New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-10-17
PARK BOARD STILL IN THE WAY
RAPID TRANSIT COMMISSIONERS WANT
A CONSENT WITHOUT CONDITIONS.
THE BATTERY PARK QUESTION HOWEVER HAS
NO BEARING on THE PLAN FOR UNDER
GROUND ROADS NORTH OF THE CITY
HALL. AND IS NOT BEFORE TIL.
COURT COMMISSION

In the opinion OF the Rapid Transit Commission
ers tho Park Commission II still obstacle IN the
way of carrying out the plans for underground
roads in spite of the Park Commissioners changed
attitude in reference to Battery Park II Is Tort
innate how ever that this obstacle even II II re-
mains viii not Interfere with the genera sch"he
Of randi transit from the City Hall northward
As a matter Of fact, the proceedings before the
Court Commission. nov drawing to a close nave
nothing to do with the proposed construction unuer
lower broadway and beneath Battery PARK. lhS
part OF the Rapid Transit Commissioners schemA
Is distinc: from the main plan ana though they
deem It essential to a complete underground syS-
,c-, and also believe that it will he easier to secure
bidder for the franchise If the underground road'
run the full length OF the island they VIII pro'ePa
with the work above the City Hall as rapidly as
possible without reference TO the souheriy sec'ion'
The situation was thus explained TO representa-
tive OF The Tribune by President Orr on Thursday'
The Park Commissioners have changed their po-
sition TO some extent. but still they have not given
such a consent to the proposed underground con-
strucion as IS required by law. what we must
have Is a n unqualified consent They say they are
Willing TO permit the road TO he built under Battery
Par: on condition that the detailed plans are SUD-
rI,,ed to them ard have their approval The Law
SAYS however that we must obtain consent 10 the
general plan before We are permitted 10 make the
detailed plans That is the position taken by our
counsel and also by the Corporation counsel "i''
consulted ny the ldih NpuiH'HEi'i'''' 49,
can sec how impossible It Is for US to accept such
a consent a. this by supposng that each OF the
proporty-owners along Broadway should give MS
consent to the building Of our road only on certain
conditions one man would want TINS. ana ahother
would want that. and as each one would nave "
pass the detailed plans, progress Woui" DE III
most impossible
1T is the desire of the RAPID Transit Commis-
sioncrs to construct the road under Battery fark
with the least possible injury to the trees ana grass
and the Park Commissioners have our asSu'a'oe
to that effect As the details OF the plans they
must trust US We have offered TO do everything
I'm our power 10 protect Battery Park, ana lnr
route we have agreed will really inJure ie".i
tres than the rol te suggested b. their engineer
II Is possible that we may nave 10 IesII' ~
court commission in reference to the work below
the City Hall. as have been competed 10 90
above but hope this will not be the case Inc
property-owncrs have potltioned Tor me pu'iulns
~ The rond under lower broadway. and we nave
reason believe that wnen thrr consents tus
this part of the underground project Is not before
the present Court Commission at a because the
proceedings before the Court commission were ap-
more day would be required for the taking Of testi
monV and that the summing up OF couhseI "ouiu
not w srs are u very hopSfi he said of favorable
report bv the commission and OF IT'S confirmation
by the Appellate Division. TO which IL VIII pc pe
sSntcd II tho decision Is in our favor. We shall be
ready to advertise for bidder and to award the
hack I'm the sane position In which We're after
the report OF thu previous court 'ommiSs9n was
would not be defeated In that case. but we shoud
have ia max" another start We nope. however,
,hot tho decision VIII be in our favor TINS time:
We have met every point that has been raised
against us
Mir Ogden one Of the counsel Of the Rapid
Transit Commission. said that the position or the
"a ri, Commission he'd not been materially altered
by It's last action I'm reference 10 Battery Park III
Ind first refused give its consent without seeing
Tho detailed plans for the underground ROAD, ana
then II had agreed To give It's consent on condition
that the detailed plans when made should be SUP,
mitt.d r. and approved 10y IT. Mr. ogden declared
that an unconditional consent was required by law
and that the Rapid Transit Commissioners had TO
secure such a consent before the detall"d pans
could bc prepared. The Common Council ndd gwen
il consent and tn. Park commissioners mad been
asked for theirs and when these had been secured
the propo owners consent would he sought on
the question whether it would be necessary 10
amply for another court COmln sion ne would ek-
Dr,.s no opinion As to the proceedings before the
prcseut Commission of that kind, he expected that
they would be completed in time for the Kappa
Transit Commission to make a contract Tor the
building and operation OF the road before the close
of the year =, ~
Park Commissioner Crugcr. who was also seen.
denied that tho Park Commissioners were acting
ns obstructiOnlsts to the rapid transit scheme
1.-THE Corporation Counsel was rather non-comrnit-
tai in his opinion on the law said he, and We
thought we were doing what the Rapid transit
commissioners wanted while at the same time we
were projecting the interests Of the parks by con-
sentng to the construction of their road on condl.
ton that we have opportunity to examine ana
approve the detailed plans when they are made. !
am SURPRISED TO learn that they are not satisfied
with our action In the matter.