New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-08-04
DEADLOCK OVER SUBWAYS
Board of Estimates Course
Leads to Long Delay.
CONTRACT FORMS THE ISSUE
Disagreement with P. S. c.. Re.
suits in Holding Up of Ad
vertisements for Bids.

Differences of opinion between the Pubic
Service COMMISSION and the transit com
mttee of the Board of Estimate over the
forms of contract for the Broadway-Lex
ington avenue subway threaten to hold up
the advertisement for bids indefinitely.
When Chairman Wilcox OF the commission
sailed for Europe some time ago he said he
hoped the forms would be in shape so that
bids could be asked for within ten days.
But the Corporation Counsel has not ap-
proved the forms, and yesterday II was
learned why he had not done so.
The trouble lies in a report made by
special board of engineers appointed by the
transit committee to go over the contract
forms In 1t they severely critcise many
of the most important features of the
forms. This became known when the COM
mission made public its reply to the crtti-
cisms The reply includes reports by
George S. Coleman. counsel to the commits
sion, and lie Roy T. Hardness, assistant
counsel; Henry r. Seaman, chief engineer
of the commission, and Alfred craven
deputy engineer of subway construction
On almost every point they take issue
with the engineers of the transit commit
tee. These engineers whose report Is dated
June II, are E. p. Goodrich, consulting en-
gineer Of the Borough Presidents office in
Manhattan; r. W. Creuzbaur, who holds a
similar place in the borough government
in Brooklyn: John n. Frazee, assistant
engineer of the Department of Finance, and
Otto H Klein, chief engineer of the Com
missioner of Accounts.
The transit committee of the Board of Es-
innate consists of the Mayor, the Controller
and the President of the Board of Alder
men President Mitchell has been away for
a month Controller Prendergast will not
return before the middle of September, and
the Mayor goes away within a week for
thirty DAYS 1t would appear, therefore,
that in view of the present deadlock over
the contract forms there is little hope of an
agreement being reached for many weeks
Possibly the most important criticisms by
the transit committees engineers were di-
rected against the cut-and-cover plan of
construction and the unit price system of
bidding. which were decided upon by the
experts of the commission.
The commission determined 70 require the
cut-and-cover method. which provided for a
complete decking over Of all sidewalks
throughout the length of the line. because
of the great Inconvenience that had been
caused In the building of the present sub
way The transit committees engineers
advise that all open-cut work possible be
allowed and that a unit price for decking
be made rather than to load the cost of the
work with decking throughout
To this criticism Mr.. Seaman. chief en-
gineer of the commission. replies that il
would have been more to the point if the
report had stated the points where cut
and-cover work could be omitted. Mr..
Craven says that while from the point of
view of the work the open-cut method Is
prefera BILE as a matter of public policy the
cut-and-cover method seems the only fair
way TO build such subway
The transit committees engineers also
advocate the percentage system of bid
ding as opposed to the unit price system
decided upon by the commission. Under
the latter system the bidder fixes the
prices of materials and work at which he
agrees TO undertake the construction. and
il then rests with the commission to decide
what bids are reasonable and acceptable.
Under the percentage system favored by
the transit committees engineers the en-
gineers of the commission would fix the
figures for the cost of all materials and
work and the contractors in their bids
would propose 10 do the work for a certain
percentage of the engineers figures on
this point Mr.. Craven in his report to the
commission which is transmitted 70 the
transit committee says:
The matter of percentage bidding has
been carefully considered, having been
urged upon the commission as early as
August 1907. Such system in simpler
work. where conditions and their precise
treatment can accurately be forecast.
may possess all the merit that is claimed
for it: but 1t is the consensus Of opinion
Of those experienced in this work that its
adoption at least at this time for subway
construction would be most inadvisabls.
Numerous other criticisms. most of which
seemed designed to limit the scope of
the powers Of the commission and lis en-
gineers in the construction of the subway.
are also answered at some length.