Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-12-09
CITY EXTENSION MATTERS.
Come Into My Par!or," Said the
Spider to the Fly.

Come Into My Par!or,' Said the
Spider to the Fly.
Editor Morning NerS: In further illus
tration of the difficulties which have in
terfered with the opening OF streets in the
new extension, the land holders complain
oftbe arbitrary course pursued by the con-
trolling spirits of the Council Committee
on Extension, whether these spirits be
majority or minority of its membership.
Ihat arbitrary dictatorship has not only
been manifested in the plan of streets
adopted. but in the conduct OF the authOrI-
ties to Individual land and lot owners.
FOR instance, in the matter of
Bull street, it is gwen sharp
denection to the west of south, imme-
diately beyond Anderson street, so that
on the east side the Bull street front will
present slantiDg face, obstructIng the
view out southwark, and on the west side
we Will have to 90 20 feet into the street to
get view toward Forsyth Park. l am
very sure that the land owners do not
approve the jog, but the committee
JUSTIFIED their action on the score Of
economy. Now as every owner of the
western front OF Bull street also owns the
land In Whitaker street, and was pre-
pared to offset foot for loot of Whitaker
street land for whatever increase they
street in straight line, and as the city
will have to pay for so much
OF the Whitaker street land
as is not set off against such
requirement from the bed of what
is now the White Bluff road, | do not
see where so much economy has ben de-
Vel0ped as to compensate for the damage
to Bull street by the jog put IN it, Indeed.
pointed out to the Mayor some very Gu
ri in pt1II ctr
by the language of the ordinance.
Another complaint of the land owners
is as to the manner in which 1t was con-
jectured that some OF the streets would
be acquired for nothing. the City Sur
veyor, initiating the suavity of that ce!e-
brated and generOus-hearted spider that
invited the fly to come into his parlOr and
get silk frock for nothing, is ready to
furnish any land owner with map of his
lots as created by the street ways which
are to cut through it, so that he can sell
his lots by the true lines. Now, If
the land owner should not be sufficiently
familiar with the law affecting the dedi-
cation of land for the purposes Of street
ways. he might in his ignorance sell one
Of his lots by such map, and be told
| afterward that he could not expect CON-
pensation for land occupied by streets
where he bad dedicated the land to SUCH
owner would find himself without
remedy.
Far be it from me to intimate that one
whom l know to be so excellent a man
and competent and valuable an officer
would furnish such map with the pur-
pose OF thus trapping the ignorant and the
unwary, but il he or any officer has ever
warned land owner of the results OF
selling lot by such plat | have never
hoard
and justly complain that the city will
neither let the land owner lay
out the streets to good advant-
age by any plan of his own,
nor execute it's own plan in lawful and
proper manner, and the unfortunate land
owner is blockaded between the devil and
the deep sea, so that he is utterly power
less to remedy the wrongs inflicted on
him by arbitrary power and needless in
justice. Would any member of Council
submit to having his property thus tied up
for ten years, Jour of which we have al
ready suffered? | should say not. The
city should either let US have our
own streets or provide sGreets for us. Ana
lot owners further complain that the
course of the authorities has been tyran-
nical, browbeating in practice, and
directly in violation Of the constitution of
the State of Georgia, in the attempt of
said authorities to scare lot owners
out OF their rights. In recent
published interview Alderman O'Connor
states that $40 was expended
by the city in settling one of these cases,
and points to it as an instance of how
fairly the city really intends to do. The
facts of the case (Which take to be the
same one, as have never heard of anv
other J, as detailed to me, were that the
city authorizes made several attempts TO
scare the man by going out there and tell
ing him that he couldn't build on the part
OF his lot where he had intended building
but, finding that be didn't "scare," they
fell back TO the lawful ground OF compen-
sation.
IL seems never to have occurred to
council that each lot derives Its chief
value from its situation, convenience aud
dimensions as building lot; and when
Council violently destroys the whole or
any part of this value as building site,
1T reduces just so much of its area
to the simple value possessed by it
Tor gardening purposes, and renders the
city liable for the damage created by
such reduction of it's valuable usage for
building site TO the Insignificant condi-
ton and use OF mere garden spot In
Whole or In part. And | know many in
stances where such reduction is equiva-
lent to the practical destruction of the
entire usefulness of the lot for building
purposes. So that the lot owner IS not so
completely at the mercy of Council as
some members seem 10 imagine.
And the land owners also complain that
instead Of waiting the possible acquire.
men, Of some street ways BY the process
o; dedication heretofore outlined, and by
driving irregular bargains with separate
land owners, it would be more in harmony
with the law to appraise the street WAYS
by means OF competent boards legally Sc.
Iected; SO that justice may be done to all
alike.
The plan of settlement, in a financial
sense, will be treated of in another paper.
LOUIS A. FALLIGANT.