New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-07-05
SELECTIONS FROM THE MAIL.
THE WIDENING OF ANN.ST.


To the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir: I have read with great interest your edi'
torial on the widening Of Ann-st. am one OF
those people who believe that the more matter fs
agitated the sooner the public Will have correc'
conception Of the wisdom Of public improvements
Discussion always corrects errors. and / should
like small portion Of your space to correct the
errors into which the writer OF your article has
fallen.
In the first place. the city was not called upon 10
spend 100000 for the Ann-st widening. The esti'
mates Of the most expert real estate brokers IN the
neighborhood fix the total expenditure OF the Ann
st. widening proper at s25o0,coo OF this amount
the city was asked to pay onc-half or $1,000"
After this project had been discussed before the
Board Of Street Openings It seemed to be the de-
sire Of some people that the street should be ex-
tended TO Beekman-st. and Beekman-st. widened 10
the river. Those who advocated the widening OF
Ann-st were neither favorable to nor opposed TO
the widening of Beekman-st II the people along
Beekman-st. desired 1t. or II It were thought wise
by the public officials to widen that street. This
would have added another 100000 10 the cost OF the
Improvement. one-half OK which would nave peen
borne by the city.
Again the widening Of Ann-st. was not urged
upon the ground that It ever would be main ave-
nue. of traffic 1t was urged upon the ground solely
that II exists to-day, II can hardly be caned
street at all. except in name. In fact, those VINO
are opposed to the widening Of the street were the
people who owned property on the block between
william and Gold sts. where the street Is only
twenty-five feet wide. They were indeed. pleased 10
call the street an alley. and 1t U.s. in fact on that
block nothing but alley. What the people OF TINS
city have right to expect in all thoroughfares tha'
are designated streets Is that they shall be IN fact
streets and not alleys. When the Commissioners
who laid out the city north Of Foureenth-st. IN
ISL determined upon the plan for that portion OF
the city. they fixed upon the minimum width OF
even the residential street at sixty feet, and yet
here In the very heart of the lower downtown dis
trct Of New-York have a street emerging close 10
the City Hall Park at Its westerly end only forty
feet wide and at its easterly end, at Gold-st only
twenty-five feet wide
mere glance at the city map shows how de-
sirable street this could be made in fact If 1t was
Of proper width The people In favor or the WIDEN
ing of Ann-st. asked for a street OF UNIFORM
width Of seventy feet throughout Its entire length
They urged this plan upon the municipal authori'
ties and invited public support for 1t solely upon
the ground that 1t would be benefit to the public
at large as well as to the private interests that
were in favor Of It, How II be said that II Is
not of advantage to the public to widen this street
when your own article states that one OF the ad-
vantages to be derived from the widening would be
give better approaches and better light ana all
to buildings along the line? l submit that this Is
one of the most important Of all public duties.
We have reached a condition of things in the
history Of this city when great public improve
ments are being conducted for no other purpose
than to give better light and air TO surrounding
| properties The so-called Small Park act. under
which the city is now acquiring title TO DOCKS OF
ground IN various portions of the city. was passed
to give light and air TO neighborhoods. as well as
| 10 afford places Of recreation In the shape OF
| park to congested and thickly populated portions
of the city. II there were no other advantages 10
| be gained except this one 1t would be undoubtedly
of great interest TO the community at large to give
| "
are being erected and will be erected In the neal
future of the extra height which are now seeing
90 I'D in all directions in the lower part OF the city
| Of New-York
The public at large would have been greatly bene-
flied by the opening OF this street TO the projected
width because the property would have been I'M
proved by the erection Of modern buildings In the
neighborhood which is particularly suited for this
class Of structures. Take. for instance. the corner
| Of Ann and Nassau SITS. If this project hao Deei
approved, upon the three remaining unimproveo
corners there would have been erected within one
| year after the termination Of the improvement MOD
| srn ofiice buildings of a character suitable 10
locality so desirable as this particular heignp1I
huiId,nss. The increased tax valuation Of the new
street. with Its increased value by reason 81 1t:
Sereon as Wei as by the erection Of the building:
| themselves, would In few years nave feiinpui se'
'n Is not not this matter Of Vital poranGSs to The
P money ' the Erection Of such buildings benefit h'
! entire community? If not, then an PuDiio IN M
movements should cease, as II Is fact neEonu o.
controversy that private improvements VIII ony ~
made where the conditions exist warranIlns tnei u,
Cn q he said that such conditions actually exist II
| a narrow street ike Ann-st.? Ann-st, because o.
lis outlet near City Hall Square, has one OF me H'es
! locations in the city. and II II were Hlaue VI q
| nroner width would Immediately become cehtr'
| of building activity. IT wouId not uep,eco ny
| DroDertv in either Fulton or Beekman-st. On th'
| rrontrarv il would strengthen and support value
In both streets Ninety per cent OF all the ProP1t
| On the north side Of Futon-st. between Iark i'oH
ond C,old-st runs through to Ann-st., ana tne 81
feet Of having frontage on two good streets Wpu.,
ad biy TO the Improvement Of each OF thes'
| tbree blocks The widening itself pclhS, OH w
north side of Ann-st. the lots on thaI sloe muui,
| he improved according 10 MODERN luedS as 9ooi' a.
| The old buildings We're removed o,-o,o, ,,-.,
III Uou.aver as the matter has been postponed unti
the beginning Of the new year, am IN hopes VIA
tho naope who are now opposed 10 tne proiect NJ,
hecone convinced of their mistake before that nm
and ioin hands with those VINO are nov ia ru0 81
the puoiIc o'''0 ~ JOHN c. SHAW.
| New-York June 26. 1897 oo
| "a public work that Is to cost S2'5W'o~ gen
or.I,v costs So. 600 If the city paid half the
exnense would the Ann-st. property-o"hers pay
tho rest? We think not. They would pay
,ar. of the neighborhood assessment ana &c
! hack a good share of It in the price or thei
,ard while the rest would be paid by owners o.
land in Park Row, Nassau-st. and other places
which would not benefit a cents worth.--Eo)
UNITE TO BEAT TAMMANY
tn the Editor Of Tho Tribune.
TT Tail, II haf