The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-03-16
VIADUCT SCHEME
MEETS OPPOSITION
Property Holders Object 10 the Railway
Company's Project
MAKE AN APPEAL TO COUNCILS
They Say That che Viaduct As Now
Proposed Would Not Affect the De-
sired Result, and Would Block Up
the Avenue, Make the Crossing
More Dangerous and Damage
Property to a Large Extent-- Aid of
the Law May BE Invoked.

That the Traction company's viaduct
project will have serious obstacles to
surnount was evidenced by Mr.. Oil
ver's rresentation of the following
communication in common council last
night
Scranton, Pa. March IL, 1S9S.
To the Common and Select Councils of
the City of Scranton.
We, the undersigned property owners
on West Lackawanna avenue, between
Seventh and Ninth streets, hereby enter
our protest against the passage of the
! resolution granting the privilege to the
Scranton Railway company to construct
q viaduct on said avenue in accordance
with plans, etc, as furnished by the city
| engineer.
The contemplated Viaduct would not
give to the West Side the desired immun-
| ity from danger in crossing the Della
ware, Lackawanna and Western tracks,
| but on the contrary, would make the
| grade crossing even mere dangerous, as
| the overhead construction would obstruct
more or less the full view OF the Della
ware, Lackawanna and Western tracks
and approaching trains. Nor would 1t
| give to pedestrians or vehicles any other
means than the present to cross the Del
aware, Lackawanna and Western tracks,
the proposed viaduct being designed for
the railway company's use exclusively.
The congested condition of traffic on
| West Lackawanna avenue during the
| busy portion of the day is such that 1t is
apparent to all that II is impractical to
occupy any portion of the avenue without
interfering with the free use of same to q
| large extent, and at either end of the
viaduct If n dray is backed to the curb.
| it would completely obstruct the passage
of teams on that side of the avenue, SO
| that it would he possible to have both
| eli of oil nj hGt 1t
| time.
The construction of the viaduct as in
| dicated would damage and depreciate the
value of our property to the extent of at
| least one-half in value IL not more, and
| we should hold the city liable for such
| damage and enforce our claim by legal
process to the full extent of the law.
We feel that our rights should be pro-
| tected by the city instead of its being
necessary for us to protest against an
| invasion of same and may be invoke the
aid of the law to protect and keep intact
our property interests.
| We appeal to your fairness and ask only
| that justice be accorded us in the matter
referred to.
This is signed by the following. The
Hunt & Connell company, A. E. Hunt,
general manager; Ira Bennett & Co,
ltd, w. l.. Belts, manager; Porter
| Bros, James Matter Hess Bros, Con-
| rad Wenzel, Jones Brothers, Elias A.
Smith, Daniel Brenneman, Lansing &
Fuller, trustees, Scranton Iron Fence
and Manufacturing company, c. p.
| Matthews, president; Luther Keller
and Henry Schnell.
The communication was simply re-
ferred to the railways committee, which
has the viaduct matter now in hand.
There was no discussion, but after
the meeting West Side councilmen free
ly remarked that the viaduct ordinance
would not get the necessary number
of votes. Had it come up last night in
common council 1t would have assured
ly been killed, they said
What they want is n viaduct the full
width Of the street, accommodating
two wagon roads and sidewalks be-
sides the street car tracks.
They prefer going without bread at
all for the present to accepting half
loaf, even though the half-loaf comes
without cost.
They are confident that the full-width
viaduct must come soon and are con-
tent to wait for it,