Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-04-07
lIIRSCHBERC AND BOLL|NG
HAVE SHARP COLLOQUY
Member OF Administrative Board
Calls for City Engineers
Resignation.
GETS NO SUPPORT FROM BOARD
Contract Awarded for Reconstruction
OF Weaker Spans OF Old Ninth
4 Street Free Bridge ut Cost OF ST.
~ 70O-Will Last Many Years.

81 A melodramatic finish was given yes
8 terday's session or the Administrative
& Board by John Hirschberc. who n
Z minute two before adjournment.
& moved tina. City Engineer Boiling he
requested to tender his rest gina ton. 10
I become effective July !. 1915. The
!, motion was defeated. to !. Mr.
: Hirschberg voting for il, and Commits
8 stoners Beck. folkes and Mccarthy
voting against il.
. Mr.. HirschberG pretaced his motion
= with n short statement to the effect
that the friction between NJ. Boiling
Z and the Administrative Board. which.
y he said has repeatedly come 10 the
\ surface. made II advisable that the City
= Engineer be asked TO resign There
= was no debate The other members OF
: the board received the motion without
: comment. and promptly voted II down.
!. Mr. HirschherG declined TO discuss his
> motion after adjournment.
= SHARP INTERCHANGE BETWEEN
I ROLLING AND HIRSCHBERG
i Tho immediate inspiration OF the
4 motion, however. was a sharp inter-
J change between Mr.. Boiling and Mr..
- Hirschberg on the question OF award
Y Ing contract Tor the reconstruction
= of eight spans of tho Ninth Street
! bridge. The consideration of this mat
I. ter ended IN tho board ordering that
= contract for the reconstruction be
: awarded to the Virginia Bridge and
+. Iron Company, OF Roanoke. At It's bid
/. OF sl7.Ieo.
The difficulty dates back TO May. 1914,
) when the board awarded to H. l..
+ Mathews a conditional contract for tho
: reconstruction OF the eight spans. at
{ his bid OF $4,000. There was available
) for this purpose, from bond-issue
. appropriation. about $4,000. and the
award was conditioned on the willing
' ness OF the Council to make an extra
: appropriation large enough 10 take care
: OF the $1,000 deficit.
resolution asking for this additional
/ Appropriation was sent TO the Council
+ by the Administrative Board. and was
a referred to the Finance Committee.
< The committee never reported the
Z measure, and the bridge award lapsed
for lack OF a sufficient appropriation.
( IIIRSCHBEnG SUPPORTED
z MATHEWS'S PROPOSAL.
y Mathews was the lowest bidder on
the City Engineers specifications, and
y the award to him was strongly sup
& ported by Mr.. lIrschberg. With its
. bid on the City Engineers specitica-
lions, the Roanoke company submitted
( also an alternate repair plan or its
. own, providing for n reconstruction Of
the eight spans at cost OF sl7,163.
8 This plan received the support Of Henry
:. p. Beck but was opposed by the other
" members OF the board.
When the controversy over the
= merits OF tho two plans was at its
height last May. City Engineer Rolling
made q statement in which he expressed
the belief that In view Of the fact
that the city must sooner or later
~Teplace the Ninth Street bridge with
al entirely new structure, It would
be the part OF economy to reconstruct
the eight spans In accordance with tho
plans OF the Virginia Bridge and Iron
Company which would provide a safe
bridge for at least twenty-hve years
Mr.. Boiling expressed the same view
before the board Yesterday and was
sharply taken to task by Mr.. Hirsch-
berg for preparing specifications for "A
reconstruction that would cost $4,000
:, and then abandoning his own spec!n-
3 cations for plan whose execution
y would cost only about one third OF that
amount II was his desire. he said,
. to vote for the plan recommended by
the City Engineer, and this he did last
E, May, he said only to find now that
the City Engineer has become the cx-
: ponent OF another plan.
: BOILING WAS FOLLOWING
HOARD'S INSTRUCTIONS
TO this Mr.. Boiling replied that in
, preparing his original specifications he
was following out the boards !nstruc-
lions to draw MP plan for a recon
- atruction OF the; eight spans. and that
he did SO With. the idea of making the
reconbtruction In the highest degree
permanent In view Of the boards In
: structions. he could not consistently, he
:, said. have prepared specifications for
"a reconstruction the life OF which
= would be more limited
Ny. Boiling called the boards at
tention 10 the fact that even az far
back as last May nc shared Mr. Bcck's
view mat The cheaper reconstruction
proposed BY the Roanoke company
would answer tho city's needs. since /.
would provide u safe crossing for
twenty years. AZ the end OF which
time. In all probability. the city Will
be ready TO supplant tho span with
modern reinforced concrete bridge
OF greater width
II still hold THAT view" said MIR
Boiling yesterday. with the city
doing It's utmost TO care for all lis
seemed an act OF wise economy TO
adopt the cheaper form OF rcconstruc-
ton. particularly sine IL answered the
) purpose as wcl! a. tn" more expensive
-. plan. held the same view las, wear
cannot see tn" wisdom in making
the reconsideration UNNECESSARILY mas
siVe and permanent when the life o.
the whole bridge j. limited. II can
not serve the city many years longer.
WILL SAVE LARGE
ANNUAL RErAIn Dill.
Unless this reconstruction T.. c,-
ried out there viii be a constant ey
pense in making annual or periodical
repairs TO keep the bridge safe In
stead of spending $4,000 or s. 900 IN
Z. temporary repairs every two or thr.c
years. I recommend that sIT.7GO be
spent at one Time for a reconstruct
tion that VIII make further rcpairs
except those OF q minor character. nm
necessary for twcnty-tlv i've years"
A There has always hccn more or les,
friction between tho city Eng!necr's
office and the Administrative BOARD
Shortly after the board was constituted
In January, 1919, the situation became
go strained as 10 lead Mr. Boiling, OF
his own initiative. 10 Offer his rrsip
nation. The board declined TO accent
III. AFTER being asked by the Council. in