Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-07-12
such an extensive degreehs this plan would

This, naturally. the LOCATION of a proper
S SrsSs snd Of the
the of rhe rswas
on this side Of the bridge, and the desire to
avoid obstructing travel by crossing the
roadways at the north and south ends. AS
to the details of location! It Is clear that the
heavy weights of loaded trains should be
carried Immediately, above the present
bridge truss. and that proper considera-
ton Of public CONVENIENCE would require
that the present wjdths of roadway and
sidewalks be practically maintained-the
necessary extra room for a single track
road. which is believed to be sufficient. be-
ing secured by widening the existing super
structure.
Principal P1qnx1 Proposed.
The most important detail Of location is
the terminal at M and Beth streets, and
much consideration has been given it. The
following are the principal plans proposed:
1. To enter the Union station at the level
of the second floor from the west by means
of an inclined viaduct crossing NJ street
above grade. This Is Objectionable and I'M
slightly construction. unsatisfactory
and possibly unsafe to operate on account
of the heavy grade necessary on the via
duct and would take and deliver its passen-
gers in the Union station at a level above
or below the level of every connecting road.
2. To enter the Union station on the
ground floor. This Is objesIal 20 strongly
and with good reason by the Capital Trac-
ton Company on the ground that it would
practically involve the reconstruction OF
the entire interior from top to bottom,
and would eventually he an encroachm ent
on their necesS ary operating space. 1t Is
also Questionable rs necessitatins 4 can
gerous crossing of NJ street at grade at
the entrance 10 the bridge, very con-
gested point for travel, and this cross-
ing would be especially periious by rea-
son of Its being on a curve and of the
train crossing the street Immediately en-
leaving the station building by which 1t
would be concealed I'D to the moment Of
crossing.
Objections Are Weighty.
3. To cross NJ street and enter shelter
shed to be constructed IN the stub of Seth
street. just north Of M street and south
Of the retaining wall across seth street /.
This plan has advantages. but its cbjec-
tons are weigrhy. The necessary terrni-
nal facilities ere much curtailed. There
Is no practicable possibility for their ex-
pansion under future requirements, and
the trains, certainly when arriving and
departing. and at times when sniftfng,
and dangerously o5struct 1t in only a
slightly degree less than would be the
the case under he second plan. Because
better plan Is believed practicable this
one Is not recommended.
4. To construct terminal on the bridge
Itself, over the canal by widening the pres
ent structure. This would avoid the dan
gerous grade crossing of NJ street, but
terminal and would be difficult of expan-
sion There would also result an interfer-
ence with foot travel over the bridge and
an enforced dependence on a long span
structural support for the terminal and its
load OF passengers and cars.
D. 10 provide terminal station on land
to be acquired for the purpose at the south
east corner of Both ard NJ streets, the
hn hrt1 hot,
the east and entering the shelter parallel
to NJ street.
Prevents Every Advantage.
This plan has none of the physical OBJ
Jections found in all the others and pre-
sents every advantage, found in any OF
them, and 1t is the one recommended. 1t
Will require the purchase of private prop
erty Tor public corporate use and for this
purpose a proper clause enabling condem-
nation thereof to be made should be added
TO the bill A plan is transmitted here
with showing the route and terminal here
In recommended =
In reference to structural considerations
involved in the use of the existing bridge
for street railway purposes as above
planned. 1t can be stated that the existing
metallic superStI ucture was designed and
constructed under such conservative unit
stresses that the members of the trusses
and their details and connections are safe
an assumed live load of 100 pounds per
square foot over the bridge as widened and
under a motor car weighing, with its load
OF passengers, twenty-SeVen tons on trucks
twenty feet apart. There Is no question OF
It's sufciency under the plan proposed. AS
to the substructu.e 1t is known that de-
fects exist in the piles. hut that they are
material is not believed; and 1t Is reason
ably certain that the proposed use of the
bridge herein described need not be de-
MED on account of their existence.
In order that no doubt may remain to
this. it would be proper that provisions
should be made in this bill for a sufficient
examination. and. If necessary, a suitable
repair of these pieces by the authorities
charged with their maintenance at the cost
OF the company or companies receiving
this franchise. AS to the bill itself and the
financial propositions it contains. 1t Is be-
lieved that in SO far as the superstructure
Is concerned the work of alteratio should
be under the Commissioners Of the District
of Columbia. who are now charged by law
with Its maintenance and repair.
Su4gested Notifications.
1t Is also believed that in section the toll
should be fxed at l cent per passenger
carried in cars across the bridge. Section
is Objectionable and should be modified,
as shown in the amended form Of bill SUBJ
mitted herewith.
The original section practically provides
railroad company with an investment the
payment OF interest on which Is practically
guaranteed by the District. No provision is
made N the original bill for the company's
showing the expenses of maintenance and
repairs. and the light toll charged would, 1t
Is believed. be not more than proper to
cover the wear and tear on the bridge due
to operating the cars over 1t. The company
has paid nothing whatever toward the
bridge. and is required to pay only the cost
necessary to secure its passage across said
bridge, and as long as no arrangement Is
made for requiring the road to share in the
maintenance. 1t Is recommended that the
toll collected be applied to that purpose, as
embodied in section 4 as amended.
The bill. as amended in accordance with
this report. is believed to be desira BILE legis-
lation. and the Commissioners recommend
that 1t be passed.
The Proposed Torpedo Boats.
The naval bureau chiefs who have been
considering the tordepo boat bids have
made a report favoring the construction of