The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Operating quay and pier types, Figs. 1,3 and 9 sections I to VIII, indicate the general range of designs for vari- ous conditions, and some of the sketches are of actual terminals such as the recently completed state pier at Mobile, Ala., section I, Fig. 7, New York city piers, section V. Fig. 8; Norfolk and Western, Western Mary- land and Pennsylvania railroad piers, sections VI, VII and VIII, Fig 9 re- spectively. Sketches II and Tit: Fie. t, do not represent any particular termi- nal but show the combination of multi-story warehouses with transit space. The army base terminal at Boston is somewhat similar to sec- tion II, Fig. 7, although it is not sym- metrical and its street is not de- pressed below warehouse and transit shed floor levels. Terminals similar to these have heretofore been more familiar abroad but some of these general types have been constructed in this country and Canada in recent years. They provide for efficiency in combined operation of transfer and warehousing facilities and provide for the complete marine terminal with reasonable economy of land. It is, of course, possible to concen- trate these facilities even more in case of necessity. Sketches IV and V, Fig. 8, repre- sent transit pier types only, without warehouses, sketch V, Fig. 8, repre- sents space generally desirable for loading and unloading large cargoes or for combination passenger and freight business of considerable mag- nitude. Peculiar needs—such as com- paratively small cargoes brought to and from the pier principally by lighter and truck, the relatively high importance of passenger business, and the extremely high land costs obtain- ing have resulted in type V, Fig. 8, for part of New York’s marine termi- iy HE digrammatic cross sections of *This is the second instalment of a paper on Marine Terminal Design from the Operating Point of View, presented before the Society of Terminal Engi- neers at the Engineering Societies build- ing, 29 West Thirty-ninth street, New York City, Feb. 9, 1931. The authors of this paper are: Frederic R. Harris, rear admiral, C. E. C. U. S. N. retired, consulting engineer; Harry E. Stocker, resident manager McCormick Steam- ship Co., New York, and contributing editor MarRINE Review; William B. Fer- guson, consulting engineer; Roy F. Bessey, vice president, Frederic R. Har- ris Inc., consulting engineers. Pub- lished in three parts, the third and last part will follow in the May issue of MARINE REVIEW. 74. Part II* nals. Sketches VI, VII and VIII, Fig. 9, represent some random railroad mar- ine terminals. It is believed that other Norfolk and Western piers have apron tracks as well as central de- pressed tracks. Sketch VII, Fig. 9, is the one story pier of the terminal of the Western Maryland railroad de- scribed before your society. This terminal also has a two story shed with set-back at second floor level. Sketch VIII, Fig. 9, shows one of the piers of the Pennsylvania’s new “rail-to-keel” terminal in Jersey city which has also been the subject of a recent meeting. The sketches indicate some typical vessels at piers. The relation of vessel to pier—in place, coming in, going out, at high and low water stages, and at extreme loading conditions—is ob- viously especially important. In this connection typical locations of overall hatches, side ports, passenger ports, gangways, dimensions and clearances of cargo handling devices and cargo and drafts, should, of course, be gone into in detail. As stated elsewhere space condi- tions and real estate values have very great influence on the terminal design. Sketches I, II, III, IV, Figs. 7 and 8, might be taken as illustrative of the range in space which might properly oint of View be occupied by a complete marine ter. minal unit of berths, transit sheds, warehouses, drives and tracks. Sketch I, Fig. 7, Mobile, sub-units are all lo- cated on the same general level—one story construction. Section II, Fig, 7, warehouses and transit sheds con- tracted in ground area and expanded upward. Section III, Fig. 7, also shows warehouse and transit sheds combined and one drive omitted. The provision for receiving cargo on the wharf at the head of slips at terminals (known in New York as bulkhead receiving) has proved to be an effective means of expediting street trucks with’ consequent traffic ad- vantage. When piers are narrow it has also reduced the cost of cargo handl- ing through reduction of congestion on the piers. When a ship is working cargo, shippers’ trucks on a pier de- livering cargo are a serious obstacle to economical and safe operation. In many cases the loads of most of the trucks are small and it is possible to keep them off the piers without any great difficulty. One steamship com- pany found that 75 per cent of the trucks handled only 25 per cent of the cargo. Receiving on wharf at head of slip kept practically all the 75 per cent off the narrow, congested pier. Such receiving is only economical when mechanical equipment is avail- PIER AND QUAY STUDIES ———————— LILLE Y YEE TE eg tht (ALABAMA STATE TERMI Quay wall or wide pier type; single. story buildings, space not restricted. central street = 6 SECTION I ISA OT? y Yt hh f, GOL QUAY WALL OR WIDE PIER TVPE Central Warehouse between quays; 2-story transit buildin8, multi-story warehouse i SECTION IT Mis MUU MLL TWisispisiistdd Li GILLIE UME VAY WAL ean Yy CARGO VESSEL Owr ($000 5/0; 8 68. OR 32’; a 410! L OR WI Q DE Multistory warehouse combined with transit building, central street SECT/ION I of PIER TY. FIGURE 7—MARINE TERMINAL DES/GN MARINE REVIEw—April, 1931 Marine Terminal Design from ‘de: