« PreviousContinue »
Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project...... $50,000 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1887 50,000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
barbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 8.)
9. Ice-harbor at the head of Delaware Bay, Delaware.—The river and harbor act of August 2, 1882, appropriated $25,000 for commencement of work on the ice harbor at head of Delaware Bay, to include the removal of sunken piers in the channel back of Reedy Island, Delaware.
The project submitted for the expenditure of this sum was modified, and embraced as finally approved the removal of the piers and the obtaining of more definite information respecting the location and manDer of construction of the proposed harbor. The removal of the piers, six in number, was completed October 29, 1883. They had for years formed a dangerous obstruction to navigation, and their removal has been of great benefit and relief to vessels using the channel back of Reedy Island as an anchorage, and to those that run regularly to the piers at Port Penn and Saint Augustine Beach.
During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1884, the amount expended was $7,425.22 in removing the sunkeu ice-pi: rs and in making the necessary examination for a site for the proposed harbor:
From the surveys and examinations which have been made the conClusion was reached that the vicinity of Listou's Point would furnish the most satisfactory site for the proposed ice harbor. The necessity of providing an ice harbor at the head of Delaware Bay for the shipping of the Delaware River and Bay has been repeatedly stated in former reports, but in view of the very large amount of dike work recommended by the Board of Engineers of 1884 in the immediate vicinity of the site which seems best adapted to an ice harbor, it would seem that the definite location of the ice harbor should be postponed until these dikes are built and the river in their vicinity has reached its fixed regimen.
No appropriation is recommended at present by the officer in charge. July 1, 1884, amount available..
$17, 500 00 July 1, 1885, amonnt available.
17, 500 00 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project. 381, 090 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 9.) 10. Construction of iron pier in Delaware Bay, near Lewes, Delaware.The original project for this work was the construction of a landing pier about 1,700 feet in length and extending into Delaware Bay to a depth of 22 feet at mean low water; the pier to be composed of a combination of wrought-iron screw-pile shafts with cast-iron caps and screws, and a timber superstructure. The work was commenced in 1871 and completed, except superstructure, in 1880.
The sum of $366,661.13 was expended up to June 30, 1884.
From the rapid decay of the timber superstructure it is believed that it could be replaced with ultimate economy by a permanent iron superstructure. The $15,000 required for the completion of the existing proj. ect could, with advantage, be applied to repairs to the present timber superstructure, or, still better, toward the partial construction of an iron superstructure. July 1, 1884, amount available...
$1,838 87 July 1, 1885, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding Habilities July 1, 1884...
951 59 July 1, 1895, amount available....
887 28 1,970 65
Amount (estimatel) required for completion of existing project.. $15, 000 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1887 15, 000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
barbor acts of 1866 and 1267. (See Appendix G 10.) 11. Delaware Breakuuter Harbor, Delaware.—Under act of Congress, May 7,1822, $22,700 was appropriated for a survey of Delaware Bay, near Cape Henlopen, for the purpose of determining upon the site for a bar. bor of shelter. In 1828 an appropriation of $250,000 was made for commencing the work, under a plan submitted by a board of commissioners appointed by Congress. “The project of the board contemplated the construction in tbe concavity of the bay, just inside Cape Henlopen, of two massive works on the pierres perdues, or rip-rap system, separated by an interval or gap of 1,390 feet-the greater called the breakwater, to afford safe anchorage during gales from the north and east; the other called the ice breaker, to protect shipping against northwesterly gales and the heavy drifting ice of the bay."
This project was completed in 1869, under aggregate appropriations, including the first for survey, of $2,292,103.70. The stone used varied from one-quarter of a ton to 7 tons in weight, the smaller constituting the bulk of the mass, the larger used to cover the exterior slopes.
As completed in 1869, the break water is 2,558 feet long, and the ice breaker 1,359 feet long on top. The average width on top is 22 feet, and at base 160 feet. The top is about 14 feet above mean low water.
In 1882 the project was adopted for closing the gap between the breakwater and the ice breaker by means of a random stone foundation, with a concrete superstructure. The random stone foundation is to be brought to a height of 12 feet below low water, with a widtb on top of 48 feet. The concrete superstructure is to have a width on bottom of 24 feet, rising to a height of 12 feet above mean low water, with a width on top of 12 feet. The estimated cost of this project was $675,000.
In 1883 and 1884 the project was modified by providing a foundation of brush mattresses for the random stone substructure and omitting the construction of a pile bridge across the gap, which formed part of the project of 1882 for closing the gap.
From the beginning of the work in 1828 the total amount expended up to June 30, 1884, was $2,395,0 2.40, of which $ 102,948.70 was expended on the project adopted in 1882 for closing the gap.
The amount expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $36,454.12, which was applied to the completion of the mattress foundation and to the delivery of stone in the substructure. It is recommended that an appropriation of $300,000 be made for continuing the work. July 1, 1884, amount available
$22, 051 30 Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884.
July 1, 1885, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of
97,051 30 outstanding liabilities July 1, 1884
$27, 142 87 July 1, 1885, outstanding liabilities.
29,113 52 July 1, 1885, amount available......
67,937 78 ( Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.
475, 000 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal yearending June 30, 1887 300, 000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 11.)
12. Rancocas River, New Jersey.—The Rancocas is a comparatively large and important stream, 200 yards wide at its mouth and narrows to about 400 feet at a distance of 8 miles above. As is usual with rivers entering into the Delaware Bay and River, a bar exists at its mouth difficult to treat effectively and cheaply on account of the liability of the cuts to close up 'unless protected by deflecting dikes. There is, however, a low-water navigable depth of nearly 8 feet over this bar at present.
The original project provided for a low-water channel from 150 to 200 feet wide, and 6 feet deep at low water to Centreton, 71 miles above the mouth, and eventually a 5-foot low-water channel to Mount Holly, 5% miles above Centreton. The estimated cost of the whole was $82,000. The amount expended up to June 30, 1884, was $19,535.50. On that date a dike had been built from the head of Hamill's Island to the north bank of the river, and a 64-foot low-water channel 150 feet wide cut through Coates's Bar.
During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, it is proposed to expend the amount appropriated in carrying the improvement up-stream by dredging the shoals in the order in which they appear. July 1, 1884, amount available..
$464 50 July 1, 1885, amonnt expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities, July 1, 1884.
297 78 July 1, 185, amount available......
166 72 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project. 62, 000 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1887 22,000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
barbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 12.)
13. Woodbury Creek, New Jersey.-The lower part of Woodbury Creek, from its mouth to the Crown Point Road Bridge, is considered to have sufficient depth of water at high stages of the tide for the needs of pav. igation. The portion which should be improved is the reach extending from this bridge to the Broad Street Bridge in the town of Woodbury, the head of navigation. At low tide this portion of the creek is almost entirely devoid of water, but the range of tide being between 5 and 6 feet, small vessels can ascend at high stages.
The project of 1883 proposed to dredge a channel affording a highwater depth of 8 feet and a width of 40 feet from Crown Point Road Bridge to Broad Street Bridge in the town of Woodbury, at an estimated cost of $15,000. This channel when once made is to be maintained by the parties interested.
The sum of $450.31 was expended up to June 30, 1884, for a survey of the creek.
The partial dredging of a channel being of no commercial value, expenditures have been withheld to await further appropriation sufficient to complete the dredging as far as Woodbury. July 1, 1884, amount available...
$4,549 69 July 1, 1885, amount available.
4,549 69 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project. 10,500 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal yearending June 30, 1887 10,500 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 13.)
14. Mantua Creek, New Jersey.--The original project for this improvement contemplates the construction of a low-water channel 10 feet deep and 80 feet wide at the mouth of the creek, which is to diminish to 4 feet in depth and 40 feet in width at the town of Mantua, situated some 11 miles from the mouth, at an estimated cost of $35,000.
The stream in its natural condition possesses good depth of water for a distance of 3 or 4 miles from the Delaware River, having a low-water depth of 9 feet throughout this distance. Above this, however, the channel depth slowly diminishes until at Mantua there is a low-water depth of only 2 feet.
No money has yet been expended on the work; and since whatever dredging done here would not be permanent, no further appropriation is recommended. July 1, 1884, amount available
$3,000 00 July 1, 1885, amount available
3, 000 00 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project....... 32, 000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 14.)
15. Raccoon River, New Jersey.—This river has a highwater width at its mouth of about 450 feet, gradually diminishing to 100 feet at Swedesborough, about 94 miles up-stream. There is a good 4-foot low-water channel and a high-water channel of from 9 to 10 feet from the mouth of the river to more than half the distance to Swedesborough. The serious and extensive obstructions are found within 2 miles of that town. There are four bridges across the stream. Two of these are located at Bridgeport, about 2 miles above the mouth of the river, and the other two at Swedesborough. The lower one of the two latter is the Swedesborough Railroad Bridge, and barges can pass under it; the upper one is the Main Street Bridge, and is the head of navigation.
The project submitted with the report on the survey, dated February 26, 1883, contemplates making the navigation up to Main Street Bridge in Swedesborough more safe and less difficult for the class of vessels now navigating tbe stream by dredging, at an estimated cost of $18,000.
The sum of $757.23 was expended up to June 30, 1883, for surveys, and nothing since, the balance on hand being held to await further appropriation.
If this work is to be executed the sum of $16,000 in addition to funds on hand can be profitably expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, upon the improvement. July 1, 1884, amount available
$2,242 77 July 1, 1885, amount available
2, 242 77 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.... 16, 000 00 Amout that can be profitably expended in tiscal year ending June 30, 1887 16,000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
harbor acts of 1001 and 1867. (See Appendix G 15.)
16. Salem River, New Jersey.—The original navigable capacity of this stream was 6 feet at low water over the bar in Salem Cove, and 3 to 4 feet at low water on the shoals at Biddle's Landing:
The originally adopted project consisted in dredging an 8-foot lowwater channel, as wide as the vessels needed, through the bar in Salem Cove. Subsequently the work was changed to the shoals in the canal and river above the latter.
The amount expended to June 30, 1884, was $13,009.34. On that date a low-water channel of 8 feet depth and 110 feet wide had been dredged through the bar in Salem Cove, and a channel 60 feet wide and from 6 to 7 feet deep at low water had been dredged from the head of the canal to a point about 200 feet above Biddle's Landing.
Nothing was expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885. The estimated amount required to complete the work according to the existing project, that is, to Hoxie's Landing, is $4,000. If the improvement is carried up to Sharptown the amount will be $37,000. July 1, 1884, amount available...
$1,490 66 July 1, 1895, amount available.
1,490 66 (See Appendix G 16.)
17. Cohansey Creek, New Jersey.—Cohansey Creek in its original condition was navigable to Bridgeton, 20 miles above its mouth, through a tortuous channel of ample depth. The obstructions to its free navigation were found at Bridgeton and at its mouth, where the creek discharged across a soft mud bar without any well-defined channel. The gas and water mains of the city of Bridgeton cross the creek at Broad street at a level of only 4 feet below low water, and prevent the use of any fur. ther deepening of the channel above them. In the event of the city authorities lowering the pipes to a proper depth, the amount required to complete the project by carrying a 6-foot low-water channel to the “Nail Works" Bridge would be about $5,500.
The original project contemplated the construction of a channel at Bridgeton 130 feet wide and 4 feet deep at a total cost of $30,000. This was modified to reduce the width to 80 feet and to increase the depth at mean low water to 7 feet from the lower steamboat landing to the bridge, and above that point to 5 feet. This project was again amended in June, 1880. It contemplates bringing the 7-foot low-water channel from deep water below the lower steamboat landing upward as far as the Commerce Street Bridge, and thence to the “Nail Works” Bridge a lowwater channel of 6 feet, the channel to be 100 feet wide at its lower end, and decrease to 50 feet at the upper bridge.
The total amount expended to June 30, 1884, was $35,489.27 ; at that date the 7-foot low-water channel had been widened and straightened, and it is now 90 feet wide between the upper and lower steamboat wharres, and 70 feet above that to the bridge.
No more money can be advantageously expended until the gas and water pipes are lowered or removed. If this is done the amount that can be profitably expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, is $5,500, and if this sum is appropriated, it is proposed to complete thé improvement according to the existing project. July 1, 1884, amount available..
$510 73 Jaly 1, 1887, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding
liabilities July 1, 1884 .... Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project....... 5,500 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and
harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 17.) 18. North Branch of Susquehanna River, Pennsylvania.- The North Branch of the Susquehanna River is a stream which is only navigable at bigb stages of the water. At low stages there are over 12 miles of bars and shoals which are nearly dry. It is crossed by numerous bridges.
No general project for the improvement has, however, been made, and the various appropriations have been expended under projects submitted for each.
A preliminary examination of the stream was made in 1879, and a