AND SHIP NEWS Port Newark, through both the West Coast and Gulf services, approximates 11,000 tons. Handling 22,000,000 pounds of freight every week is no small item, but even this activity demands but a fraction of the acreage, track age, and dock space that is available at the Transmarine terminal. Even though the entire fleet of 32 ships be employed, as they undoubtedly will be within a few months, there will be ample space for the accommodation of many more ships whether they be employed for intercoastal, trans-atlantic, or South American trade. Nor does size matter, as the channel in Newark Bay has a uniform depth of 30 feet from the Kill van Kull to the ship channel at Port Newark. This channel depth was attained through a bond issue by the City of Newark, and it is maintained now by the army engineers under the maintenance program of the Rivers and Harbors Act. This channel is constantly being widened, and Newark Bay will permit the safe navigation of any ship drawing up to 28 feet of water. As it is, only vessels of the large passenger type that need more than this depth of water, it is readily seen that Port Newark can receive any cargo ship that decides to call. Plenty of Berthing Space Transmarine ships are averaging a little better than 90,000 nautical miles a month in the Gulf and Inter coastal services, transporting about 50,000 tons of freight to and from Port Newark every 30 days. The volume of tonnage is steadily increasing, and will probably reach the 75,000 ton mark by spring. If present ratios are to be used as a basis, it is safe to forecast a million tons of freight for Port Newark during 1924. In fact, such a figure, predicated on the business of the last six months, would be somewhat conservative. Vast Area Tributary to Transmarine Terminal Through the activities of the Transmarine Lines the name of Port Newark is looming larger to shippers, particularly in eastern half of the nation. Offices have been established in 14 cities of the Middle West, South, Southwest and Pacific Coast. It is a curious, yet easily explained phenomenon that a large quantity of freight from points as far west as the Mississippi River can be shipped cheaper to the Pacific Coast, via the Newark Gateway through a combination rail and water haul than over the all-rail route. The rate line of demarcation in some cases extends almost to continental divide. Saves Lighterage and Time The progress of the Transmarine Lines, particularly in the intercoastal service, is due principally to its direct access to the major rail lines entering the Port of New York area. It is possible here to intercept shipments 10 miles from the banks of the Hudson, where lighterage becomes a necessity, and divert these cars to Port Newark through the connecting medium of the Atlantic Port Railway. This terminal carrier, a sister company of the Transmarine Lines, taps the New Jersey Central, the Lehigh Valley and the Pennsylvania main feeders into the port. This advantage makes Port Newark the most direct avenue to the sea, and it enables shippers to save from 2 to 5 days in transit time, usually consumed in the operation of lightering across the Hudson to the steamship piers in Manhattan. Port Newark has taken its place in the world of marine activity, and the Transmarine Lines is proud to be the means of demonstrating to the world that Newark Bay is the most valuable arm of New York Harbor. Caustic General Observations Gradually steamship and terminal authorities are "seeing the light" and the eyes of many are focused beyond the west banks of the Hudson. The Port of New York Authority is fully aware of the senseless inefficiency of Manhattan, and even the railroads who are in a large measure responsible for their own plight, are awakening to the need of closer relationship of rail and ship. Their absorption of lighterage is merely reflected in the distribution of this waste in the operating expense, and indi-rectly in the freight rates. From a distinctly Missourian attitude the main lines have changed to a policy of helpfulness. And the impelling reason is not charity of heart-it is purely dollars and cents, and perhaps some common sense. A car arriving at Port Newark is discharged and returned to the railroad within 24 hours-a car floated across the Hudson is usually tied up for 10 days or two weeks, and need one compute what this expense is in a year? Port Newark is coming into its own, and that day is not so far away when the shores of Newark Bay will be teeming with marine traffic, and all the by-plays of com merce. Prince Line's Increased Service Furness, Withy & Co. announce that the schedule of the Prince Line to South America has been augmented by the new oil-burning steamers Castilian Prince, sailing on February 15th, Corsican Prince, March 15th, and Sardinian Prince, April 15th. These steamers will be placed in the direct River Plate trade and will sail on advertised dates direct to Montevideo and Buenos Aires. There will also be a direct monthly service to Rio de Janeiro and Santos on the following schedule: Direct to Santos, Chinese Prince, January 26th. Direct to Rio de Janeiro and Santos, Korean Prince, February 29th; Portuguese Prince, March 29th; and Manchurian Prince, April 29th. New Jersey's Increased Realty Values The five great counties of New Jersey that are nearest values of the entire 21 counties of New Jersey. These to Greater New York represent two-thirds of the ratable are: Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Passaic and Union, or a total of $2,709,915,846 out of a grand total of slightly more than four billion. The net increase in the ratable values of the 19 counties of New Jersey that showed an increase was $273,076,483.89. Middlesex County, in Central New Jersey, and but a few miles from Greater New York, has a value of $144,315,422, or an increase of $5,970,558 over the previous year-an increase of slightly over 4 percent. Two things are going to give impetus to the growth of Central New Jersey in the near future, to wit: 1. Electric rapid transit around Staten Island, with tunnel connection with the Borough of Brooklyn and Manhattan, and 2. The construction of a bridge connecting Tottenville with Perth Amboy. As Staten Island fills up its overflow will extend into Middlesex County, because Middlesex County then will be within easy commuting distance. of Manhattan. Seventy-five percent. of all of the ratable values of New Jersey are in the northern section, and those values exist because of the proximity of that section to the great metropolis. But Middlesex County is nearer to Greater New York than Sussex, the most northerly of counties, and more than five times greater in value; and Middlesex is about as near to Greater New York as is Passaic, although the value of the latter is more than twice that of Middlesex. "There is a reason" that we will discuss later. Gov. Smith Would Give Port Authority Control of Tunnels G Extract From Annual Message to the New York Legislature Delivered By OVERNOR SMITH'S recommendations to the New York Legislature in his 1924 annual message regarding the Port Authority are as follows: Besides enunciating the theory of co-ordinated and unified port development the Port Authority, being a body corporate and politic, also is intended to bring about a thoroughly modern method of financing public improvements without burden to the taxpayers of the state, maintaining the state's ownership and yet financing on the basis of economic value of the improvements themselves. This is accomplished by the authorization given the Port Authority to issue its own tax-exempt bonds against the improvements. Prior to 1922 there was no plan for the organization of the port facilities at New York. There was no agency with power to develop them and coordinate them in any systematic and progressive way. The Port Authority was given power in 1922 to carry out the comprehensive plan as rapidly "as economically practicable." Its power was confirmed and added to by the Congress of the United States in the same year. Obviously the first place to begin was the railways carries themselves. The comprehensive plan is essentially a plan for linking up the railway lines into one unified, co-ordinated system. The persistent efforts of the Port Authority, led by a chairman whose work in the public service is beyond estimate, and aided by its engineering and legal staff, elicited an array of facts and legal authorities to support the principles of the plan which overwhelmed the carriers and brought them to a realization that a policy of opposition, especially at this time, was as unwise as it was lacking in appreciation of the public duties they were required to perform. In consquence, in September last their policy became one of co-operation. It is a source of satisfaction, therefore, to inform you, as the Port Authority will report to you later in more detail, that the great plans for developing the Port of New York, for serving its nine million people and for serving the people of the nation are now well under way. Interstate Connections. While it is true that the Port Authority is an interstate agency and serves the whole state, the fact nevertheless remains that the City of New York has the largest interest in its operations, because of its tremendous waterfront property. We have recognized in the treaty with the State of New Jersey the right of the local authorities to consent to the taking of municipal property for any part of the port development plan. I am satisfied that no mistake would be made to allow the Board of Estimate and Apportionment in New York City by resolution to appoint at least two members of this state's three on that authority. Any consideration of the port plan involves the development of those connections between different parts of the port area which can best be accomplished by highways in the form of tunnels or bridges. Having progressed to an acceptance of the theory that port development is a co-ordination of all means of distribution for incoming and outgoing freight necessary to maintain life in the district, it is only part of the same process to reach a determination as to where connections facilitating such distribution should be nade and how constructed to fit into the general plan. Vehicular Tunnel's Progress Before the Port Authority was constituted the state undertook to build a vehicular tunnel under the Hudson and placed its construction in a specially created agency, the New York and New Jersey Bridge and Tunnel Commission. This tunnel is being financed in New York State out of current revenues and in New Jersey out of the proceeds of bond issue. The vehicular tunnel now under construction by the states of New York and New Jersey will, it is expected, be completed by 1926. By that time the demand for this highway under the river will be so great that it is the belief of the experts that its capacity will be saturated as soon as it is opened. Looking ahead, it is clear that new highway connections, linking up New York and New Jersey, must be planned and constructed. In my opinion this bi-state work is a logical and necessary part of the task committed to the Port Authority. This agency, created by the two states and confirmed by Congress, should plan, build and operate these connections. The revenue-producing capacities of these arteries should support their own financing, and the Port Authority is the agency both for ascertaining the economic proof and of securing the necessary funds with which to build them when the proof justifies. If the theory on which the Port Authority is based is sound, then here is the best possible demonstration of it. Transfer to Port Authority The present vehicular tunnel now under construction should, in its present state, be immediately turned over to the Port Authority by an amendment to the pact between the states of New York and New Jersey which permits the building of this particular tunnel. The Port Authority should raise the necessary funds to complete it by the issuance of Port Authority bonds, complete the construction and take over the operation of the tunnel for the two states. No further appropriation for this construction should be made out of current revenues in New York State. In New Jersey the funds appropriated have been derived from a bond issue which I understand is about exhausted, and I understand that, that financial problem could be met by further legislation in that state. As the tunnel cannot be operated for two years, future provision can be made for the return to the state's of money already invested. if that is deemed necessary or advisable. Future Tube Construction There is no excuse for turning over such valuable privileges as future tunnels to private corporations. These are highways. They should be under complete public control and supervision. Private capital should be satisfied with a reasonable reward for construction work and for lending its money to such a bi-state enterprise. But private bodies should not be left in control of tolls or rates or profits, nor be permitted to determine the location or character of the tunnels. This is part of the work of the Port Authority. In (Continued on Page 18) Port of New York Authority Reports on Bridges and Tunnels A In Communication to Governors of New York and New Jersey Port of SPECIAL report from the Port of New York Authority to the Governors of New York and New Jersey given to the press on December 27 by Governor Smith, embodies recommendations consequent upon public hearings for relief of traffic conditions between New York and New Jersey, by the construction of a bridge across the Hudson north of 125th Street, Manhattan, and "at least two additional vehicular tunnels"; and that preliminary engineering and traffic studies be promptly undertaken relating to these projects, in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. The report is adverse to the proposed bridge at 57th Street, and declares that five Hudson river crossings, each of not less than four lines of traffic should be completed by the year 1942. The full text of the report follows: December 21, 1923. To the Governor of the State of New York, To the Governor of the State of New Jersey, Sirs, Bridges The New Jersey Hudson River Bridge Association was adverse to the construction of either bridges or tunnels by the Port of New York Authority and specifically favored the construction of a bridge at 57th Street, Manhattan, by private enterprise. Three written statements were received prior to the hearing in favor of a bridge at 57th Street, Manhattan, and one in favor of a bridge at or near Canal Street, Manhattan. Two of the three favoring a bridge at 57th Street were in favor of one or more tunnels in addition to the one now building. One disapproved the building by the Hudson River Bridge Corporation would be suffiof any more tunnels, arguing that the bridge proposed cient for all purposes. A study of all the views presented reveals a large majority in favor of additional vehicular tunnels and opposed to any bridges below 170th Street. There was, however, substantial approval for a highway bridge at a location suggested about West 178th Street, Manhattan. When formulating the Comprehensive Plan for the re On August 7th, 1923, your Excellencies issued a joint organization of the terminal freight systems of this port statement in which you stated in part: "One of the results of the conference between the two Governors was that we favor the construction at the earliest possible moment of additional vehicular tunnels or bridges between the State of New York and the State of New Jersey, to be determined upon, constructed and financed by the Port Authority, and we stand ready to recommend to the Legislatures the passage of any additional legislation that will be helpful toward the accomplishment of this result." The Commissioners of the Port Authority and their technical staff were at that time actively engaged in preparation for the resumption of concurrent hearings with the Interstate Commerce Commission in an investigation relating to beginning the effectuation of the Comprehensive Plan, but proceeded to devote such time as was possible to preliminary studies of traffic conditions, present building costs and other material questions relating to transportation between the New York and New Jersey shores of the Hudson River as they might bear upon the question of the construction of tunnels or bridges and the most desirable locations therefor. On December 5th, after due notice had been given in the public press and by direct communication to the municipalities, trade bodies and transportation interests within the port district, a public hearing on this subject was held. Eighty persons attended, 48 organizations were rep resented and 40 presented written or oral statements relating to the subject. A list of the organizations and others who presented oral or written views is given in the appendix. The sentiment expressed at this hearing was, with one exception, that Inter-state vehicular tunnels or bridges should be built by the Port of New York Authority, and likewise, with one or two exceptions, was in favor of the construction of two or more vehicular tunnels, and for a bridge at some point north of West 125th Street, Manhattan. and for the future development of the port, the Commissioners of the Port Authority gave very careful consideration to the bridge proposed by the Hudson River Bridge Corporation for which it had a Federal Charter and which it proposed should be located at West 57th Street. The Commissioners were forced to conclude that the proposed bridge did not form an economic solution in relation to freight handling between New Jersey and Manhattan. Later on the Commissioners again had conferences with the projectors of this bridge and gave careful consideration to the proposals in relation to its facilities for highway traffic, for trunk line passenger trains and for rapid transit commuter service between New York and New Jersey. In September last the Commissioners were asked by the Board of Army Engineers on Rivers and Harbors, to whom an application had been made by the Hudson River Bridge Corporation for a permit to construct their proposed bridge at West 57th Street, to advise the Board of the Commissioners' opinion relating to this proposal The Commissioners again gave careful consideration to this matter in all its bearings as relating to the Comprehensive Plan, navigation of the river, railroad passenger and highway facilities, and were compelled to advise the Board of Army Engineers on Rivers and Harbors that in the Commission's opinion: "detailed plans and studies regarding approaches, requirements and methods of handling traffic, and concurrence with municipal officials, should be made and progressed to a much clearer and more definite state than has yet been done before final authority to construct such a bridge at that point is given." The solution of the problem of motor traffic both for trucks and passenger motors appeared to the Commissioners, especially as relating to Manhattan, to lie in decentralization and distribution rather than in concentrating many lines of traffic at one point. This principle, while especially applicable to vehicular traffic which had to use the city streets, was also ap AND SHIP NEWS plicable to the concentration of trunk line passenger traffic which would in itself involve a large amount of street traffic by taxicabs and motors to carry passengers to and from such a union passenger station. Some leading railway executives expressed the opinion that the establishment of a union passenger station there would create a new point of congestion which in a few years would be likely to require new methods of relief to be devised. Conferences with the North Jersey Rapid Transit Commission developed the fact that they did not believe that a bridge at 57th Street would satisfactorily solve their problems. The Committee on "The Plan of New York and Its Environs" of the Sage Foundation which, with an experienced and competent staff, has been devoting special study to traffic conditions and plans in the large metropolitan area covered in the purview of its work, presented a very important and thoughtful paper at the public hearing, giving forceful reasons why it opposed the construction of a bridge at 57th Street and equally important and logical reasons why it favored the construction of a bridge for vehicular traffic at about 178th Street, and it favored tunnels at points to be determined between the tunnel now under construction and its proposed location for a bridge. The studies of the staff of the Port Authority indicate that a bridge pouring fourteen to sixteen lanes of traffic into Manhattan at 57th Street would cause intolerable congestion of Manhattan's streets and that truck hauls resulting from the concentration of so many lines of traffic at one crossing of the river would be unduly long on both the New York and New Jersey sides. The testimony offered regarding bridges, and especially that of the Committee on Plan of New York and Its Environs of the Russell Sage Foundation indicates that a bridge north of 125th Street would serve a large amount of traffic between New Jersey, North Manhattan, Westchester, Bronx, Queens and New England territory. The Commissioners recommend that preliminary engineering and traffic studies and plans should be promptly undertaken relating to this project, with similar studies relating to tunnels, as these proposed methods of communication are necessarily related in considering the question of which would first to be most assuredly selfsupporting. Tunnels The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the two states and by Congress included two tunnels tentatively located, the northerly one about West 47th Street, Manhattan, the southerly one about Morris Street, Manhattan, one block north of the Battery; to be ultimately occupied by an automatic electric railray service originating at appropriate transfer yards with the several trunk lines in New Jersey, the Manhattan ends to be connected by north and south tunnels serving twelve inland union terminal stations which were tentatively located, after a careful study of existing traffic conditions and street capacities, so as to create zones in that portion of the city which would as nearly as possible equalize the number of pickups and deliveries in each zone, shorten truck-hauls, lessen congestion on the streets and economize trucking costs. The report accompanying the Comprehensive Plan also contained a suggestion for prompt relief, and stated: "Prompt relief can be obtained as part of the evolutionary process of bringing about the ultimate completion of the whole (automatic electric system), and this can be done without abruptly disorganizing the industries and services upon which the city necessarily depends and without the destruction of large invested capital." transfer platforms at New Jersey terminals between freight cars and motor trucks and for an improved ferry service (until tunnels could be made available) to inland union stations. Such inland union stations could and should be located and designed so as to be adaptable later on to the automatic electric or other complete underground system when the density and volume of traffic justifies the necessary expenditure for such an installation. Truck Delivery-Jersey City to Manhattan A similar but modified form of truck delivery between Jersey City and Manhattan to an inland terminal has been established and is in operation by one of the trunk line carriers and it has been testified to in a proceeding before the Interstate Commerce Commission that this has resulted in marked economies to the carriers and to the shippers and consignees. The saving in former costs. shown was from 80c to $1.60 per ton on the various classes of commodities to the railroad and a substantial amount per ton to consignees and shippers. These economies are effected not only in former direct costs but the method has tended to free the waterfront of a serious amount of congestion both on piers and on streets and the extension of this system is expected ultimately to save the carrier an additional large amount in rentals of city piers heretofore used for the delivery and receipt of freight and which are now entirely by-passed. This terminal is not a union station but serves only the one carrier and as that carrier operates its own ferries it provides facilities for prompt carriage of trucks, without ferry toll to the trucking company performing the service under contract with it. Most of the important carriers who rails terminate on the New Jersey side of the Hudson operate their own ferries and there is no reason why they could not institute similar service. It will be manifest, however, that the full benefit of this system of prompt relief can only be obtained for shippers, consignees and carriers alike by its becoming a standard service to union terminals properly zoned. The studies of the staff of the Port Authority indicate that the growth of the traffic would justify the completion of five river crossings, each of not less than four lines of traffic, by the year 1942, if it is to be assumed that by that time ferries would be abandoned. The question of the most important and desirable locations and specific designs can only be determined by careful borings and physical studies and co-operation with municipal authorities is relation to portals, street approaches, etc. Ventilation and Safeguards Against Fire Some doubt has been expressed as to the practicability of ventilating vehicular tunnels. This doubt, in the staff's opinion, is not justified as it believes that the tests for the Canal Street tunnel demonstrated that ventilation can be accomplished successfully. There has also been a doubt as to whether proper protection against fire could be had. With regard to the fire risk, it is believed that the provisions made by the Bridge and Tunnel Commissions to prevent the spread of fire are reasonably adequate, but could be improved by the insertion of water curtains at frequent intervals. The ventilation question and the fire risk can both, however, be minimized by mechanical transportation of vehicles through tunnels, which would keep carbon monoxide and other gases from motor exhauts out of the tunnel and lessen the fire risk. It is possible that the power for the small amount of ventilation needed, together with the power required for mechanical transmission would be no greater under this system than the power required for ventilation without it. This system would This method of prompt relief provided for suitable required for ventilation without it. AND SHIP NEWS also, if adopted, make practical the construction of a two-line tunnel instead of the two-line tunnels, and therefore tends toward better dispersion of traffic and cuts costs so that the immediate expenditures for relief would be materially lessened. If the ventilation and fire protection contemplated for the Canal Street tunnels prove to be inadequate, the investment in the tunnels is not lost, but additional monies would have to be expended to install mechanical transmission and to make certain interior changes in order to provide the requisite headroom for such mechanical transmission. With the rapid growth of the city's population and its consequent growth of business in necessary supplies, it is clear that the ferry service as now conducted cannot provide adequate transit on the river, at least without greatly increasing the waterfront occupancy on both sides for additional ferry slips, while one of the ends to be desired in the reorganization of port facilities is to free available river frontage as much as possible for coastwise and ocean steamships. It is difficult to determine the yearly increase in resident and transient population in the Port District, but it is known to be very large, and this growth necessarily increases the volume of products and commodities to be handled. It takes several years to construct tunnels under the river, and the Commissioners recommend that preliminary engineering and traffic studies and plans for at least two additional vehicular tunnels should be promptly undertaken. Since your Excellencies issued your statement of August 7th, there has been neither the time nor the means at the disposal of the Port Authority to carry the matter forward in such detail, although much information has been assembled. If the Legislatures should determine that this work should be done by the Port of New York Authority the engineering and traffic studies and negotiations with Municipal authorities necessary to reach final determinations would require additions to the present technical staff and special appropriations. Whatever necessary sum might be appropriated by the Legislatures of the two States for this special work could properly be returned to the respective States with simple interest when financing for the construction of the tunnels has been arranged for. Respectfully submitted, EUGENIUS H. OUTERBRIDGE, Ratified and approved: DE WITT VAN BUSKIRK, LEWIS H. POUNDS, JOHN F. GALVIN, JULIAN A. GREGORY, Commissioners. Chairman. LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHERS PRESENTING Organization. Russell Sage Foundation (Plan of New York N. Y. Chapter Am. Ass'n of Engrs. Transit Commission... Central Mercantile Ass'n.. United Real Estate Owners Ass'n. Jersey City Chamber of Commerce. Speaker. Thomas Adams West Harlem Business Men's Ass'n. Statements Samuel Rea, Pres. Penn. R. R. Co. A. H. Smith, Pres. N. Y. Central R. R. Alex Cumming Robert J. Egar .J. Raymond Tiffany .H. Prescott Beach D. L. Turner, Con. Eng'r., Transit Commission. J. Spencer Smith, Pres. N. J. Board of Commerce & Navigation. N. Y. Butchers' Dressed Beef Co. Harlem Board of Commerce. The Barrett Company. Committee on the Plan of N. Y. and Its Environs. S. Wood McClave. City Club of New York. Governor Smith Would Give Port Authority (Continued from Page 15) conjunction with Governor Silzer of New Jersey, I conferred with the Commissioners of the Port Authority last June and we both requested them to consider the subject and report to the Legislatures thereon. Fursuant to our request public hearings have been held and I will shortly transmit to you a report from the Port Authority dealing specially with this important subject. At its last session the Legislature gave the Bridge. and Tunnel Commission the duty of surveying the possiblities for constructing a bridge between Staten Island and New Jersey-another interstate connection. Probably a report on this will be presented to your honorable bodies and a request made for an appropriaI am opposed to continuing this method of financing such construction, and I believe and recommend that the results of that survey should be given to the Port Authority and the project consigned to them to carry out if the legislatures of both states decide to build the bridge. The New York and New Jersey Bridge and Tunnel Commission should be abolished. Future interstate connections in the port district should certainly be developed and financed by the Port Authority. This is in line with the methods of relief from burdensome taxation suggested earlier in my message. Water-Power Resources There is no doubt in my mind that we can find a similar way to develop the great water-power resources which are and should always remain the property of the people of this state. For years we have been unable to progress beyond the barest declaration of policy, which is that the state should perpetually own and develop these resources. As I have just D. L. Turner, Con. Engr.. pointed out, in discussing the Port Authority and vehicular tunnels, there is no need to burden taxpayers, either through the issuance of state bonds of by appropriations from current revenues, for huge obligations for improvements that in their very nature are revenue producing. Joseph E. Kean .C. E. Fuller |