New-York tribune., 1901-12-06
4 RUTHLESS PROJECT.

I'm comments on the proposed sehelhe ~ "
crease the facilities for handling 'raihc ''' '''
end of the Brooklyn Bridge to WHICH, WIN sum-
important notifications, Chief Engineer -N'i w,
gives his earnest approval. lttle mas peen '"'''
about one of it's obiectonapie cohsee"e
The proposition is that four trach eie'
r,i,road shall he built through Centre-st as
nor+ of q link connecting the old bridge WIN
rho NOW ones north of it. That is TO say. IL II
nronosed to iniure seriously the appearance Oh
the upper end of the City Hall farh' lroi'
which the public has been hoping Ih't 'iie pie'
emf unsightly buildings would soon De cle'iieo
away; to destroy the artistic value OF 'he zen.
tre-s, front of the costly and beautiful Hall of
Records going up at the corner vi on'ii,
bersst and to fill the new criminal courts with
the roar of passing trains. These grave opJec-
tiops to the plan on which the bridge officials
and the Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company nave
set their hearts have been referred to in the
Tribune and elsewhere but we have not OBJ
served any allusion to them in the reports Which
the Board of Estimate and Apportionment may
be invited to consider to-day. Nevertheless, they
demand careful attention
I. can be safely affirmed as Il general propo-
sitiun that no new elevated roads should be con-
stltic.ed in the lower part of the city. or near
the central line of it, at ieaSt. Mr. Sage used TO
think that the Manhattan Companys viaducts
bad pleasing appearance. but ne never Iouhu
anybody to agree with him. They are fright
fully ugly. and in various ways they exact q
heavy sacrifice in return for the und0ubted ser
vice they render. For the reasons just given, n
four track line through Centre-st. would be
peculiarly offensive. and there should be no
thought of adopting such n scheme until conclu-
siye proof has been submitted that there is no
other possibility of dealing satisfactorily with
the problem now presented at the bridge en-
trance That has not yet been done. In the
first place. effort has been made to ascertain
how much relief would follow if the train ser
vice OH the bridge We're now made good as
1t formerly under the management of the
city. Again. nobody can determine in advance
how the distribution of traffic will be affected
by the new bridges and the rapid transit tunnel
We believe there is some official support for the
theory that the use of the old bridge will not be
materially lessened, but perhaps the contrary
opinion that great deal of traffic will be di-
verted to the channels is quite valuable
1t would seem TO he the part of wisdom to post
pone the execution of plan to which many
weighty objections inevitably attach until the
natural consequences of changed conditions
have become apparent.
Nobody who is not an extremely careless
reader of The Tribune can ina gine that we re
gard the situation at this end of the Brooklyn
Bridge as a trivial matter or course, ii Is
scandalous, wenigh intolerable and "A mnnu-
mental proof Of official shortsightcdneSs. The
city ought 10 have taken. at the proper time
land enough for a digniied and spacious ap-
proach TO one Of the finest river spans in exist
ence, and the public may have to pay Il heavy
price hereafter for an imperfect remedy But
we cannot believe that il is yet necessary to
build another elevated railroad along n route
where it would be extraordinarily disfguring
and injurious.