New-York tribune., 1871-05-30

The proposed arrangement OF Watefiroht, lhcluuihB
the new river wall and far better disposition OF the
,ers pives on the North River, from the Battery TO
sxt river wall line OF 25,14S feet and pier
length of a. 800 feet with pier of 3S6OO square
feet and on the East River from the Battery 10 flI
frstst river wall llne oI Z''o lee'' VII" pi'i az"
Thus the proposed system, the piers ana river wall
together will give wharf.-the OF about l9o'VO Ieet OF
about 81 miles, and the piers alone VIII nave az area o
about 5o5oo square feet suieleni, Is se bs 10 say
accommodate commerce vastly gnatef IMAM tIa'
which finds its way " the water front ol
WHERE THE NEW SYSTEM SHOULD BE FIRST APPLIED.
1t would thus appear that, for very long ume 10
come viii be necessary TO extend the new system over
portion only of the water front betweenSlxtynrstst
North River, and Fftyfrstst East River Nearly ali
the commerce of New-York is now located be-
tween Grandst., the East River, and the
foot Of West btoa6 On the Ss hSrn majority hyGT
OF the piers, the lack Of width In the river,
streets and the consequent difficulty OF access, this
possible to transact the shipping business satsIaet9r
the heavy general business of the port must always be
conducted 1t s therefore, evident that e new system
should be first applied 10 this portion OF the river front,
In order to afford relief az a. practicable.
The proposed arrangement will give between Grandst.
and West Eleyenthst wharf line OF 243 miles greater
Ing the new construction at BrEenhead which amount
in all 10 about 2O miles against an existing line within
the same limits OF 207 miles and from the superiority Of
the arrangement In the increased width OF the piers
slips and river streets and the greater depth OF water
making every foot available for use, will accommodate
with ease much greater commerce than now exists.
THE COST OF THE WORK.
The cost OF the proposed system between GTandst and
West Eleyentst will be about AS follows VIII Four and
onethird miles of river wall at s26OOOO per mile sO
$4,000 piers, s975COOtota, s2OOOOOOO or per mile Of
wharf line $932 In the above estimate for the cost
Of the river wall the filling Of tine river is included
but NOT the paving In the estimate for the piers pro
vision has made for few. the construction of
which masonry and iron enter, great ma
arc fo he of preserved wood built the best manner
and Tar superior the present system. The question Of
plers of masonry iron is simply OF cost
and they can be applied anywhere along river front
Whenever ii is considered desirable to do 50.
ECONOMY RECOMMENDED.
But the cost Of building permanent piers is great
that have not thought 1t advisable to recommend their
general use especially at time wheh money Is OF such
great value and when taxation for all purposes is
heavy burden upon the community have no doubt
"a 10 the immediate necessity Of widening the river
streets and building permanent rlyerwall, as recon-
mended but think IT sound policy to content ourselves
for The present with constructing piers ll WIN aiiod
All necessary facilities in the way OF slse general ar
angernent and strength, hut mostly on % % ~ A. ~
leaving IL for other generations richer thah we hei 70
replace them by permancut struciufes WNopeFVr po
comes cXpedicni tO DO ~, y, ,,.,,,onsI o,A
is be understood that the proposed ioc4'iOS anu