New-York tribune., 1920-03-02
COethals Plan
For Tunnel Is
Called Unsafe
Chief Engineer for Proposed
Vehicular Hudson Tube
Makes Sharp Criticisms
in Answer to General
Board Wants Talk to End
s'Useless to Discuss Details
Seriously,'' Says Letter
Given Out by Commission

The report of Clifford NJ Holland,
chief engineer Of the New York-New
Jersey Bridge and Tunnel Commits
slons, recently made public, has de-
veloped lively controversy between
Mr.. Holland and General George w.
Goethals. The Goethals plan for the
proposed vehicular tunnel between
Manhattan and Jersey City suggested
concrete block form Of construction.
The plan recommended by the chief
engineer and the consulting board,
which was contained in the report of
the New York commission to the Legis-
lature, calls for twin tubes of cast iron,
and throws out the Co halls scheme,
along with several Others.
In recent letter to the commissions
General Goethals requested data show
ing the reasons for rejecting his con-
crete block plans. At meeting of the
New Jersey commission, held in the
Halls of Records, Manhattan, yesterday.
Mr.. Hollands reply to this letter was
read and its transmission ordered, with
the added recommendation that it be
made public.
Want Controversy to End
In answer to General Goethals Mr..
Holland takes up one of the five points
upon which information was requested
IN the Goethals letter. The reply is
accompanied by a letter from the Board
OF Consulting Engineers, which says:
me board lndorses unqualifedly
the answers which have been submitted
by the chief engineer, and in conclu-
sion would respectfully call attention
to the fact that these answers are so
conclusive in their showing of the ma
ture OF the project, which has been un-
der discussion for so long a time, and
the impossibiity OF its serious con-
slderation as a matter of construction,
that 1T is hoped that this answer to the
proponent Of the scheme may close fur
ther discussion and allow the time of
the chief engineer and the board of
consulting engineers to be devoted to
the active preparation of plans leading
to the execution of the project
In answer to the point of capacity,
which was the first Of the Goethals
five points, Mr.. Holland quotes figures
to show that under the Goethals plan
to carry. three lines of traffic would
between vehicles.
otTenStn MOI crowded
The Goethals request for "the ana
lytical analysis which shows that the
rings or blocks are not sufficient to
withstand the external load" is an
swered by the transmission of the
analyses requested, in addition to
which the letter states:
"Thesc are merely supplemental to
the studies based upon actual tunnel
experience, which show that the con-
crete block tunnel is fundamentally de-
fective in that it does not provide
for strength in those details where
tunnel experience has proved that
cially in the cross joints, where it has
been found necessary to increase the
rigidity Of the connections between ad-
jacent segments in order to strengthen
the ring and prevent its failure through
distortion"
Discussing the statement in the ac-
cepted report that the concrete tunnel
is not suited to Hudson River condi-
tions," Mr.. Holland states that the type
of construction proposed in the Goe-
thals plan is "the worst possible to
meet these conditions"
Says 1t Would Float
Summarizing his objections, Mr..
Holland states that, as designed, the
Goethals tunnel would float if it could
be built as shown upon the plan; that
its top would be even with the level of
the government improvement plane, and
it would for that reason be unsafe;
that it would give no increased traffic
capacity for its unprecedented diam
etcr," and that the proposal to build
such diameter tunnel of untried ma
terials abandons all experience in tun-
mel building, and concludes:
at is useless to discuss seriously
the details of the cost of q structure
that experience shows cannot be built,
but the errors shown in the estimate
of cost of the proposed structure point
to no possible economy in the kind OF
construction proposed"