The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-02-21
FIVE PLANS FOR
new FREE BRIDGE
Contest Narrows Down to That
Number, and Experts Will
Pick Best.
WHY SOME WERE REJECTED
Two Consulting Engineers Will
Aid Mr.. Boiling in Final
Award.
WHY SOME WERE REJECTED

After eliminating all but Ave OF the
designs proposed for the construction
OF a new bridge over James River to
replace Mayo's Bridge, the subcommit-
tee from the Council Committee on
Streets last night referred these five
plans to a board of expert consulting
engineers, consisting or Wilbur j..
y. BurgWyn, or Richmond. and City
Engineer Charles L. Boiling. The nve
pianS under consideration are those
OF 1me MckaS Engineering Company,
OF designs by the Concrete
Steel Engineering Company. of New
lork) stamper Brothers & Ragland.
Of Richmond: H. n. Airport & sons. Of
Richmond, and the Carolina Concrete
Company. OF Greensboro, N. c.. designs
prepared by the Lutin Consulting En-
glneerlng Company, OF Cincinnati).
Many Pinns Rejected.
After excluding all bidders from the
room, the subcommittee Went over all
of the fifteen plans proposed last night
in some detail. The plans Of Tie Nc.
Lean Construction Company were re-
3ected as excessive in cost; those Of
me Souther-Ferro concrete Company
Island; those OF G.. r. Clarke & Com
pany because Of spandrcl arches. which.
y was believed, would catch driftwood
the snare & Triest Company because
OF lack of finish: those Of the EruiIl-
colaoli company because Of the very
snort spans; those Of the piedmont
Construction Company for the same
reason. and for the girdcr form OF
G1@nstruetion ~proposed those OF the
riennenrllmc construction Company be-
cause OF the short spans: those Of the
Iaines Corse Company because Of open-
work construction, and those OF the
nnmmins Structural Company because
no paving was provided and 30 con-
structlon across the island. Other rca-
sons for rejection were advanced in
some Instances by City Engineer Boil
ing. 80
Want Prompt CONSTRUCTION
objection was made to the
ltasland g. Company plans on account
o. me eStimat Of eighteen months for
compietion. but 1t was argued that
other bids on ESQ WORKING DAYS might
chSiiS iengthen into an indefinite period
MN high water. freezing and very hot
weather. rainy p.lls and other DELAYS.
When the competition had been mar
rowed down to a minimum. MIR. Lynch
moved 10 refer the Mckay. Stampcr
Co. plans 10 a board OF experts for
report. Mr.. Davis objected 10 tho
Alckay people, whose concrete work
IN eonnection with the municipal cleo
isfac,ory, and on his motion the Caro-
Una Concrete Company, with plans
drawn by Mr.. Lutcn. was added. on
nro'ton OF Mr.. Moore the plans or H..
M. Alport & sons were added, although
objection was made TO some OF the
features Of the design.
Expert Engineers.
AZ a previous meeting City Engi-
neer Boiling had been asked to nom
mate three consulting engineers from
whom the committee could choose. He
PROPOSED the names of Colonel C.Hep.
~, Burswyn, Of Richmond. whose in
,egrlty and ability he said were well
SHOWN; j. c. Griner, of Baltimore. con-
sul'lhs OF the Erie and Bal
tlinorc and Ohio Railroads. and EN-
proved III n consulting capacity on
bridge work by tho city Of Baltimore.
ana Wilbur j. Watson, Cleveland. o..
an authority On reinforced concrete
work among all engineers and high
~ Endorsed for integrity by Philip
Aylett. OF Chicago, formerly OF Rich
The committee instructed Mr.. Boiling
Mr.. Watson, and # it we're possible
GO secure their services within tbc
limits or the approximation 10 invite
them to sit with him as a board If
tHre.. engineers TO pass on the merits
o. the I'VE plans still under considcra-
tion. Resides the general opinion 81
'he engineers as to tho quality and de-
STABILITY of the plans. the hoard Is
requested 70 report on the vent Of the
river IN time Of freshct through Tho
sheets OF the spans. and the method
Or securing conduits and sidewalks.
MI Davis failed in ar efor to sub-
stlthte me name Of Mr.. C;riner fer
nat OF MI. Watson, saving tina hc
mad learned that Mr.. Watson was not
satisfactory to Mr.. l.utcn. the engineer
1or the Carolina Concrete Compnny
II was ordered that the report OF the
board OF engineers be tabled for four
days for the inspection or bidders be-.
fore committee action. and that al
checks from unsuccessful bidders Lo
returned. ~ -