and use it for compacts now, those little foreign cars that you see all around, but it is not structurally in very good shape.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I understand that 100,000 cars were crossing this bridge each day when it was closed. Is that correct?

Mr. AIRIS. There were 100,000 cars in both directions, sir. I think I gave the figure at 50,000 cars for the bridge in the last week's testimony, and we checked that and the correct figure will be inserted in the record which I think will be 58,000 plus. Now, there are about 134,000 cars per day in both directions, with each bridge carrying approximately 67,000 cars daily.

Mr. MCMILLAN. If you do build a new bridge, how many lanes do you expect to recommend?

General DUKE. Four lanes.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Why not build it with eight lanes and solve this problem once and for all? Would it not be best to try to build a wide bridge now, than try to widen it later on?

General DUKE. The decision on the capacity of any bridge is a very serious decision to make, sir, because a bridge just by its nature does not lend itself to future expansion very readily. However, you have to take into consideration everything you know about the approaches to the bridge and the planning on both sides in order to accommodate. future plans for expansion as much as possible.

Now, based on what we know about the plans on the Virginia side, that is the expansion of the Shirley Highway, of course, and the connections there along the George Washington Parkway, it was just our thought that the four-lane bridge would serve. As additional insurance, six lanes could be put in-excuse me, sir.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Just a few years ago we widened Key Bridge and that's the reason I asked the question. It is quite expensive to widen a bridge after it has been built. I don't think there will be a need to widen this proposed bridge if we build it with the future in mind. Six or eight lanes now would cost much less than to widen the bridge later.

15 years

General DUKE. Sir, there is no question at all that if we built a four-lane bridge and then 5 or 10 years from now the highway planners considered it desirable to bring additional interstate lanes through this same corridor thereby requiring a widening of the existing approaches in some way, we would look kind of foolish. We have a solution to this extra requirement of Key Bridge, which I am sure the chairman is familiar with. We are thinking in terms of putting in even another bridge up there now.

Mr. MCMILLAN. How did you all manage to get the Bureau of Public Roads to designate that bridge for Interstate 95, coming through Washington? I thought that these interstate highways bypass every city in the country if they can.

General DUKE. I would have to yield on that, Mr. Chairman. I am personally not familiar with it.

Mr. AIRIS. Well, just off the top of my head, they have actually two bypasses, one is via the Anacostia Freeway, Route 295; and the other is the Beltway around the city, 495. So anyone who does not have business, particularly any commercial vehicles coming up from the South or coming down would go via one of those bypasses around Washington.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I think about nine-tenths of the trucks are using those bypasses.

Mr. AIRIS. Yes, sir; both the Anacostia-and I cannot remember the figure, but they are substantial, somewhere in the neighborhood of 40,000 or 50,000 vehicles per day, and also the Beltway is being used.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Mr. Chairman, that is about all the questions I want to ask, except that I want to be certain that we have enough information when we go on the floor of the House. If you remember when we had the legislation for the last two bridges we were able to get across the Potomac, we had quite a session in the House, with numerous questions about it and why did we not have a solid concrete floor across the Potomac or go under it. I think we had better get a good record.

However, as I understand, you think you may have authority to go ahead with it, without us, any direct authorization from Congress. Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. McMillan, the Commissioners are taking the position that no legislation is necessary, and that is one thing we are trying to determine here today, if possible.

Mr. MCMILLAN. If that is true, of course, we don't need all these questions.

Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Broyhill.

Mr. BROYHILL. Do you have on the charts and maps here something showing the location of your proposed new structure in relation to the existing structures, and in relation to the old 14th Street Bridge? General DUKE. Yes.

Mr. Broyhill, this is the Mall, that shows the proposed line of the new bridge, and it is almost in the same alinement as that of the old one. Mr. BROYHILL. That is what I wanted to find out. From all practical purposes, the approaches are in the same location, so if it was not a question of engineering problems and your alinement with the ice flow, the existing piers would be all right as far as the traffic flow is concerned?

Mr. AIRIS. Yes, sir.

General DUKE. The positioning of the piers, I suppose you would say, in upstream-downstream direction would be all right; yes, sir. Mr. BROYHILL. On the other question, and this may be an unfair and improper one at this time-you mentioned another bridge up around the Key Bridge, and I imagine you are referring to the Three Sisters; and in view of Mr. McMillan's questions about the possibility of making this eight lanes, is it too farfetched to even consider the possibility of that Route 66 traffic coming over that far and utilizing a wider or an additional span at 14th Street than down at the Three Sisters location?

I'll qualify that a little bit although there is a lot of feeling about it now.

General DUKE. I must say there is a lady sitting behind me right here who has been an advocate of this proposal for some while and she would be, I am sure, quite pleased to comment on that.

Yes, we have thought about this, Mr. Broyhill, and the basic idea that we have adopted is to handle or to accommodate the traffic by corridors, this being the corridor that comes up from the southwest, and the other corridor of Route 66 is the corridor that comes in from the west. The traffic plans for accommodating the traffic in those

two corridors do not contemplate connecting the 14th Street corridor with the Rosslyn or northern corridor at this time. There has been a suggestion made that the Jefferson Davis Highway which now connects, as you know, Rosslyn with the 14th Street corridor but not to the degree contemplated by the interstate standards, the suggestion has been made the Jefferson Davis Highway be built up to interstate standards and provide the cross connection that you just referred to. I am not in position at the moment to really give you any final judgment on that. I can only say that our studies to date have not concluded that it would be the best course to follow, for many reasons, but on the other hand I can say similarly that we are still studying it and that we have not reached the point of ruling this out.

This was one of the suggestions that was raised by the Policy Advisory Committee in the report that was rendered about a month ago, as you may recall.

Mr. BROYHILL. One other question and I will be through, Mr. Chairman. Mr. McMillan also referred to that repair on the Memorial Bridge and he also acknowledged that this was outside of your jurisdiction.

Would it help matters any if the District of Columbia Highway Department took over the maintenance of the highways and bridges that are now under the jurisdiction of the Park Service, with proper budget allowances so it could be better coordinated? The objection I have to the repair of Memorial Bridge is the fact that it has involved such an unreasonable delay. It has been seemingly a lack of recogni tion of the fact that there are vehicles moving back and forth here. Mr. MCMILLAN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BROYHILL. Yes, I yield.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I don't know how many millions of dollars have been spent on the approaches to the Lincoln Memorial and Roosevelt Bridges. However, it is much more difficult to get across Memorial Bridge now than it was before we spent those millions. I don't know why they have blocked off the highways to the Memorial Bridge unless someone desired to prevent traffic on U.S. 50 and Arlington Boulevard from using the Memorial Bridge. Of course that's not your responsibility. I think we should place all the highways and bridges under one authority, either you or the Highway Department.

Mr. BROYHILL. There are three jurisdictions involved in some of these connections. There is the District of Columbia government, the District of Columbia Highway Department, and the National Park Service, and that runs into complications, I would imagine, as far as maintenance and repairs are concerned.

General DUKE. I can only say, Mr. Broyhill, that this organizational arrangement has existed for some while and there has evolved a situation that has worked so far. So, when I say it poses difficulties, or when you ask, does it pose difficulties, you obviously have to compare it with another situation and with respect to any advice or any comment that I might render, or either the comment of the chairman or of Mr. Broyhill, I would ask indulgence on that. I think that any advice I would give on the spur of the moment might prove to be more newsworthy than practical, and therefore I would respectfully request that I not be

Mr. BROYHILL. You prefer to duck the question?

General DUKE. That is what I am saying.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Would you and Mr. Airis consider changing those plans to six or eight lanes

Mr. WHITENER. The bridge?

Mr. MCMILLAN. Yes, the new bridge.

General DUKE. From four to six lanes?

Mr. MCMILLAN. Six or eight lanes.

General DUKE. We have four lanes now contemplated on the new bridge.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Yes. I don't know that it would relieve traffic to any extent. I think you should have six or eight lanes.

General DUKE. Excuse me, sir.

On that score, too, I think I would ask your indulgence to let me render a written opinion on that. I am somewhat afraid to express a firm opinion on it at the moment.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I think it would do away with the bottleneck on the Virginia side and possibly on the District of Columbia side also if you had eight lanes coming into the District and going out.

General DUKE. We share with you entirely your concern over past experience which is one where, when you are building a bridge, even though you are convinced at the moment that it is going to handle the traffic for the next 20 years, experience turns out frequently to be that you should have done a little more. So, from that standpoint I would like to look into it a little more and give some advice on it later.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I would appreciate it if you would advise us if this proposal is advisable or would meet with your approval. General DUKE. I would be delighted to, sir.

Mr. WHITENER. General, and Mr. Airis, I believe that Mr. Garber, our counsel, has some questions on some engineering problems. If you don't mind answering him, we will let him proceed at this time. General DUKE. Yes, sir.

Mr. GARBER. Just a few questions here for the record, as the committee may be asked questions and they will need the answers on the House floor regarding the existing piers and piling of the old highway bridge.

In the letter that was placed in the record from the Forest Products Laboratory in Madison (p. 39), there is reported the findings on the condition of the piling. Was this examination conducted on each of the piers, or was it just under some of them?

Mr. AIRIS. Under one pier, sir.

Mr. GARBER. Under one pier?

Mr. AIRIS. Yes.

Mr. GARBER. Was that pier exposed, was the piling exposed below the concrete line?

Mr. AIRIS. Yes.

Mr. GARBER. How many of the piers have an exposure of the piling beneath the concrete cap?

Mr. AIRIS. My answer to the two-part question, the first part is, yes, sir; and the second one is, there are probably five.

Mr. GARBER. About five?

Mr. AIRIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. GARBER. In the report of the Laboratory it indicates a rather substantial loss of bending strength and estimates that at 30 or 40 percent.

Mr. AIRIS. That is correct.

Mr. GARBER. Now, we have a drawing here of 1903 which was furnished to the Engineer Commissioner at the time the old Highway Bridge was to be built. It shows the construction that was to be used in the piers. A sample pier has a dimension of 78 feet long and about 20 feet wide. Within that pier the drawing shows 150 pilings. Mr. AIRIS. That is my understanding, yes, sir.

Mr. GARBER. Is there a bending factor in massive piling of that sort?

Mr. AIRIS. Well, there is, yes; theoretically.

Well in the old days this was one of the common faults that they did not recognize in good design. I mentioned it in the testimony I gave last week, that in your structure there is always some lateral movement and with piling exposed, and with no batter piling. If you will notice in those plans, that there are no batter piling

Mr. GARBER. That is correct.

Mr. AIRIS. And with no batter piling and no possible way to take up the lateral thrust of your bridge which occurs because of settlement and various other reasons, the vertical piling then have to take whatever thrust there is. So the net result is that the vertical pile have to take some bending movement in them particularly, and this is where it gets critical, particularly when they become exposed, and the restraining effect of the soil has been taken away. These piles have been exposed in at least five places up to 4 and 5 feet.

Mr. GARBER. Now, what is the relative importance of the compaction strength as compared with bending?

Mr. AIRIS. Well, in an old bridge like that, I think it would be impossible to calculate it out exactly.

This is Mr. Sawyer. He will speak to you.

Mr. SAWYER. The bending stresses might be a little bit more severe. The strength in direct load is more important than that in bending. However, resistance to bending stresses is still of sufficient importance to justify our concern about the structural soundness of the timber pile system. In our analysis, we have assumed that resistance to compression has been impaired considerably.

Mr. AIRIS. I might add, your bending stresses would be the most critical, because of the deterioration of the outside of the piling themselves.

Mr. GARBER. Now, then, you mentioned a lateral movement. There has been some settlement at the abutment of the old bridge, has there not?

Mr. AIRIS. Yes, sir; there has.

Mr. GARBER. That is on both sides?

Mr. AIRIS. I think one side settled approximately six-tenths of a foot-do you bear me out-six-tenths of a foot, and the other piers and other abutments to a lesser extent

Mr. SAWYER. Eight-tenths of a foot at the north abutment. Mr. GARBER. Has there been any lateral movement of any of the piers?