Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

CONGRESS

EXTENSION OF T STREET NW.

DECEMBER 14, 1906.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

Mr. BABCOCK, from the Committee on the District of Columbia,

submitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 5971.)

The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 5971) authorizing the extension of T street (formerly W street) NW., report the same back to the House with the recommendation that it do pass when amended as follows:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:

That, under and in accordance with the provisions of sections four hundred and ninety-one a to four hundred and ninety-one n, both inclusive, of subchapter one of chapter fifteen of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, within thirty days after the passage of this act the Commissioners of the District of Columbia be, and they are hereby, authorized and directed to institute in the supreme court of the District of Columbia a proceeding in rem to condemn the land that may be necessary for the extension of T street from Thirty-fifth street to Wisconsin avenue, formerly High or Thirty-second street west, with a width of sixty feet.

SEC. 2. That assessment shall be made by the jury as benefits as contemplated in section four hundred and ninety-one g of the subchapter of the Code hereinbefore referred to: Provided, That the total amount found to be due and awarded as damages, plus the cost and expenses of the proceedings, shall be assessed by the said jury as benefits.

SEC. 3. That the sum of three hundred dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated, out of the revenues of the District of Columbia, to provide the necessary funds for the costs and expenses of the condemnation proceedings taken pursuant hereto, to be repaid to the District of Columbia from the assessment for benefits when the same are collected, and a sufficient sum to pay the amounts of all judgments and awards is hereby appropriated out of the revenues of the District of Columbia.

The amendment recommended by your committee in the nature of a substitute is for the purpose of bringing the proposed legislation in harmony with sections 491a to 491n of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, these sections regulating proceedings for the condemnation of lands for streets.

As this improvement is considered to be of advantage mainly to that immediate section of the city, provision has been made in section 2 of the substitute so that the property benefited will be assessed to cover the amount awarded as damages for land taken, as well as for the costs and expenses of the condemnation proceedings, which entire amount will be returned to the District revenues as it will be assessed as benefits, and the District of Columbia will ultimately bear no portion of the expense for this improvement.

This measure has the approval of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, as will be seen by the following letters: OFFICE COMMISSIONERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

Washington, March 13, 1906. DEAR SIR: The Commissioners have the honor to state in regard to H. R. 5971 of the present session, "Authorizing the extension of T street (formerly W street NW.," that upon further consideration subsequent to their report to your committee on that measure, they concluded that the proviso in the second section of the bill to exempt from assessment for benefits the uncondemned portion of any land from which a dedication shall have been made and the requirement in the first section for the dedication of 40 per cent of the land as a condition precedent to such condemnation are inadvisable, and accordingly recommend that they be eliminated for the reasons given in their letter to the Senate on Senate bill 2838, having the same title and object as the House bill under consideration. A copy of that letter and of the bill, amended as recommended, is herewith inclosed. Very respectfully,

HENRY B. F. MACFARLAND,
President of the Board of Commissioners

of the District of Columbia. Hon. J. W. BABCOCK, Clairman of Committee on the District of Columbia,

House of Representatives.

FEBRUARY 19, 1906. DEAR SIR: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia have the honor to submit the following on Senate 2838, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session, “Authorizing the extension of T street (formerly W street) northwest,” which you referred to them for report touching the merits of the bill and the propriety of its passage.

A blue print is inclosed showing in red the proposed extension.

The street which it is proposed to extend under the provisions of the bill is now known as T street in the subdivision of Burleith, and the proposed extension would be through squares 1297 and 1298 of Beatty and Hawkins addition to Georgetown. T street if extended westwardly from the city would be approximately on the same line as is proposed herein for this extension. The length of the extension is about 400 feet, and a portion of the way is now open over private property which is used by the public.

The bill proposes that proceedings shall not be instituted until after the dedication of 40 per cent of the land necessary for the extension. The Commissioners understand that it is proposed by those interested in the passage of the bill to secure the dedication of about one-half of the land necessary for the extension. If a valid dedication were secured of this amount, the estimated cost for condemning the balance of the land necessary, including the improvements thereon, would be $5,500.

The advantage to be gained in the extension of this street is that it will provide an outlet from Thirty-fifth street to the car line on Thirty-second, or High street, Georgetown. No such outlet exists at present as there is no east and west street between T street (formerly U street) and U street (formerly Madi. son street), a distance of 1,000 feet. Another reason for the extension is the probable extension of T street east of Rock Creek from Massachusetts avenue to Georgetown up the valley inmediately north of R street (formerly U street) and s street (formerly Linthicum place). A portion of the land necessary

for this extension has been dedicated, near Lovers' Lane, and such a highway as that proposed by the extension of T street is desirable for sewerage purposes as well as a line of travel.

A part of the proposed extension is about on grade and about $200 will probably cover the cost of all grading necessary. There are three old houses in the line of extension, but they are in a dilapidated condition, and it would be advantageous to this section of the District to have them removed.

Section 2 of the bill provides that the entire amount found as damages shall be assessed as benefits on the surrounding property, and contains a proviso that the remaining portion of any land from which a dedication has been made for the extension of the street shall be exempt from any assessment for benefits. The reason for inserting this proviso was to offer an inducement for the dedication of the 40 per cent provided for in the first section of the bill. The Commissioners are opposed to the principle of exempting land, from which dedications have been made for the extension of a street, from which benefits might accrue to said land from the extension as they believe that the amount of benefits derived might be in excess of the value of the land dedicated, and they further believe that the matter of assessment should be left entirely to the jury. They see no reason for requiring the dedication of 40 per cent of the land before instituting proceedings for the remainder, and if this provision is eliminated from the bill, which the Commissioners recommend, the provision for exemption would naturally go with it.

in the event that it is necessary to condemn the entire extension provided for in the bill the estimated cost is $9,500, and the bill provides that this entire amount shall be assessed on property benefited.

The Commissioners recommend favorable action on the bill if it is amended along the lines above indicated. Very respectfully,

HENRY B. F. MACFARLAND,
President of the Board of Commissioners

of the District of Columbia. Hon. J. H. GALLINGER, Chairman Committee on the District of Columbia,

United States Senate.

The provisions requiring a dedication of 40 per cent of the land required before the Commissioners are authorized to institute the proceedings, and exempting from assessment for benefits the remaining portion of any parcel of land from which a dedication has been made, which are referred to in the above letters from the Commissioners, have been eliminated in the substitute bill herewith reported by your committee.

O

CONGRESS

EXTENSION OF PROSPECT STREET NW.

DECEMBER 14, 1906.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

Mr. BABCOCK, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, sub

mitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 7039.)

The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7039) authorizing the extension of Prospect street NW., report the same back to the House with the recommendation that it do pass when amended as follows:

Strike out all after the enacting cluase and insert in lieu thereof the following:

That, under and in accordance with the provisions of sections four hundred and ninety-one a to four hundred and ninety-one n, both inclusive, of subchapter one of chapter fifteen of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, within sixty days after the passage of this act the Commissioners of the District of Columbia be, and they are hereby, authorized and directed to institute in the supreme court of the District of Columbia a proceeding in rem to condemn the land that may be necessary for the extension of Prospect street from Thirty-eighth street to the Canal road, with a width of sixty feet.

SEC. 2. That the assessments shall be made by the jury as benefits, as contemplated in section four hundred and ninety-one g of the subchapter of the Code hereinbefore referred to: Provided, That the total amount found to be due and awarded as damages, plus the cost and expenses of the proceedings, shall be assessed by the said jury as benefits.

SEC. 3. That the sum of six hundred dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated, out of the revenues of the District of Columbia, to provide the necessary funds for the costs and expenses of the condemnation proceedings taken pursuant hereto, to be repaid to the District of Columbia from the assessment for benefits when the same are collected, and a sufficient sum to pay the amounts of all judgments and awards is hereby appropriated out of the revenues of the District of Columbia.

The amendment recommended by your committee in the nature of a substitute is for the purpose of bringing the proposed legislation in harmony with sections 291a to 491n of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, these sections regulating proceedings for the condemnation of lands for streets.

As this improvement is considered to be of advantage mainly to that immediate section of the city, provision has been made in section

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »