The New York herald., 1868-06-09
THE WIDENING OF BROADWAY.
A Discussion of the Project by Property
Owners Immediately Interested.

4
A Discussion of the Project by Property
Owners immediately Interested.
| meeting OF the standing Committee on Street
Openings OF the Board of Common Council, to whom
| was referred several weeks ago the project OF
widening Broadway from Seventeenth street to
! Fifty-nnth street. was held yesterday afternoon
| at three O'Clock, In the Council Cham
ber for the purpose of hearing further argu-
ments pro and in reference to this proposition.
A number of the property owners on the line OF the
intended project were in attendance.
| Councilman Hart, Of the Twelfth ward presided.
| GEORGE W. PEL.L spoke as follows in reference to
| the proposition THE subject OF widening Broadway
has been fully discussed at previous meetings that
| purpose to submit the following points with
| out comment; Frst-The almost unanimous
| opposition OF property owners Cd the line
of the proposed widening. Second-The enor-
| nous assessment which such widening,
| II carried into effect, would entail upon such
| owners, not only without benefting them, but
| actually causing them a serious injury Third-The
bestowa Of property so taken from rightful owners
| upon future railroad corporators Fourth-3o dis
turbing the present ownership to render it almost
impossible to make the lots uniform they at
the present time. Fifth-The division of the property
by such widening into angles trianges and gore lots
| Slxth-Renderlng the property less valuable for
| business purposes by increasing the width Of the
| said street. Seventh-The disturbance Of the bus
of the street for perhaps many years to come,
| compelling it to seek other channels Of accom-
| mediation.
JOHN M. DoDD remarked that the streets were
already wide enough, and would pass thirteen thou
sand persons In three hours from the Park. without
going west OF Ninth or east Of Fourth avenue II was
safe to say that more space was needed. Any real
public improvement was for the benefit OF every one.
| This. however, was not an Improvement. Wide
| streets were never likely to be valuable for
business purposes East Broadway was once a
| business thoroughfare, but what is 1t now lot
| on Nassau street to day worth three lots on
| Broad street. below Exchange place. West Broad
| way was widened thirty years ago, and only about
| five hundred feet Of improvement was now visible
| on che broadened section. II wide street were
| valuable for business why did not the people find
this out for the BOwery and do something for tS 1t
had never been like some OF the narrower streets
drive was ruinous to the dry goods business on
the amount needed to keep the street as it
About one-third OF the island was already taken up
Mr.. smIEFFELIS stated that he owned sixty lots
above NInetieth street, three lots on the corner Of
nc street, ali Of Which wopI 'e he
affected by the proposed assessment The resolution
introduced by the President OF the Board was to
| widen Broadway $50 feet on the eaStery side from
| Union square to Fity-ninth street. 1t would GER
tanly be public convenience to widen this street
there, it also would to widen it from the Battery
| to Union square, 1t would also be public con-
venience to widen Nassau street and also many
| others; but business would thereby suffer- Spruce
street was once good business thoroughfare until
| 1t was widened from Nassau to Gold streets. Rail-
roads would soon be run along Fifth avenue, and in
| less than two years would be on Broadway.
Mr. ROMAN remarked that the opposition to this
project came only from those Immediately affected,
| and not from the merchant princes below Seven
teenth street. Church street had been selected for
the dry goods business because Of the dryness OF the
up town. after amassing fortunes there and were
seeking out wide thOroughfares. II railroads were
| to be placed on Broadway, and could not be pre-
vented the best plan would be to provide room for
| them. From Thirty fifth street up he was sure 1t
would not meet with 80 much opposition. Fifth ave-
nue. was now overcrowded, and II this widening
were effected 1t would draw Off much OF this surplus
travel. lie was sure that those afected would be
paid dollar for dollar the worth OF their property He
owned lots on the Boulevard FOrty-third and Church
n xepnoo ' e 10 e ee
poisoned by the breathngs OF an overcrOwded pOpu-
lace wide streets were therefore needed especially
| business purposes.
party Interested remarked that he had before
presented aremonstrance Of individuals above Thirty
| fifth street against this project
Mr.. ANDERSON claimed that the Common Council
had no power over this question according to a re-
| cent decision OF the Supreme Court
II. NJ. SHIEFFELIN said he was the owner OF go feet
fronting on Broadway, between Twenty-seventh and
Thirtieth Streets and objected to the widening OF
Broadway for the following reasOns:-It will diminish
its value for business purposes as has been found to
be the case in all very wide streets, witness BOwery
New Bowery, Canal street and West Broadway The
purposes kept back thirty after that Of the
| west side by the comparatively small space at the
end OF the City Hall Park and many will recoect
that the lamp post in the middle Of that space
used place of refuge to avoid being run over be-
fore the cars were stationed there.
| Mr. RICHMOND remarked that the widening pro-
| posed was asked for by those who were not owners
| OF property the line Business would be greatly
| jeopardzed by the proposed alteration. He owned
but one lot on Broadway, yet he did not consider 1t
necessary to destroy his neghbors property in order
seu sa with &
| ward and with the Park, and 1t required no other
Improvement to give citizens all the pleasure they
wanted OF driving out and to give all the accomm0-
daton needed for travelling northward.
remonstrance of parties on Broadway, represent
ing l369 feet on that street, was here presented.
A map was left for the consideration OF the COM
mittee, made by direction OF property owners Of
broadway, between Forty-ffth. and Ffty-eighth
in that section desired to have Broadway
wdened from fiity ninth to Forly-sixth street and
however, to make 1t one hundred and fifty feet wide.
| The proposition was to make Broadway parallel with
| Seventh avenue. The proposed width would be one
hundred and twenty-five feet. The distance from
Broadway to seventh avenue was ninety-three feet
In places and seventy feet in others. The object
| was to make square fronts on both Sides
| JOHN A. HAMMOND said that ninety-nine persons
ON n' the line Of Yf his PROPOSED mprcvemen We're in
| favor OF widening Broadway from Thrtyhfh to
Fiftyninth street. He had conversed with every
person he had met since the inception OF the project
and he had not met the first owner yet who opposed
1t. The opposition was confined to those who owned
The public neath demanded wide streets, though
this object might be effected without stagnating bust.
| ness. The question OF width had very little to do
with the trade Of street. Fifth avenue and Broad:
| way were what they were because the current OF
| wealth and fashion had struck them. II was the
travel Of the latter street which made IL what II was
| Cutting new avenues between the streets would not
| avail Then, instead OF having fifteen or twenty
| property owners, they would have five thousand.
| They would be nothing more than duplicates OF
Sixth and Eighth avenues and Of the others. Broad.
| way and Eighth avenue were the only streets that
went TO the central point OF the city. He remarked
that he, himself, did not own any property on tne
| line Of this project
| The committee here adjourned, not deeming II
necessary 10 hold another meeting on the subject.