opted by the act of July 3, 1930, provides for maintaining a depth of 19 feet and a width of 250 feet in the harbor channel from Tampa Bay to the port of St. Petersburg and a depth of 21 feet in the outer harbor basin for a length of from 1,400 to 1,700 feet and a width of 90 feet. This project merely provided for completing and maintaining the harbor already largely completed by local interests. The project was completed in 1931 at a cost of $93,921.52 for new work and $35,420.35 for maintenance. 12. Improvement desired.-Local interests have presented a brief, which accompanies the report of the district engineer, setting forth the improvement desired and their reasons therefor. They request at a cut-off channel 30 feet deep and 300 feet wide be provided to we south of St. Petersburg, so that vessels may have a direct route between the harbor of St. Petersburg and the entrance to Tampa Bay; that this channel be continued to the northeast to the Port Tampa Channel; and that the same depth and width be provided in the existing east and west harbor channel, so that all channels will conform in dimensions to the other channels in Tampa Harbor. The scope of this report is limited to the channel leading south from St. Petersburg in accordance with the resolution quoted in paragraph 1. Local interests claim that the shorter distances from the Gulf to St. Petersburg and Port Tampa afforded by further improving this channel would result in sufficient savings to warrant its cost. 13. It is claimed that a precooling plant for citrus fruits will be established at St. Petersburg if suitable channels be provided, and that refrigerated vessels from Tampa will take on citrus fruit at Petersburg at a saving in truck haul as compared to the present Co of trucking to Tampa. It is also claimed that petroleum prodats will be delivered to the port in tankers rather than in barges towed from Tampa and Port Tampa. Bar pilots claim that vessels will use a straightaway channel 30 feet deep and 300 feet wide at night, whereas they now prefer to lay over outside the entrance to Tampa Harbor rather than attempt to navigate the existing winding ship channel. 14. Terminal facilities.-There are about 20 docks in or near Bayboro Harbor used by oil companies, fish companies, and various mercantile and manufacturing companies. Two warehouses 50 by 200 feet and 100 by 300 feet have been erected by the city on the quay of the port of St. Petersburg. Space in these warehouses is used by the Bull Line and United States Coast Guard Base No. 21. Other portions of the marginal wharves have been leased to sand, shell, and gravel dealers for open storage. Paved highways and the two railroads entering the city connect with the port. Terminal plans provide for expansion to handle future growth of commerce. 15. Commerce-Vessel traffic.-The commerce of the port amounted to 897,000 tons at the height of the boom in 1925. This commerce gradually decreased to 117,000 tons in 1928 and 42,298 tons in 1929. Since that time there has been an increase to 125,947 tons in 1934. 16. Most of the 1934 commerce was handled in barges or small boats between St. Petersburg and Tampa, Port Tampa, and adjacent waterways in channels having sufficient depth for the craft used. The Bull Line handled 3.291 tons. The boats of this line draw 22 feet when fully loaded, but are sometimes able to use the 14-foot channel south of St. Petersburg when partially loaded. 17. Port Tampa commerce in 1934, which might have used a channel leading south from St. Petersburg, included 1,120,300 tons of phosphate and 343,847 tons of petroleum products. Other items were of negligible amount. 18. Inbound and outbound one-way trips and drafts of vessels using St. Petersburg Harbor in 1934 included 1 drawing 16 feet, 31 drawing 14 to 16 feet, 1,211 drawing 12 to 14 feet, and 13,419 drawing under 12 feet. Coast Guard cutters drawing 15 to 172 feet visit the locality, and it is expected that one of the new cutters drawing 16 feet will be based at the local Coast Guard station when completed. Target rafts drawing 1812 feet must be towed from the base to the Gulf for target practice by Coast Guard and naval vessels. In 1934 there were 1,360 trips by Coast Guard vessels, including patrol boats drawing from 6 to 9 feet. 19. Inbound and outbound one-way trips and drafts of vessels using the harbor at Port Tampa in 1934 included 3 drawing 26.6 feet, 6 drawing 26 to 26.6 feet, 98 drawing 24 to 26 feet, 77 drawing 22 to 24 feet, 79 drawing 20 to 22 feet, 210 drawing 18 to 20 feet, 192 drawing 16 to 18 feet, 109 drawing 14 to 16 feet, 93 drawing 12 to 14 feet, and 3,577 drawing less than 12 feet. The heaviest draft vessels were those carrying phosphate and petroleum products and the small steamers of the Peninsular & Occidental Steamship Co. Probably 80 percent of the Port Tampa tonnage was carried on 253 trips of vessels drawing between 20 and 26 feet. 20. Special subjects.-There are no questions of terminal facilities, land reclamation, flood control, power development, or other special subjects which could be coordinated with the proposed improvement. 21. Views and recommendations of the district engineer. The district engineer has made a survey of a channel leading south from the St. Petersburg Harbor channel to the main ship channel in lower Tampa Bay. No rock was found at a less depth than 25 feet, except in the southerly end of the channel in the vicinity of the Pinellas Point Beacon, where rock was encountered at a depth of 16 feet. South of the beacon rock occurs at a less depth in the southeasterly section of the existing channel than in a straight north and south channel. The district engineer has made the following estimates of cost of channels between the limits stated above. Local interests decided to request a 30-foot depth after completion of the survey, and complete data for 26- and 30-foot depths are not available. The estimates given, however, are believed to be reasonably accurate. (a) A straight channel 19 feet deep and 250 feet wide, $114,000. (b) A channel 19 feet deep and 250 feet wide via the existing route, $142,000. (c) Same as (a), except 20 feet deep, $163,000. (d) A straight channel 26 feet deep and 300 feet wide. $785,000. (h) Same as (f), except 20 feet deep, $123,000. (i) Same as (f), except 21 feet deep, $188,000. 22. The estimated costs of annual maintenance are $2,500 for a 26or 30-foot channel, $1,500 for a 19- or 20-foot channel 250 feet wide, and $1,200 for the 200-foot channels. 3. The district engineer states that citrus fruit is not produced to considerable extent near St. Petersburg, the production being tered in the northern end of the county. He estimates that the aring in trucking to St. Petersburg rather than Tampa would not more than 1 cent per box, and that to realize this saving an investent of several hundred thousand dollars in precooling and handling pment at St. Petersburg would be necessary. The additional st of stops at St. Petersburg by fruit vessels would reduce the savHe thinks that the present method of handling citrus fruit will tinue to be the cheapest. 4. The district engineer states that existing oil storage tanks are ated on Bayboro Harbor, which has a controlling depth of only 9 et, and that delivery of oil in deep-draft tankers would involve ing the tanks to deep water or installing pipe lines. Tankers th full load could not navigate the existing 19-foot channel to St. Petersburg, and tanker delivery would necessitate the use of small partially loaded vessels. This can be done at present by using e existing circuitous channel, and the fact that it is not done indites that the savings would not be sufficient to have a material bearon the justification for the channel herein considered. The strict engineer estimates that a saving of one-half cent per gallon petroleum products would be possible in the event of the extension the airport, with incidental deepening of St. Petersburg Harbor 30 feet. Most of this saving could be made, however, by use of the Isting circuitous channel without the construction of the channel ing south from St. Petersburg. The construction of the proposed channel would save about 2 s' time for vessels which now must use the longer route from St. Persburg to the Gulf. This would be an important factor in emercy calls on the Coast Guard. Of the vessels calling at Port Tampa 1934, 511 trips were made by vessels of between 14- and 20-foot raft, on which a saving of about 4 miles, or about one-half hour Canning time, could have been realized had a cut-off channel south of . Petersburg been available. An additional 254 trips could have en made via a 26-foot cut-off channel at a similar saving. A 30-foot annel would have afforded a saving to only 9 additional vessels. 26. The district engineer states that local interests make claims of savings which would result from direct delivery of petroleum prodts in deep-draft tankers, full loading of larger tanks, and similar rements which are not creditable in justification of a new channel, much as the savings are already realizable by making use of the sting channel. He states that the value of the proposed channel is ined to the degree in which it will eliminate lost time or hazards navigating the existing channels. The district engineer states that the proposed channel would efit only a small proportion of the present or immediately prostive commerce of St. Petersburg Harbor, as existing channels are ient for at least 95 percent of the present commerce. 25. At the time the preliminary report was prepared, a statement Tas secured from the executive officer of the United States Coast Guard that the proposed channel would save the Coast Guard about $4000 annually in fuel and other costs. Due to increased activity of agency, the district engineer places the saving that now could be realized at $10,000 annually. He estimates the annual savings on a 19-foot channel south of St. Petersburg as follows: Bull Line boats, 78 hours, at $20 per hour___ Total for 19-foot channel.. $1,560 6, 400 10,000 17,960 He estimates an additional saving on the 26-foot channel of $3,810. Considering the elimination of some lay-overs at night and some increase in commerce, he places the annual savings on a 19-foot channel at $18,000, and on a 26-foot channel at $25.000. 29. A large proportion of the 511 trips of vessels of the Peninsular & Occidental Steamship Co. betwen Port Tampa and Key West and Habana could be made through a 19-foot channel south of St. Petersburg. These vessels would stop at St. Petersburg and save passengers the cost of inconvenience of the trip to Port Tampa which is now necessary in order to take the boat. During 1934 a total of 4,726 passengers were carried by this line, a considerable proportion of whom came from St. Petersburg. 30. The annual maintenance and interest charges at 4 percent are $6,060 for a 19-foot channel, $8,020 for a 20-foot channel, $33,900 for a 26-foot channel, and $58.380 for a 30-foot channel. The district engineer states that the $10,000 annual saving to the Coast Guard represents a direct return to the United States of over 6 percent on the estimated cost of the 20-foot channel, and that this is sufficient to warrant its improvement even if no other benefits and savings were to be expected. 31. The district engineer concludes that the direct savings in time of transit of vessels which would navigate a 20-foot channel are sufficient to justify its cost. He believes, however, that the promised benefits from channels 26 or 30 feet deep are not sufficient to warrant the cost. Since the larger vessels of the Coast Guard, Bull Line, and Peninsular & Occidental Steamship Co. draw 20 feet, he concludes that it is advisable to provide that depth. 32. The district engineer recommends that the United States provide a channel 20 feet deep and 250 feet wide, extending from the entrance to St. Petersburg Harbor, Fla., southerly to water of that depth in lower Tampa Bay, as shown on the map accompanying his report, at an estimated cost of $163,000 with $1,500 annually for maintenance. 33. Views of the division engineer.-The division engineer does not concur in the view that an improvement of this southerly channel to a depth of 20 feet is necessary at this time. Vessels of as deen draft as can enter St. Petersburg Harbor have no difficulty in reaching the east and west entrance channel by the northerly approach. The alleged savings of distance and cost of operation which, it is claimed, would result from the provision of an improved southerly channel, are believed to be largely visionary and incapable of realization. The savings of time would simply enable vessels to reach the dock and tie up somewhat sooner. All costs, except possibly an actual consumption of fuel, would be incurred whether tied up or running. 1 Only sheet 1 printed. As stated above, the southerly channel was authorized by the Deficiency Act of March 4, 1929, which provided that a balance on and of $17,000 could be used to dredge a channel 16 feet deep and feet wide, which channel has never been completed. The diviengineer is of the opinion that further legislative authority uld be given definitely adopting a project for this channel to prode for a depth of 16 feet for a width of 200 feet, and funds proed for its completion to that depth. He believes the ensuing benewould justify the small expenditure needed therefor. Recommendation. The division engineer recommends that the ject for St. Petersburg Harbor be modified so as to provide initely for a channel 16 feet deep and 200 feet wide, extending therly from the harbor entrance channel to the main ship chanin lower Tampa Bay, at an estimated cost of $29,000, with $1,200 Eually for maintenance. EARL I. BROWN, REPORT OF THE DISTRICT ENGINEER SYLLABUS The report under review considered the advisability of providing a channel feet deep and 250 feet wide from the entrance to St. Petersburg Harbor, Fla., herly to water of that depth in lower Tampa Bay. Local interests now est that a channel 30 feet deep and 300 feet wide be provided in that same iation. The acting district engineer concludes that the savings which promise *sult from the provision of a channel in this location are sufficient to warthe provision of a channel 20 feet deep and 250 feet wide, but not of a tunnel 26 or 30 feet deep and 300 feet wide. He recommends that the former annel be provided. WAR DEPARTMENT, Subject: Review of previous reports on St. Petersburg Harbor, Fla. Resolved by the Committee on Rivers and Harbors of the House of Repreentatives, United States, That the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors rated under section 3 of the River and Harbor Act, approved June 13, 1902, and is hereby, requested to review the reports on St. Petersburg Harbor, Ta, submitted pursuant to provision in the River and Harbor Act approved lady 3, 1930, with a view to determining the advisability of providing a channel f suitable dimensions extending from St. Petersburg in a southerly direction the main ship channel in the lower bay at the present time. The duty of making the review and preparing a report thereon was med to the district engineer by instructions of the division engiMr. Gulf of Mexico division, dated March 4, 1933. The preliminary port of the district engineer was submitted on November 27, 1933, and a survey was authorized by the Acting Chief of Engineers on February 8, 1935. 2. Contents of report under review. The report under review was submitted in compliance with a provision of the River and Harbor Act approved July 3, 1930. The report of preliminary examination |