has to condemn, and if the war had lasted very much more, they certainly would have been asked, Congress certainly would have been asked to give the Shipping Board the authority to condemn and go into it. There is no use talking, as soon as you go over here, or any place else, the only thing the Navy Department can do, if they want to build a navy yard or a naval base, is to exercise the authority they have under the law and take time to let the people go into court and let the courts determine the value.

Senator PHELAN. I want to recall Senator Walsh's attention to the fact that when it was desired to acquire land at San Diego for an aviation base Congress passed a law giving the right to condemn, and since then condemnation proceedings have been had in such

matters.

A

Mr. DUNNIGAN. I might say for Senator Walsh's information, that I gathered the names and addresses of the owners of these properties. That land was sold in 1868 in lots 20 by 80, and 25 by 100, and mapped out, and none of it has turned hands since. Some of the property would be, if the Navy wanted to bother with it, in the hands of the Alien Property Custodian. Some of it is owned in Italy, by the heirs of Italian pioneers. Very recently there died in Spain an old man who came here in the fifties and gathered up a number of these water lots, and that is in the probate court. real estate man who has been familiar with this for 25 years found it impossible to get the ownership straightened out and to get any bargain made with anybody. There is one piece there 20 by 80 feet in size, to illustrate, in the ownership of which there are 11 heirs, and some of them are in the insane asylum. So you can see what trouble you would have in getting options. In addition to that, we were never asked to get an option, and the city never proffered this land as a gift; therefore the city did not approach the landowners. The land question was discussed in one phase when the Helm Commission was here. The city engineer demonstrated by his figures that the cost of the land was in any event more than offset by the cheapness of construction of the kind of structures that were needed by the Navy Department.

Senator WALSH. That seems a reasonable answer to my question as to why there were no options obtained. Apparently the title is so involved that it is impracticable. But let me remind you that when a railroad company seeks to acquire a right of way, it does not proceed to condemn immediately-it always endeavors to secure the land first by negotiation, and if the negotiation does not result satisfactorily, if it can not acquire the property at what it thinks is a fair value, it then resorts, as a last recourse, to condemnation. The procedure seems to be reversed here. No efforts have been made to acquire the property by negotiation, but it is proposed to condemn at

once.

Mr. DUNNIGAN. We wrote letters and asked the owners what they would offer the land for, and some people offered to give the land to the city for nothing, saying, "We have had it since 1868, and we will give it to you, if the Government wants it." Others want fabulous prices. They paid $75 to the State for that land in 1868, say, under water, the particular piece, and they naturally expect to get the $75 and an old lawyer here wants his $75 and 6 per cent interest com

pounded since 1868. We have corresponded with all the owners at different times upon the subject.

Mr. BRITTEN. Mr. Dunnigan, just for the purpose of the record, $2,000 an acre seems like a lot of money.

Mr. DUNNIGAN. The Emergency Fleet Corporation paid $30,000 an acre for land across the bay.

Mr. BRITTEN. I was about to say that, while $2,000 seems a lot of money, yet if this property is divided among approximately 1,500 owners, any one lot of 20 or 25 by 100 would only cost the Government $100 between $100 and $200 at the outside. That is all the owners would get out of it at $2,000 an acre.

Mr. DUNNIGAN. $2,000 an acre is not a high price for water-front property-take the Chicago water front, and what was that worth? $50,000 an acre.

Mr. BRITTEN. What I wanted to get into the record was the fact that an owner who held his property for $20 or $30 or $40 would only get, at the outside, $200 for that land.

Mr. DUNNIGAN. $250.

Mr. BRITTEN. On the basis of 10 lots to the acre.

Mr. DUNNIGAN. Yes; it would run about $250 a lot.

Mr. PADGETT. I would like to ask a question on a different line. That property that lies northwest of the big dock of the Union Iron Works, that property in there [indicating]—is that all submerged? Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. That is all submerged.

Mr. PADGETT. Have you made any borings in there as to the character of the bottom?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. We have not.

Mr. PADGETT. I had understood that the rock was supposedly nearer the surface in that section than it was down here where you have the drawing of red.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. The three smaller docks.

Mr. PADGETT. The three smaller docks there. Have you any notion as to that?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Well, some borings were made by the Union Iron Works when they built this dock as to future expansion of this bay, and I think Admiral Parks has that data of the Union Iron Works.

Mr. PADGETT. In a general way, do you know what it indicate. Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. I think the rock was about 40 to 50 feet in the water on an average.

Mr. PADGETT. In other words, if the Government should get s property and with these docks, and it wanted to build other addıtional docks, it would want to aggregate them there together, and not scattered over a wide area of territory, and it seems to me, just looking at the map, that the more desirable place for additional docks would be adjacent to the long dock which you have already built there.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Well, it seems to me that south of the Union Iron Works, along in here [indicating] is the most available place for additional docks.

Mr. PADGETT. Why do you take them away from there and separate the machinery for handling?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Well, this is not very far away; it is quite adjacent to the other place. I think the rock conditions are very satisfactory around this point here.

Mr. PADGETT. I have heard that you had to go more than 100 feet to get rock, down in there.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Not at this point; no; not near the Union Iron Works. Down here where these three long docks were originally proposed, and I believe you made a suggestion yesterday about putting the smaller docks here and putting the long ones up here where the bedrock is assured, which I think is a good change.

Mr. BRITTEN. May I suggest for the record, Chief, that the chief of the bureau is quite confident that the most easterly projection from where you show the three big ones is territory such that you would have no trouble whatever in founding a dock there? The borings that Mr. Padget had in mind were made at the westerly point where they have the three small docks that go about 100 feet, then striking mud and clay.

Mr. PADGETT. I understand that those three up there where the larger ones are shown on the map-what is the distance to the rock there?

Mr. BRITTEN. We have made no late borings there, the chief of the bureau being confident that there is plenty of rock-practically on the surface the same as Hunters Point and Union Iron Works. Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Not to exceed 35 feet.

Mr. BRITTEN. And there would have to be an excavation of more than 40 feet for the dock itself, so you would be excavating in rock. Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Now as to the water depth. Nature has provided a depth of water of 50 feet outside of Hunters Point, and observations show the current to have a speed of about a knot and one-half an hour around Hunters Point, which makes it easy for landing and handling ships. The current is strong enough, however, to prevent the deposit of silt, of which very little comes from the watershed areas draining into the south bay, which have a relatively limited area. Soundings taken over 40 years show very little change in the sediment deposit around Hunters Point; therefore its value for permanent deep-water navigation is assured.

Then the weather: During most of the year San Francisco has extremely clear weather. During June, July, and August we have considerable fog in the western portion of the city, but Hunters Point, being 6 or 7 miles from the ocean, gets very little and practically none of this fog, so the weather conditions will be always favorable for good workmanship.

Mr. PADGETT. On that point of weather conditions, you made the remark a while ago that this part that was reserved for the city was reserved because it was keeping in with your commercial development ideas up there, and that this would be more convenient for the city, to put in the naval base on this south side.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. On the south side.

Mr. PADGETT. How are the prevailing winds and the tide in that north side section, compared with this south side section?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Well, the general trade winds, from the northwest, from this direction [indicating] the prevailing trade wind. So really this side here is a little more exposed than are the southerly shores. However, in winter, we have pretty good storms sometimes, southeasters. They come from the opposite direction from the direction of the prevailing trade winds. For those winds, this side will be more exposed. But the reason for my suggestion was not

33698-21

because of weather exposure-it is because, if you look at the other map at the left, our waterfront is developed from the Presidio by wharves and docks to within a mile of this point, and we are extending southerly with our commercial development, and the last five years the State of California has acquired all this land you see inside of this color, for additions to the waterfront. Our water front is entirely owned by the State. The State operates our docks and wharves, and they condemned all the rights of the private owners inside this zone. So that commercial development is extending in this direction. Mr. PADGETT. Do those indicate piers that you are contemplating putting there?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Proposed piers.

Mr. PADGETT. And that is your pier line?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. That is the proposed plan of the harbor commission. And in this north portion of this land, near the road where you crossed the drawbridge, are oilstorage tanks, and vegetable oils. This region is now considered in any proposed development.

Mr. PADGETT. Is it proposed to fill in when you establish_that pier line out in front-to fill in behind these points where you have harbor development coming in there?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. That is the idea; to make a bulkhead wall along here, like our water front down at the ferry building, and pump the mud in behind the bulkhead wall.

Mr. PADGETT. To make dry land out of that which is back?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. To make dry land out of that for warehouses, and build the wharves from the bulkhead wall out.

Mr. HICKS. Chief, I would like to ask you about the mainland right about where the word "legend" is on the map, down in the lower left-hand corner. Is that low land or high land?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. That is all high land.

Mr. HICKS. There is no danger of this proposed naval base as it is outlined here getting that wind from the ocean sweeping across the mainland ?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. No. The ocean winds come from the other direction, from the west. This map is placed north and south, as indicated by the arrow. Here is the northerly point. The Golden Gate opens toward the west, and all our winds come from the west, so that this portion is absolutely sheltered from the prevailing winds, this proposed site.

Mr. HICKS. I was under the impression that this was low land where the word "legend" is shown.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. This light-colored line here, this buff line, shows the boundary of the high land.

Mr. PADGETT. That is on that hill where we stood below looking up yesterday?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Yes. This is the hill we looked up.

Mr. HICKS. I understand that; but I thought that between this 563-acre tract, as marked there on the map, and the ocean itself, there is low land intervening.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Oh, no; it is all high land. In fact, it is the Twin Peaks, the hills between this point and the ocean are 950 feet in height.

Mr. BRITTEN. Chief, that city property that you said was condemned, is that the property you spoke about a while ago as costing about $6,500 an acre?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. That is the property; yes. Now, power supply in San Francisco. We have one of the cheapest water supplies in the United States, power being sold in large units for 1 cent per kilowatt hour by private corporations. Besides the power plants now available, developed by private corporations, the city has under construction the Hetch Hetchy water project, which will have ultimately over 200,000 hydroelectric horsepower as a byproduct from the water development. One 60,000-horsepower plant of this project it is hoped to have finished in three years from date. Less than 1,000,000 hydroelectric horsepower is developed at the present time in northern California, and it is hoped to develop ultimately about 5,000,000 hydroelectric horsepower in this region, which will be more than ample for both commercial and Government purposes.

I will say that one corporation, the Pacific Gas & Electric Co., has plans now for building 400,000 horsepower inside of the next eight years, adding at the rate of 50,000 horsepower a year. Another power company, the Great Western Power Co., has 150,000 horsepower developed now, and they are building a new plant which will be completed inside of a year, of 60,000 horsepower. So we are going to have an abundance of power in the region of San Francisco.

WATER.

Mr. HICKS. Before you pass from the question of power, you say 1 cent per kilowatt hour is the present rate in large units? Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. In large units; yes.

Mr. HICKS. Can you give any estimate of what the Government could expect from the city of San Francisco by way of a cheaper rate after you have the Hetch Hetchy project fully developed.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Under the Hetch Hetchy grant we have the right to give water at actual cost.

Mr. HICKS. And how about power?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. Power is not mentioned, but I am sure the disposition of the city would be to give them power at actual cost also. Mr. HICKS. Have you any idea how much less than 1 cent per kilowatt hour that would be, and what it would mean to this naval base if it needs any large amount of power?

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. With present labor prices and commodity prices that is, under present conditions, generally speaking it would not be much less than 1 cent. We can't tell what the future will bring forth in the way of adjustment of labor and food and other commodity prices.

Supervisor WOLFE. Chief O'Shaughnessy, the Government can get from the city power at a cheaper price than they would have to pay to get it in the open market, can it not? We can furnish the Government power cheaper than they would have to pay for it if they had to buy it from some other corporation? I think that I think that goes without saying.

Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY. There is no doubt we would favor the Government in that respect.