VARIOUS BILLS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISI TION OF LAND TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 1931 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 1 OF THE Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. W. Frank James (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, this hearing has been called upon H. R. 137, a bill authorizing appropriations to increase the flying-field area of Governors Island, N. Y. The bill reads as follows: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, a sum not exceeding $2,500,000 for the purpose of increasing the flying-field area of Governors Island, New York, by about seventy acres, more or less; and the Secretary of War is hereby authorized to expend such money, when appropriated, in such manner as may be necessary to accomplish this purpose. Mr. LaGuardia has another hearing to attend, so we will hear him first. STATEMENT OF HON. FIORELLO H. LaGUARDIA, REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the committee for giving me this opportunity to speak on H. R. 137. I have had this bill up before several Congresses awaiting this opportunity. As you all know, Governors Island is located just south of Manhattan. I will not go into the history of the island. You have had that before you in a very extensive hearing some time in 1926 or 1927, when the whole matter of Government property was taken up by the Senate committee as well as this committee; and at that time General Kahn testified before the Senate committee on the military view of Governors Island as such. The members of the committee are familiar with that. Governors Island is ideally situated for an air terminal. I want to make that distinction and make it clear between an airport and an air terminal. An airport has hangars and repair shops and is used for the purpose of keeping airplanes and repairing planes, fueling, and keeping personnel there. An air terminal would be used only for the purpose of landing, discharging passengers and mail, freight, and taking on passengers. 1 The CHAIRMAN. This bill has nothing to do with that distinction? Mr. LAGUARDIA. No. I am going into that in just a minute. In other words, an air terminal would be just like the Union Station here, where passengers come in and get on the trains, and then the trains go out from the yards and so on. I want to make that clear. I have not in mind any competition with any airport in and around New York. Now, the immediate matter before us is the enlargement of Governors Island. Governors Island now is practically made-up land. It was enlarged about 1906 or 1907. Am I right on that? General DE WITT. I think so. Mr. LAGUARDIA. I take it that it would be useful to the committee, Mr. Chairman, to have these photographs that I have here of the island. The CHAIRMAN. They filled in around that island in 1906, didn't they? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. Mr. WAINWRIGHT. They used material from the New York subways, didn't they? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. And they are stili building subways. The CHAIRMAN. You are going to start work on a subway across the middle of New York? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Oh, yes. We have in the course of construction about $400,000,000 worth of subways. I think two or three hundred million of that has been spent, and I think we have authorized about $350,000,000 more of subways. In fact, a part of the subway plan is the tube from Manhattan to Governors Island and from Governors Island underneath the island to Brooklyn. Mr. Chairman, if we could have these pictures put into the hearings, I think it would be very useful. It would not cost very much to reproduce them. If it does, I would like to get the photographs back. I got them from the Air Service. They will give you an idea of the island. This committee has authorized, and we have appropriated, and there are some new buildings that have been put up on this island. I think it is about here [indicating], about the middle of the island. Mr. WAINWRIGHT. On the filled-in part of the island or the original part? Mr. LAGUARDIA. On the original island. Fortunately, these buildings were originally planned and put there-and I want to say this without any reservation whatever; I assume full responsibility for saying it—because they wanted to clog up the island so that they could not use this natural place for what it seemed it was intended for many thousands of years before we thought of flying. But, anyhow, they had an elaborate program of scattering these buildings all over here. This committee saved that by drawing a dead line; and south of that dead line, of course, they can not put up any buildings. Mrs. KAHN. Åre there any buildings south of the dead line? Mr. LAGUARDIA. There were some shacks. Have the shacks been taken down ? General DE WITT. I think they are all down. Mrs. KAHN. The law says that they can build no permanent buildings south of the dead line? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. There are a few shacks, but they will all come down. Mr. LAGUARDIA. The immediate proposition here is the filling in of this island so as to broaden this point on both sides. I think we can extend it south. I am assuming that this is due north and due south. I may be a little off. Is it due north? General DE WITT. Approximately. Mr. LAGUARDIA. So that when I say "south" I mean that it is at this southern tip. It may be a little southeast. I have inserted the amount of $2,500,000. I don't know where I got that figure. The experts will have to talk upon that. There is a very elaborate statement that you received that I would like to have inserted in the record. It is a letter from the Chief of Engineers; the one of January, your last letter. The CHAIRMAN. I have one dated October 18, 1928, signed by General Ely, and one dated January 30, 1929, signed by Colonel Barden. Mr. LAGUARDIA. I think they ought to go into the record, with the accompanying map. (The letters referred to are as follows:) Hon. W. F. JAMES, HEADQUARTERS SECOND CORPS AREA, OFFICE OF THE CORPS AREA COMMANDER, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. JAMES: On the occasion of your visit here on September 27, you inquired as to whether or not it would be practicable to increase the size of Governors Island, and if so, where and how much and the probable cost. In reply I may say that it is entirely practicable from an engineering point of view to enlarge the island, as was done some years ago, by the construction of a riprap mound surmounted by a concrete sea wall and filling the inclosure thus formed. Any such enlargement, however, would encroach upon the harbor area of New York and, as indicated below, it is believed that no very great enlargement could be had without unreasonable interference with the navigable capacity of that area. Under the provisions of section 10 of the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899 (laws for the protection and preservation of the navigable waters of the United States) no work of this character could be undertaken without the approval of the plans therefor by the Chief of Engineers and the Secretary of War. If a bill were introduced for enlargement under a special act of Congress such bill would, in the usual course, be referred to those authorities for report. In either case the matter would, following the usual procedure, be referred to the district engineer at New York for investigation. In a case of such im. portance, a public hearing would undoubtedly be held at which all persons, especially navigation interests, would be given an opportunity to be heard. The data thus obtained would be given careful consideration and the report would necessarily be largely influenced thereby. I have consulted the district engineer and he has indicated on the accom. panying Coast Survey Charts No. 369, the only extension which, based upon present information, he feels could be permitted without unreasonable obstruction to the navigable capacity of the adjacent portions of the harbor of New York. It will be noted that the enlargement is solely on the south and southeast sides. Any further enlargement in these directions would encroach on the 1,200-foot authorized Buttermilk Channel between Governors Island and the Brooklyn shore or on the connecting channel south of the island between the anchorage (or main) channel of the upper bay and the Buttermilk Channel. He does not consider that any extension on the west (northwest) side should be authorized. While there are at present shoal areas of limited extent adjacent to that side of the island he believes that with the increase in the num ber and size of the large trans-Atlantic steamers, and the increase in both trans-Atlantic and coastwise traffic from year to year, the congestion in this locality, which is at the junction of the Hudson River, Diamond Reef, and Anchorage Channels, will increase and that not only should no enlargement of the island be permitted at that locality, but that it may be eventually necessary to widen the waterway there by the removal of these shoal areas. The division engineer of the northeast division concurs in the views of the district engineer. The enlargement on the south and southeast sides indicated as being apparently unobjectionable from the standpoint of navigation would amount to about 70 acres and would probably cost in the neighborhood of $2,500,000 or about $35,000 per acre. Very truly yours, H. E. ELY, Major General, United States Army. MY DEAR MR. JAMES: In accordance with our conversation and your verbal request of yesterday, I inclose a copy of a letter to you from General Ely of October 18, 1928, concerning a possible addition to Governors Island and submit the following additional information as to the method of making the enlargement should this be authorized. The method of construction proposed would be similar to that used in the previous enlargement of the island in 1901 to 1912. The inclosure would be formed by a riprap mound built up to about the elevation of mean low water and topped by a concrete wall to elevation 10.5 feet. A gap would be left in the inclosure to admit of bringing in scows with material for the fill which would be dumped therefrom. Much of this fill would probably have to be rehandled, probably by a pipe-line dredge, to build it up to grade, and some material would have to be pumped in from outside after the gap in the wall was closed. In the former work some fill was handled over the wall from barges by derricks to cars and hauled to place. After the fill was completed approximately to grade a top dressing would be added. Much of the stone for the riprap base could probably be secured from New York City excavations, particularly if extensive subway construction was in progress at the time the work was done. Material for fill brought in by dump scows might be from city excavations or other sources. It is possible that the most economical and desirable plan of filling would be to use materail dredged by seagoing dredges in the improvement of waterways in this vicinity, this material to be dumped adjacent to the inclosure and rehandled therein by pipeline dredges. The estimate of approximately two and a half million dollars was based on the use of the cheapest suitable material for filling that could be secured. Should the work be authorized it is believed that a large part of it could advantageously be done by contract or contracts. I am unable to make even an approximate estimate of the money value of such enlargement should it be made available for commercial or residential purposes. Based on the value of land available for such purposes at an equal distance from the lower end of Manhattan Island this value would evidently be very great. But unless the entire island were disposed of this addition would be comparatively inaccessible and this would undoubtedly affect its value. Referring to that part of General Ely's letter referring to the provisions of section 10 of the river and harbor act of March 3, 1899, which was based upon a memorandum submitted to him by me, I desire to state that upon further consideration it would appear that the provisions of this law would probably not apply to work done by the United States itself. It is, however, evident that the same care should be taken that the needs of navigation should be properly conserved and, in my opinion, the enlargement to the extent of about 70 acres as indicated on the map is the maximum that could probably be made without being objectionable from the standpoint of the interests of navigation. Very truly yours, W. J. BARDEN, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Engineer. Mr. LAGUARDIA. I do hope that this committee will give some consideration to this proposition. The land there is very valuable, and the filling in could be carried on at less cost now than at any future delayed time. We could take advantage of the subway construction, and I think there is plenty of material available to fill in. I am not going to get into the engineering aspect of that. You will have others talk about that. Some suggestion has been made, or would be made, perhaps, as to surveys. I am rather impatient for surveys. I think that if this committee would authorize the filling in, then I would be satisfied after we got the authority, to let the Committee on Appropriations appropriate for the first preliminary survey. Let us not take it up a little bit at a time. Let us authorize the project, and then we can get the first appropriation for a preliminary survey. But this thing will have to be done, and I think it is a very useful project, and should not be delayed any longer. I am sure we can justify it before the House. I do not anticipate any trouble getting it through the other body. After you start work, then it will be time enough to work out the details of just how this field would be used. But I do hope that the authorization for the project will identify it for the purpose that we have in mind. The CHAIRMAN. I think I know where you got that two million and a half. In the letter of October 18, 1928, General Ely states: The enlargement on the south and southeast sides indicated as being apparently unobjectionable from the standpoint of navigation would amount to about 70 acres and would probably cost in the neighborhood of two and a half million dollars or about $35,000 per acre. Mr. WAINWRIGHT. That is to the south of it? The CHAIRMAN. To the south and southeast. Mr. WAINWRIGHT. I would think that that would narrow up Buttermilk Channel. Mr. LAGUARDIA. I think that is increased. Mr. HILL. Is that used no was a flying field? Mr. LAGUARDIA. I have landed there. I landed there twice. Once we staged quite a demonstration there. I was charged with conspiring to put it there, but I didn't have anything to do with it. It was just about the time that they were telling us that there was not any room to land there. We landed a whole fleet there. It has since been chopped up quite a bit. But once we fill in, we will have four runways. It will be ideal. Mr. MCSWAIN. Is it your idea that it might be available for private aviators and commercial aviators that might stop there, or is it exclusively for military purposes? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Oh, no; it is for the public. Just a stopping point. If we had that landing field within five minutes of Manhattan, gentlemen, it would be utilized by people from all over the country. |