Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1917-03-15

Same, Pier 4, So ..
+ Havana, Cuba, Pier No. =, supported
on reinforced concrete piles: decE
live load $50 lbs. per so. it., 1895.
San Francisco, Cal. Pier %, cyIin
ders spaced l5'x16' &C, 1920. -. G
Same, Pier 2G, $3.1G.
Same. Piers 80 and 80, $3.50. H.
Same. Pier 90, 1887. =.
While the piles proposed to be used
by Mr.. Forbes may be shorter than
those used at Havana, or more cheap
ly placed than the cylinders used al
other places. II is to be remembered
that the structures above mentioned
were built when the prices OF rein.
forced concrete materials we're low,
compared with those current at the
present time. ~.
We are also of the opinion that the
plan suggested by Mr.. Forbes pre-
| scnts grave possibilities from the pub.
lie health viewpoint. A large empty
SPACE of about one acre in area, en-
closed on top, bottom and sides by
concrete and earth, dark and incon.
venient of access to human beings,
would afford an ideal refuge for rats,
which are becoming more and more
widely recognized as carriers of d.
sease. We find a statement i'm The
Survey" for February "a, 1917, p. 500,
as follows: ....=. !.
"A bill has been presented to the
Massachusetts legislature requiring
that all new buildings along the wa
terfront Of Boston be made rat-proof
as well as fireproof This bin is the
result Of an eldeavor to rid the city
OF its annual expense Of 81 1856, 900. for
the support of rats, which, as was
suggested last summer, might carry
infection of poliomyelitis,' and have
been proyed' to carry infection of bu-
bonfc Plague" 49,.
1t is hardly necessary for us to dwell
further on this phase of the matter.
We have no desire, either as a CON-
mittee or as individuals, to enter into
controversy with Charles r. Forbes
over this matter. It Is evident that
the manner in which Mr.. Forbes ap-
proaches project of the magnitude of
the one under discussion is so radical
ly different from any method which
any one of us would pursue, that it is
highly improbable that we, either as a
committee or as individuals, could ar
rive at any common basis with him,
from which we might proceed to
consideration Of the main features of
the plan. In our previous report on
the work on. piers 8, 9 and 10 we earn
estly endeayored to offer constructive
criticism, and We carefully avoided
anything which might be considered
as a direct criticism of Mr.. Forbes.
The way in which he attacked our re-
Fort on the evening of March was
so Ahostile and antegonistic that we
have no reason to suppose that any
other report from us, which does not
support his contentious, would be re-
ceived by him in an unprejudieed
spirit. @=..=..
We doubt whether Mr.. Forbes Is
capable Aof calmly and dispassionately
weighing in his mind the merits of two
schemes, one his own, and the other
originating with some one else. The
Plan proposed now by Mr.. Forbes is
avowedly his own plan, developed and
presented by him, and for which he
accepts the responsibility. Under these
circumstances we decline to enter into
any controversy in which we should
render ourselves liable to the vitu-
peratiVe verbal attacks which unfort- |
unately seem to be characteristic Of
Mr.. Forbes conduct toward those with
whom he does not agree.
His assumption as to weight of sub.
merged fill we consider ill-adyised In |
an article in the Engineering News of
May Is, 1905, page 511, VOL SO, on
Pier and Bulkhead Construction in !,
New York Harbor," by j. A. Bensel,
chief engineer, department docks and
ferries, New York city, past president
A. S. c. E., and d. C. Serber, consult
ing civil engineer of New York, the
following assumptions are given as
the result of their experience:
Weight of riprap in air, 107 lbs. per
cubic foot.
Weight of riprap submerged, 70 lbs.
per cubic foot III.
Earth filling in air, 10 lbs. per
cubic foot. ..e
Earth filling submerged, &C lbs. per
cubic foot.
'Surcharge live load, 1000 lbs. per
,ubic foot of surface"
Mr.. Forbes has assumed that sub
merged earth weighs only 35 lbs per
cubic foot. Our investigation caused
IS to use Go lbs. FER cubic foot for
his type of fill.
AS citizens, property owners and
axpayers of this territory, we feel
hat it is right and due to the public
hat we should state that it is our
irm conviction, based on our examin-
Ltion Of the plans and specifications
II Piers 8, and 10, which were pre- ;
jared under Mr.. Forbes direction and
which received his approval: also on
lis sketch and estimate of his pro-
'osed "deck-slab anchorage" scheme;
.lso on his statements regarding the
eason for approving the design Of and
for an anchorage which
is own statements Head us to believe .
Ie did not intend to allow to be built;
lso on the fact that he permitted, or
I least did not prevent, the excava-
ion Of a contract and massive en-
ankment on the outer face of the
walls of piers s and 8 that
ormed a natural bulwark of strength !
Or the support of these walls: also on '