New-York tribune., 1902-05-08
TWEyTY-FITE MILLIONS TO WASTE?

Are the people of the city of New-YOrk pre-
pared to pour their money endlessly into a repe-
titiOn of Tweed courthouse and Albany Capitol
enterprises? If not the astonishing figures OBJ
tanned by The Tribune as to the probable cost of
the projected Manhattan, or Navy Yard, Bridge
must give them pause. Even those figures, we
fear are below the mark, for they were calculated
on the assumption that no greater width of
land need be taken than for the present bridge.
AS matter of fact strip almost twice as wide
will be required. The plan Contemplates, and
the proper completion of the bridge would re-
quire, large plaza at the Brooklyn entrance,
the cost of which is not yet at all considered.
Therefore the estimate of $25OOO0OO as the
probable amount which New-YOrk taxpayers
must make up their minds to spend If they go
on with this scheme is well within bounds
And what for? Merely to give the Brooklyn
elevated railroads an entrance TO Manhattan
without the trouble or expense of building any
new lines for themselves. Doubtless they ought
TO have the entrance, but why should the city
pay for it? Why should the city build an eX-
traOrdnarily long apprOach-far beyond what
is required 10 get down to the ground-merey
10 tap the elevated roads instead OF forcing
them 10 tap the bridge? The whole plan
veals purpose to make the cty'S interest sub
servient 10 that of the railroads. In fact, II Is
merely a railroad scheme. Years ago the rail-
roads planned a bridge Of this sort but. not
caring TO spend the money themselves, they
cleverly induced the city under the Van Wyck
administration, TO undertake 10 provide what
they wanted
The scheme calls for the construction of four
tracks each way between Flathush-ave and
Fulton-st.. Brooklyn and the Bowery and Canal
ST.. Manhattan. That means about $6,00O,O00 a
track, or altogether twice what II would cost 10
put the same number OF tracks IN tunnels so
spread out as to disperse instead Of congestng
the traffic. How would the passengers dumped
at the BOwery and Canal-st. by four tracks he
disposed of? There is one elevated railroad
and one trolley line there Others might be
concentrated there 10 take the passengers away.
but It would he extremely difficult 10 arrange
various through lines from upper Manhattan 10
outer Brooklyn. Transfers would probably be
necessary, and we should see n reproduction in
the Bowery, on a larger scale than now at Park
Row, Of that great aggregation Of humanity in
one place which makes crowding inevitable no
matter how good the facilities. AS Mayor Low
said few days ago: THE public wants TO get
into car anywhere and go anywhere" The
thing to do is to avoid transfers and terminals
and obliterate the East River. so far as inter
borough traffic is concerned as thoroughly as
ditch in Cana-st This cannot be done by a
bridge which gathers eight tracks together and
draws traffic into funnel. Tunnels connect
ing various Manhattan and Brooklyn lines will
obliterate the river and make the centre Of
New-York accessible without change 10 resi-
dents of any part OF Brooklyn. And these tun-
nels can be built in half the time and for half
the money required for the bridge.
1t Is easy TO understand why some people in
Brooklyn should hesitate 10 favor abandon
ment of the projected bridge, though others,
among them "The Brooklyn Times" heartily
favor the idea. A bird in the hand appears TO
them worth two in the bush, and IL is not to be
expected that they should consent 10 forego n
bridge seven years off on the mere prospect of
tunnels in three wears. They have a right to
ask definite action which will assure them of
the tunnels before the bridge is finally aban-
doned, though we think the authorities would
be justified in holding up the bridge work and
stopping expense pending investigation into the
enormous wastefulness Of the project When
an adequate system Of tunnels is planned by
the Rapid Transit Commission to take the place
of the bridge they will doubtless he satisfied.
Such n system should he planned at once If
the city can undertake this tremendous expense
Of $25,O00,00O for a bridge ii can go at once 10
work on one two or even three $3,0000O0 or
S4,OOO,000 tunnels substitutes II is not TO
be expected that any railroad will build $25.-
100000 bridge. or even pay n fair rental for its
use But the tunnels could probably he built
without expense to the city and so without any
trouble over the debt limit. The existing rail
roads would doubtless be glad to bid for fran
chises on reasonable terms for works costing
such moderate sums. Moreover. if the city
should prefer not to give them control we he
leve that IL could get the tunnels built by con
tractors who would operate them and turn them
over free to the city after limited period. with
out the loan of the citys credit. We believe
there are public spirited citizens who if the
matter were properly presented to them, would
lend their own credit TO build tunnels which
the city would own, as 1t owns the rapid transit
subway If bridges are built the city must
surely pour its own money out for the work
Private capital can be brought 70 build the tun-
nels if it is properly encouraged.