipping frequenting it."

The Engineer-in-Chief does not blame anyone for the sins of the past, although he divulges many facts of a surprising nature, states the "Napier. Telegraph." "What we want," he says, "is not a dragging into public criticism of the past actions of anybody, but rather the making of a fresh start on good lines and progress towards a satisfactory solution of the harbour problem."

Mr. Furkert strongly advises the maintenance and ultimate completion of the breakwater, and he gives economic and_ engineering reasons for his conclusions in this respect. He repeats the recognised contention that the maintenance of the breakwater is essential to the success of ihe inner harbour. The breakwater scheme presents no engin-, eering difficulties, and £400,000 will suffice to carry out the work. Experience has proved, he says, that the rock in the bottom of the breakwater harbour is of a character quite similar to that in the Bluff, and presents no difficulty to disrupting by blasting and subsequent removal. Mr. Furkert forwards a plan for extension of the break-water. He recommends the construction of another wharf to accommodate two deepsea vessels.