COLLAPSE OF WHARF.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 9 December 1924, Page 8

COLLAPSE OF WHARF.

AUCKLAND AFFAIR, COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT. tBV TJiLJSGUAVU i’KKSS ASSOCIATJU-N. AUCKLAND, Dec. S. The commission of inquiry into the collapse of Western wharf on October 2-3 has come, to the conclusion* in its report, which was submitted to a special meeting of the Auckland Harbour Board to-day, that in view of all tire circumstances it is clear that the designs • and plans of the structure were neither good nor sufficient, the design being defective in that it provided a structure and an arrangement of parts of such a nature that stresses, df a character which the wharf was unable to bear, must develop in it. The wharf collapsed on account of a rupture of some of tiie supporting piles at the back under an outward lateral pressure, due to settlement and outward .movement in mass of the rubble mound which surrounded the piles. In the opinion of the commissioners -want of foresight was displayed in designing and carrying out a structure' unable to bear the inevitable stresses. Otherwi.se no negligence had been shown by any officer or employee. It is recommended that the nibble retaining wall and the mound on wljioh it stands he removed, as this is the proper and only permanently effective remedy for disintegrating influences. Similar influences are operating at- the Princes wharf, the Calliope Dock.' wharf,- and Freeman's Bay, and although there does not appear to be an immediate danger of disruption at any one of those places, careful vigilance is urged as a, precautionary measure. The commissioners state that the influences which caused the collapse may have-been supplemented bv some flaw in the ground, as suggested by the board’s engineer (Mr. Hamer), or by a deposit of soft mud on the dredged benches supporting the rubble mound, as suggested by Mr. Hoklerness, but they were insufficient in ihemsejves to account for all that has happens!. . “The lapt that a large portion, ii not. the whole of the remaining work, was found in a state of distress, under the influence of forces to which the braces of a structure of this kind should never be subjected, enables us to picture, without difficulty what actually took pi age where the collapse occurred,” adds the report. “The question may be raised as to why the rest of the \vhnrf, particularly the part of it _a. few hundred feet inshore, which is now fully loaded with filling, did not also collapse, but there are reasons why the porlion of it- which did so .should be the first to go.” As to the question concerning the carrying out of the work, the answer of the commissioners is that all tht evidence which came before them. fortified :<by their own observations, indicated that, the works - were faithfully . carried out'. The commissioners state : “The pile driving records, accord with the borings, and indicate. l that every beariiif pile was driven into a solid bottom o. lorfc; .1 he appearance of the disiu teg: ated structure, as shattered In the collapse and subsequent disruption by blastings, indicates that th< concrete was •first-class, and that’the . reinforcement was placed as in tender by the designer. Records of soundings after .dredging indicate that tht dredging of the benches and the 38 feet trench along the front of the -.vlnr fwe carried out as closely in aecc-.d wreli the design as the limitations of (dredging will allow.” “We regret. str*-? the eommissioners in concluding their report, “that certain _ of . opr conclusions have beer irresistibly forced upon us, and we would impress on the board, when considering these- findings, to bear in mind that lio great engineering works, extending as these have -done nvei nearly a quarter of a. century, have ever been . constructed without, something having been done which the passage cf-time lias indicated should not ha.ve been done.” Hie chairman of the Harbour Aboard stated to-night, when the report was being considered, that during the afternoon the commissioners attended a meeting of the hoard and made several stab orients in regard to questions. Among tlmm w ee the fo'llowiug: Ihat the Marine Department snould ha-ve been more explicit in its objections to the plans, of the Westewharf, and the disaster mi In have been, averted had the structure been watched and steps taken to re licve- the- pressure. iu reply : to a question. Mr. flame, aid he had no statement to make in "non ~eP °>'t commission. I he board resolved to accept the resn nrtion of .its engineer (Mr. Hamer) anc, to grant him siy months’ leave. • orid-wide a-pplr-a lions for an en-•■'in-rer will be called

be board also decided to authorise ll ’ n works -recommended by the commission and to !V ric Messrs. 0. Niece' ‘"H R. F. Moore to report on the restoration of the Western wharf.