Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

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 of this improvement.

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

Washington, January 9, 1906. DEAR SIR: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia have the honor to submit the following on H. R. 7039, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session, “Authorizing the extension of Prospect street NW.,” which you referred to them for examination and report:

A blueprint is inclosed showing in yellow the land proposed to be condemned for the extension of the street from Thirty-eighth street to the Canal road as provided in the bill.

The extension proposed is of present Prospect street from its terminus just west of Thirty-seventh street to the Canal road, and the object is to divert part of the traffic which now passes along M street and the Canal road to Prospect street, and thus relieve the congestion of traffic on M street in the vicinity of Aqueduct Bridge. The Commissioners believe that the extension of the street will divert a considerable proportion of light vehicular traffic, and thus relieve the congestion to some extent, and they also believe that the heavy vehicular traffic would prefer the lower route along M street, as the grade of the proposed extension, which is about 34 per cent continuously from Canal road to Thirty-sixth street, would be prohibitive except to light vehicles.

The extension, however, would be of considerable local benefit, and this fact is recognized in the bill, which proposes that the entire cost of the extension, estimated at $10,000, shall be assessed against the adjacent property.

The physical opening of the extended street, which would have to be provided for by subsequent appropriation, would be attended with considerable difficulty on account of the deep gulch which would have to be crossed at a spring branch along the line of the extension, and the cost of opening the street is estimated at $19,000.

This improvement is not recommended by the Commissioners at the present time on account of the number of other street improvements necessary which are considered of more importance.

The Commissioners recommend favorable action on the bill providing for the extension, however, which they believe will relieve somewhat the congestion of traffic on M street, though the heavy traffic on this street will not be sufficiently diverted until the proposed memorial bridge to Arlington and Fort Myer is provided for and constructed. Very respectfully,

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

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

House of Representatives. Your committee also incorporates as part of this report the following letter from the Georgetown Citizens' Association: GEORGETOWN CITIZENS' ASSOCIATION, OF GEORGETOWN, D. C.,

December 28, 1905. DEAR SIR: On December 13, 1905, there was introduced by Mr. Allen, of Maine, bill H. R. 7039, the same being for the extension of Prospect street from Thirty-eighth to its intersection with the Canal road.

The object of this extension is to relieve the dangerous and congested condition of the travel on the Canal road or M street extended at its intersection with the Aqueduct Bridge. In a very short time the Great Falls and Old Dominion Railroad will be in operation, and their cars shifting at this point, in connection with the egress and ingress of the cars of the Capital Traction Company, together with the travel across the Aqueduct Bridge to the Penn. sylvania Railroad station, will almost completely block the travel at this point. The before-mentioned extension of Prospect street is but a short distance, and while the bill calls for the power of condemnation the maps, surveys, and data furnished show that the extension of the said street is public property, but that the bill is introduced carrying with it the power of condemnation in case anyone should attempt to claim under adverse possession.

This extension has been urgently pressed by this association for several years, and is probably more urgently needed than the opening up or extension of any street in the District, and at the same time the cost of the same would be but a trifle. Would be pleased if you could press this bill for final action. Respectfully, yours,

GEO. W. KING, Vice-President. Hon. J. W. BABCOCK,

Chairman District House Committee.

[ocr errors][merged small]

CONGRESS,

OPENING OF FESSENDEN 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. 8435.]

The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 8435) for the opening of Fessenden street NW., District of Columbia, 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 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 opening of Fessenden, formerly Flint, street from Wisconsin avenue to River road, and also through the small undedicated parcel of land westward of and adjacent to said River road, with the uniform width of one hundred and twenty feet according to the permanent system of highway plans adopted in and for the District of Columbia.

SEC. 2. That 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. Tbat the sum of five 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 of this improvement.

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

Washington, January 5, 1906. DEAR SIR: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia have the honor to submit the following on H. R. 8435, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session, for the opening of the Fessenden street NW., District of Columbia,” which you referred to them for examination and report.

A map is inclosed showing in red the extension proposed in the bill, which is the opening of the street for a width of 90 feet, and also in blue lines the width of the street as laid down under the street-extension plans, which is 120 feet. The bill provides for the condemnation of the 90-foot width only and the establishment of building restriction lines on the 120-foot width, the object being that no building shall be built in the portion of the street within the restriction lines.

The Commissioners would state that under existing general law, when building restriction lines are established, all private property between these lines has to be condemned and paid for at its value at the time of taking, so that in order to have legally established building restriction lines it would be necessary to condemn the street entirely within these building restriction linesthat is, with a width of 120 feet, as laid down in the street-extension plans. A portion of Fessenden street has already been dedicated through American University Park, with a width of 120 feet.

The proposed extension is from Wisconsin avenue to River road, and the extension would be of considerable local importance, as it would provide a direct right of way from American University Park to the electric-car line on Wisconsin avenue, along a line of fairly easy grades. The estimated cost of the land is $7,500, and if an appropriation is subsequently made for the grading of the street $6,500 would be necessary for this purpose.

The bill provides that the entire cost of the extension shall be assessed as benefits on adjacent property, which, as the benefit is merely local, is a proper provision.

To bring the bill within the lines recommended by the Commissioners would require amending as follows:

Strike out the words " ninety" and "with a ” in line 12, page 1, and insert after the word “of” in said line the words “ one hundred and twenty."

Also strike out line 13, on page 1, and the word “street," in line 1 of page 2.

In order to bring the method of making payments within the prosent practice of making such payments, it will be necessary to amend section 7 of the bill by striking out all of the section after the word “land,” in line 13, page 5. and inserting in lieu thereof the following: " by the disbursing officer of the District of Columbia from moneys advanced to him by the Secretary of the Treasury upon requisitions of the Commissioners of said District, as provided by law; and a sufficient sum to pay the amounts of said judgments and awards is hereby appropriated, one half from the revenues of the District of Columbia and the other half out of any moneys in the United States Treasury not otherwise appropriated.”

The Commissioners recommend favorable consideration of the bill as amended, and copy of the bill, with amendments, is inclosed. Very respectfully,

HENRY L. WEST,
Acting President of the Board of Commissioners

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

House of Representatives.

[ocr errors]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »