New-York tribune., 1902-05-12
MILLIONS FOR THE LAND.
WHAT BRIDGE APPROA CHES
WOULD COST.
MANHATTAN STRUCTURE WOULD TAKE
MORE THAN $25,OO0OO0 OF CITY
MONEY PLEA FOR
TUNNELS.

svolve the city in an expenditure of much more
l1han 100000, instead of the modest sum of
yS15OO000O, the estimate Of Mr.. Shea when he
twas Bridge Commissioner. AS has been pointed
out in The Tribune, this bridge is to be built in
total disregard TO the direction Of streets.
feature which is distinctly contrary to the plans
of the Brooklyn Bridge and the williamsburg
Bridge. for in the of the williamsburg
Bridge its Manhattan land span and approach
is parallel TO Delancey-st and its Brooklyn land
span and approach is nearly parallel with Fifth
st. The Brooklyn Bridge is aligned with the
direction oc the streets in Manhattan, and its
diagonal position to the Brooklyn streets was to
q great degree excused and the cost kept down
by the fact of the short approach. The Brook
lyn approach Of the bridge. for example, is only
971 feet long
The Manhattan Bridge. however. was laid out
apparently much the plan Of a Russian mill
tsry road. Two points to be connected
rule laid between these points, and a
straight line was drawn connecting them. Why
t5ust these terminals. which are CanaI-st. and
the sowery. in Manhattan, and Fulton-st and
DE Kalb-ave. in Brooklyn, chosen still re-
mains a mystery. Despite the fact that streets
gere crossed diagonally. blocks being cut in two
pr mutilated by having their corners chopped off.
mo effort was made to counteract the additional
Fexpense caused by such a plan of construction.
On the other hand. the Brooklyn approach, in
stead Of stopping at Sands-st. or High-st which
haye the same height above the level
Canal-st. and the Bowery, is planned to go
than half mile further
Mr.. Shea tried TO excuse this long stretch of
viaduct by saying that Fulton-st. and De Kalb-
ave. would afford a better radiating point for
travel. In other words, the city is building this
enormously expensive structure for the benefit
of the railroad company which is to its
over it, Instead Of using the city's millions to
build viaduct suit the convenience of the
Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company, the people Of
brooklyn, Of Manhattan and of all the other
parts of the city. who taxpayers would have
20 pay for this Improvement have Indignantly
replied that the railroad company should build
.ts tracks to the bridge approach
Comparisons with the length OF the other city
bridges show the extravagant length of the
Brooklyn approach of the Manhattan Bridge
The approach of the present Brooklyn Bridge is
81 feet. that Of the Williamsburg Bridge is
1.751 feet, while that of the proposed Manhat-
tan Bridge is 4,230 feet, or more than four
ffths of a mile Property will have TO be con-
demned under the land span for the purpose so
engineers of the Bridge Department say of
guarding the girders of the bridge from fire. AS
the land span either side of the river is $50
feet long, this increases the stretch of land to
be purchased by the city in Brooklyn from 4,230
feet to 5,0S0 feet.
Man.
haitian and the Brooklyn approaches and land
spans Of the three bridges is as follows: Man
haitian Bridge. 1870 feet: Williamsburg Bridge
5000 feet; Brooklyn Bridge, 1888 feet. These
figures include both approaches and land spans.
It is thus that the Manhattan Bridge will
Enecessitate for its construction the condemna-
ition of a strip of land more than three thousand
feet longer than that for the Brooklyn Bridge.
The width of the Brooklyn Bridge is only s5
in
be 120 feet The land for the Brooklyn Bridge
. thus covers 373.405 square feet. whereas that
FOR the Manhattan Bridge will take 944, 400
square feet The land for the former cost
lSso00000. At this rate the land for the Man
haitian Bridge will cost nearly S21O00O00
These figures do not take into considera-
1ion that the bridge is to be built diagonally
Through the blocks Of each borough. Further
,more, the land for the Brooklyn Bridge
bought nearly thirty years ago. On examination
lof the property tc be condemned for the Man
haitian Bridge 1t is found that some exceed
1ngly valuable property must be condemned. The
land to be condemned the Manhattan side Of
the river is crowded with business and tenement
houses. Speculative builders Of six story and
basement tenement houses have put up dozen
new buildings this strip.
On the northeast corner of Monroe and Mar
rket sts is a new public school. which will
most serious property damages will fall on own
ers along Cherry and Water SITS. who are chiefly
manufacturers. The greaS seven story Hecker
four mills, 100 by 100 stand at Cherry-st and
Pike Slip. This property is assessed for Sloo-
fOoO but il is believed it would cost the city
high as 100000. No 1S9 Cherry-st. is the prop
;erty OF Edward F. Heating, manufacturer of
plumbing supplies. 1t is six stories high. The
IS. Valentine -four mills are few feet south of
4he Hecker -four mills.
Tunnels, on the other hand. would not destroy
ANY property, except, perhaps. a few square
feet at the terminals
The Tribune received the following letter yes
1erday from w K. Aston, of No. Al Wall-st':
The discussion reported this morning between the
% worthy the attention Of every taxpayer in
greater New-York II appears that the older mem
Stewart Smith. Morris X. Jesup, Woodbury. Lang
DON John Claim nj & aRd hosn5 09n9 from 70 s nceSon and
who with years OF study. all the developed
from OF thf h seGght to Be By
newer members ex ofhclo's Mayor Low ano con-
and careful observation adyoeatng the tunnel Ig as
Queens 1S and Richmond and the other advocating
bridges such connection 1t Is obvious that this
question IS OF vital interest in respect TO the matter
the amount OF money 10 establish single line for
is the cost Of a tunnel for the same purpose and
that il may fail but Of the tunnel is surely
established without any need of repairs appre-
ram al weather conditions and undsturbed by any
use OF the water which IL serves 10 cross from
Superior 10 the bridge On the economic side it is
doubiy superior. because 1t does not cost half as
Ief US sustain with all our influence the older
Transit Commission who advocate the tunnel in
preference 70 the bridge II money were % abundant
But the cost of either structure must necessarily