----------
WAR DEPARTMENT,
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS,
Washington, December 7, 1912.
From: The Chief of Engineers.
To: The Secretary of War.
Subject: Preliminary examination of Chesapeake Bay at Cape Charles City, Va.
1. There is submitted herewith for transmission to Congress report dated October 23, 1912, by Lieut. Col. E. Eveleth Winslow, Corps of Engineers, on preliminary examination of Chesapeake
Bay, with a view to straightening the north side of the channel at the entrance of the harbor at Cape Charles City, Va., and to increasing the width of the channel 200 feet, called for by the river and harbor act approved July 25, 1912.
2. This harbor is an artificial one constructed nearly 30 years ago by the New York, Philadelphia & Norfolk railroad. Its improvement was undertaken by the United States in 1890 under a project providing for the dredging of a channel through Cherrystone Inlet 16 feet deep at mean low water, the dredging of an entrance channel of the same depth, dredging the inclosed harbor to a depth of 14 feet at mean low water, and the construction of stone jetties to protect the channel leading into the basin. The jetties have been built and the basin and channels have been dredged and redredged to their projected depths.
3. The commerce of the harbor, which amounted to about 300,000 tons when work was commenced by the United States, now amounts to about 2,500,000 tons, nearly all of which pertains directly or indirectly to the railroad. The district officer states that the dimensions of the channel are now far greater than are required for any of the general commerce of the port other than that carried in the railroad boats. He refers to the report on preliminary examination of this locality made pursuant to the river and harbor act approved February 27, 1911, in which the opinion was expressed that the improvement and maintenance of the channels at this harbor are proper charges against the business of the railroad, and that the harbor and entrance channel thereto are not worthy of further improvement by the United States. He states that conditions at Cape Charles City, as far as the railroad ownership are concerned, are unchanged, and he is of opinion that it is not advisable for the United States to enlarge its project for the improvement of this locality. In this opinion the division engineer concurs.
4. This report has been referred, as required by law, to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, and attention is invited to its report herewith, dated November 25, 1912, concurring with the views of the district officer and the division engineer.
5. After due consideration of the above-mentioned reports, I concur with the views of the district officer, the division engineer, and the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, and therefore in carrying out the instructions of Congress, I report that the improvement by the United States of Chesapeake Bay, with a view to straightening the north side of the channel at the entrance of the harbor at Cape Charles City, Va., and to increasing the width of the channel 200 feet, is not deemed advisable at the present time.
H. TAYLOR,
Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers,
Acting Chief of Engineers.
----------
REPORT OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS.
[Third indorsement.]
THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS,
Washington, November 25, 1912.
To the CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY:
1. This examination is called for with a view to straightening the north side of the channel at the entrance of the harbor at Cape Charles City, Va., and to increasing the width of the channel 200 feet. This is an artificial harbor constructed, owned, and operated by, and marks the southern terminus of, the New York, Philadelphia & Norfolk Railroad. The United States undertook the improvement of this harbor under a project adopted in 1890, which required the dredging of a channel through Cherrystone Inlet and Bar 100 and 200 feet wide, respectively, and 16 feet deep at mean low water, the dredging of an entrance channel 100 feet wide of the same depth, and dredging over the entire area of the protected and inclosed harbor to a depth of 14 feet at mean low water; also the construction of stone jetties. There has been expended on this project about $119,000, and it is practically completed.
2. The commerce of this harbor is very large, amounting to about 2,500,000 tons annually, the greater part of which consists of freight carried through the harbor by the boats or on the floats of the railroad company. There is, however, some commerce, such as farm products, fish, oysters, and building material, brought in by small boats not owned by the railroad company, the total of such freight probably not exceeding 40,000 tons annually, and a large part of this even is for shipment by the railroad company. The entrance channel is narrow, and its use by small craft, combined with the frequent passage of the large boats belonging to the railroad company, gives rise to more or less danger and interference, and the object of the improvement is largely for the purpose of overcoming this undesirable condition. The district officer states that the widening of the entrance is clearly necessary. He states further, however, that the important question is whether it is proper that this work should be done by the United States or should by left to the railroad company.
3. The dimensions of the channel provided under the present project are greater than are required for any of the general commerce of the port other than that carried in the railroad boats, and the benefit of any additional expenditures would accrue almost solely to the railroad company. The district officer expresses the opinion, in which the division engineer concurs, that the improvement is not advisable by the United Sates.
4. Interested parties were advised of the unfavorable tenor of the district officer's report and invited to submit their views to the board in regard to the necessity and propriety of the United States undertaking this improvement, but no communications on this subject have been received.
5. This harbor was the subject of a report, not yet published, made under provision of the act of February 27, 1911, which provided for an examination in all essentials similar to the present one. Conditions outlined therein are similar to those existing at the present time. The board then stated that after mature consideration it had arrived
at the conclusion that the expenditures made upon this harbor by the United States for the benefit of general commerce were fully commensurate with the amount of such general commerce, reported as about 38,000 tons, while the railroad company carried about two and one half million tons, the greater part being through commerce. It also stated that the terminal facilities required at the meeting point of water and rail transportation should, so long as both are owned and controlled by one company, be provided by that company, just as they are on any other portion of the line, and that so long as these conditions exist such work should not be done by the United States. Conditions have not changed since the date of that report, and the board reiterates the opinion expressed therein that it is not advisable for the General Government to undertake the further improvement of this harbor at the present time.
6. In compliance with law, the board reports that there are no questions of terminal facilities, water power, or other related subjects which could be coordinated with the suggested improvements in such manner as to render the work advisable in the interests of commerce and navigation.
For the board:
WM. T. ROSSELL,
Colonel, Corps of Engineers,
Senior Member of the Board.
----------
PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF CAPE CHARLES CITY HARBOR, VA.
WAR DEPARTMENT,
UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE,
Norfolk, Va., October 23, 1912.
From: The District Engineer Officer.
To: The Chief of Engineers, United States Army (Through the Division Engineer).
Subject: Preliminary examination of Cape Charles City Harbor, Va.
1. The river and harbor act, approved July 25, 1912, provides for a preliminary examination of Chesapeake Bay, with a view to straightening the north side of the channel at the entrance of the harbor at Cape Charles City, Va., and to increasing the width of the channel 200 feet.
2. Cape Charles City is situated on the west bank of the Cape Charles peninsula, about 12 miles north of the cape of that name. The city derives its principal importance from the fact that it is the southern terminus of the New York, Philadelphia, & Norfolk Railroad, which road extends northerly through Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware, and at Wilmington, Del., makes a connection with the Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington branch of the Pennsylvania Railroad system. The locality is shown on Coast Survey Chart 131 and the harbor itself on a tracing submitted herewith.
3. The harbor is an artificial one, made nearly 30 years ago by the railroad company by dredging out a rectangular basin in what was formerly the bed of an almost insignificant creek. the entrance to this harbor is by a narrow dredged cut, about one-third of a mile long, which connects the harbor with what is known as the Cherrystone Channel.
4. This Cherrystone Channel extends from north to south nearly parallel to the shore and is separated from deep water in Chesapeake Bay by a long bar or reef, also parallel to the shore. The bar is marked by two lighthouses -- the Cherrystone Lighthouse, nearly opposite Cape Charles City, and the Old Plantation Lighthouse, about 2 miles farther to the south.
5. The Cherrystone Channel is of varying depth. Immediately opposite Cape Charles City it is nearly 20 feet deep, and it is still deeper a few miles farther south, but between the two deep places there is a shoal, situated about half a mile south of Cherrystone Light.
6. The Cherrystone Channel is connected with deep water of Chesapeake Bay by two channels, one near its southern end and the other immediately north of Old Plantation Light. Over the latter crossing was originally a channel of about 14 feet deep at low water.
7. This locality was the subject of an examination and survey for the first time in 1889, in accordance with provision of river and harbor act of August 11, 1888. (Report on this survey is found in the Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1890, p. 975.)
8. In this report the conditions were described as above, and it was stated that the entire harbor had been dredged by the railroad company to a depth of 11 or 12 feet; that the entrance channel between the harbor and Cherrystone Channel had been dredged to a width of 150 feet and a depth of 12 feet; that the inner part of the sides of the entrance channel had been protected by a sort of timber bulkhead, but that the bulkhead had decayed and that shoaling had taken place in the entrance. At the time of the examination the available depth was stated to be only about 10 feet for a width of about 80 feet. The shoal in the Cherrystone Channel was stated to have over it a depth of 11 feet, while at the crossing near Old Plantation Light there was an available depth of about 14 feet.
9. The locality was recommended as worthy of improvement under a plan which should provide for the dredging of the harbor and the entrance channel to a depth of 14 feet and of the shoal in the Cherrystone Channel and the crossing near Old Plantation Light to a depth of 16 feet. The entrance channel and that in the Cherrystone Channel were to be 100 feet wide and the crossing near Old Plantation Bar was to be 200 feet wide. In addition, the project provided for the construction of stone and brush jetties on the north and south sides of the entrance channel to protect it from being filled by the sand moving up and down the shoal. The estimated cost of all the work was $142,300. This project has never been modified.
10. In 1890 Congress appropriated $25,000 for work under this project, the greater part of which was expended during the following year in dredging in the harbor proper, the entrance channel, and the Cherrystone Channel. Ten thousand dollars more was appropriated in 1892, but to the appropriation there was attached a proviso that none of this money should be expended until the owners of the harbor should, in a manner satisfactory to the Secretary of War, grant all vessels free entry except upon payment of reasonable wharf charges, and that the owners of the harbor should provide an approach to the wharves not less than 40 feet wide connecting with the nearest public highway.
11. This proviso was never carried out, and in consequence the $10,000 and the small balance of the former appropriation remained
unexpended until Congress, by the act of June 3, 1896, repealed the proviso, thus rendering the money available. The funds were thereupon expended, partly in dredging and partly in extending by a length of 400 feet the north jetty, which had already been constructed by the railroad company to a length of about 750 feet.
12. A total of $90,000 was appropriated in the years 1899, 1902, 1905, and 1907, and nearly all of it was expended and has resulted in the practical completion of the project. The north jetty has been built to a total length of over 1,600 feet, but nearly half of this was built by the railroad company without expense to the United States. The south jetty has been built to a length of 232 feet, and its further extension is not considered necessary. Dredging has been carried on over the entire areas included in the project and in addition corners have been cut off, easing the turn from the entrance into the Cherrystone Channel. The total amount expended up to date on the project has been about $106,000, and in addition about $13,000 has been expended in maintenance of work previously done.
13. $20,000 in addition was appropriated for this work in 1910, and this, with about $6,000 unexpended from previous appropriations, remains available for the work. It is expected that a considerable portion of this will be expended during the present fiscal year in the redredging of places where shoaling has occurred.
14. The harbor is a tidal one, the average variation being about 2.5 feet. No questions of flood control or water power are involved.
15. The harbor itself is rectangular, the entrance being at the north-west corner. Along the north side of the harbor the railroad company has built a concrete sheet-pile wharf which is used by their regular passenger steamers for landing passengers, baggage, and freight. It is also in use by various small vessels bringing fish, oysters, and truck. Nearly all of the cargo landed by these small boats at this wharf is for shipment by the railroad, but it is understood that small boats are permitted to make use, without charge, of this wharf for the landing or loading of freight to or from the merchants in town, subject to the condition, however, that all of the merchandise landed must be removed before the boat leaves.
16. At the east end of the harbor are the two large transfer slips which the large car floats enter for the loading or discharge of freight cars.
17. At the east end of the south side of the harbor there is a coal wharf belonging to the railroad company, the remainder of this side of the harbor being taken up by the remains of a bulkhead. All boats are allowed to tie up here and to load or unload free of charge, but everything loaded or unloaded at this point has to be hauled to or from the town, a distance of approximately 1 mile and up a steep grade over the railroad tracks. The road is not in good condition.
18. When work was begun by the United States upon this channel the annual amount of commerce was about 300,000 tons. There has been a fairly steady increase, and the annual commerce is now about 2,500,000 tons, value not given. Much of the larger part of this commerce consists of freight carried through the harbor by the boats or on the floats of the railroad. There is, however, some commerce such as farm produce, fish, oysters, and building material brought in by small boats and barges not owned by the railroad company. The total of such freight probably does not exceed 40,000 tons annually, and a large proportion of this even is for shipment by
the railroad. It is thus seen that practically all of the commerce of the harbor pertains directly or indirectly to the railroad.
19. By the provision of the law requiring this examination, consideration is restricted to the entrance channel "with a view to straightening the north side of the channel and to increasing its width 200 feet."
20. This entrance channel is very narrow, the side slopes being steep and the adjacent areas shoal. It has been dredged many times and is the part of the project which is the most difficult to maintain, although since the completion of the jetties much less difficulty has been experienced in maintenance than prior to that time. One of the difficulties in the maintenance of this entrance channel is its narrowness, as the passage of the large car floats through such a narrow channel appears to have a tendency to suck down the sand from the sides.
21. Originally the railroad company made the width of this entrance 150 feet, but it was found to be impracticable at that time to maintain it at that width, and since the United States has had control of the improvement the project width has been 100 feet only, and, as shown by recent soundings, approximately this width of channel has been maintained.
22. Passage through such a narrow channel by the large car floats must necessarily be slow, and with a cross wind, which is frequently found, it is extremely difficult for the tugs towing the floats to keep them from blowing ashore on the sides of the cut. Furthermore, these floats take up such a large proportion of the cross section of the channel that the passing of even a small sailboat is extremely hazardous. The widening of the entrance channel is, therefore, clearly necessary.
23. The important question is whether or not it is proper that the additional width should be provided by the United States or should be left to the railroad company. The harbor and the entrance channel were originally made by the railroad company, but the Government has since that time spent about $119,000 in the enlargement of the harbor and its approach channel and in maintaining it in a good, navigable condition. The dimensions of the channel are now far greater than are required for any of the general commerce of the port other than that carried in the railroad boats, and the additional expense, if incurred by the United States, would be almost solely for the benefit of the railroad company.
24. The river and harbor act approved February 27, 1911, provided for a preliminary examination of this locality in words essentially identical with the provision of the act of July 25, 1912, in accordance with which this report is now submitted. The examination required was made by my predecessor, and his report, submitted under date of June 10, 1911, after describing the conditions essentially as above, stated:
Cape Charles City Harbor is really an adjunct to this railroad company, and it is a fair statement that 99 per cent of all commerce of whatever kind entering or departing from this harbor is tributary to the said railroad company. The railroad company owns all the land around the harbor, owns every foot of the water front, owns all docks and all terminals, and the question simply is, whether it is the business of the General Government to make further improvements in this harbor or whether such work should be done by the railroad company itself?
An examination of the passenger and freight tariff schedules of the New York, Philadelphia & Norfolk Railroad shows that between Norfolk, Va., and points on its own line north of Cape Charles City the rates charged for both passenger and freight service
are greater than between Cape Charles City and the same points. In other words, for carrying freight and passengers on its boats between Norfolk, Va., and Cape Charles City the railroad company makes a charge and receives a certain revenue.
The United States improves and maintains channels which are used by general commerce, but where individuals or corporations own the water front along such channel and establish thereon docks or terminals, the General Government, as a rule, does not dredge channels leading into such docks, nor does it increase the depth available along side them; such work is almost invariably done by the private owners.
The harbor at Cape Charles City, an artificial one, as stated above, on the eastern side of the Chesapeake Bay, bears just about the same relation to the bay channels which are improved by the United States and used by general commerce as do the docks or piers along any stream or in any harbor to the channels therein.
The maintenance and the betterment of the railroad tracks on land are regarded as proper charges against its operating revenue; it is difficult to see why the maintenance and any necessary improvement of the harbor are not likewise properly chargeable against the revenue derived for freight and passenger traffic borne on the railroad company's own boats to and from Cape Charles City. This same railroad company owns or makes use of a dock and terminal facilities in Norfolk Harbor, but the United States has not dredged channels into nor along them. It seems to me that Cape Charles City Harbor and its entrance channel present a very similar case. The harbor itself is nothing more than a basin alongside the railroad docks, to which the entrance channel gives access from the water of the Chesapeake Bay.
The harbor and channel have been improved by the United States sufficiently to meet the needs of all traffic except that carried on the railroad company's own boats which have somewhat outgrown the facilities thus provided. After careful consideration of all the facts, I am of the opinion that Cape Charles City Harbor and the entrance channel thereto are not worthy of further improvement by the United States.
25. The report of the district officer was subsequently referred to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, who gave consideration to the matter and had a number of hearings at which the railroad company was represented, and it is understood that the conclusions of the board were unfavorable to the improvement of this harbor by the United States, although the report on the subject has not as far as is known been published in the usual way.
26. Since the submission of the above-mentioned report of my predecessor conditions at Cape Charles City, as far as the railroad ownership is concerned, are unchanged. The channel, the harbor, and the landings are still owned by the railroad company, and though the public is permitted to use the channel, the harbor, and the wharf, it is by sufferance of the railroad company only and this permission may at any time be rescinded at the pleasure of the officers of the road.
27. For the reasons stated above, including those quoted from my predecessor's indorsement, I am constrained to the conclusion that it is not advisable for the United States to enlarge its project for the improvement of this locality.
E. EVELETH WINSLOW
Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers.