Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1900-03-13
COST MOTHER CITIES
Proportion Paid for Abolition of
Grade Crossings.
REPORT TO NORTHEAST ASSOCIATION
Philadelphia Alone Paid Over
100000 for Results Secured.
OTHER BUSINESS MATTERS

At the regular monthly meeting of the
Northeast Washington Citizens Associa-
ton, which was held last evening with
President Evan Tucker in the chair and
Mr.. S. w Sowerbutts secretary, the
principal business transacted was the dis
cussion and adoption of a paper on the
steam railroad questions now under discus
sion by the public of Washington.
This paper, which was prepared by the
committee on railroads, of which Mr.. Wi
liam j. Frizzel1 is chairman, was addressed
to the association and is as follows:
Under date of February u last your COM
mittee on railroads submitted re-
port recommending among other things that
the division of costs for the proposed work
Of elevating the Baltimore and Ohio tracks
and abolishing grade crossings be left to the
discretion of Congress and the District Com
missioners This proposition has been ac-
quiesced in by several of our citizens as
sociationS directly interested and is op-
posed by only few persons who have no
community of interest in anything pertain
ing to the welfare of the whole city and
can See no farther than their own imme-
date neiShborhOods.
Your committee has staken the trouble
to inquire into the methods followed in
of abolishing grade crossings, and submit
a few examples, as follows:
by an ordinance of the city of Philadel-
phia, Pa, approved March 5. 1892, the city
appropriated $30Gn0 to abolish grade cross
ings on the Philadelphia and Trenton rail-
road at Comfy, Longshore, Washington and
Union streets. BY another ordinance, April
10, 1888. the city appropriated $4,000 to
aDollsh grade crossings on the Philadelphia
and Trenton railroad at Cottman street
and on the Princeton and Holmesburg rail-
road at HaSermaH street. BY another ordi-
nance. February >. 1897. the city appropri-
ated StD,0@ to change the grades of streets
and to abolish grade crossings from Nor
ris street to Butler street on the line of
the Philadelphia and Trenton railroad and
released the Pennsy' vania Railroad Com
pany, lessee of the Philadelphia and Tren-
ton railroad, from any liability for dam
ages on account of this work. BY another
ordinance. March 20 1897 the city appro-
prated S2JGgO to abolish grade crossings
on the Philadelphia and Trenton railroad at
Magee and Nankirk streets. By another
ordinance of the same date the city APP
propriated $1,000 to abolish grade crossings
on the Philadelphia and Trenton and
frankfort ard Holmesburg railroads at
Rhawn street.
In each of the above cases the mayor
was authorized to enter into bond on be-
half of the city for the payment of any
damage accruing to property by reason Of
change of grade or otherwise.
The Aggregate Amount.
You will from the above that the
city of Philadelphia by five separate ordi-
nances contributed S1O1O,GOO as its pro-
portion of the cost of aboishing grade
crossings in that city the line of one of
its smaller steam railroads.
I'VE find that the state of Connecticut has
a statute which provides that whenever
any city or town desires the elimination of
grade crossings such city or town shall
of the
crossing antedates the construction of the
railroad and - per cent if such crossing
has been laid since the construction of the
railroad. If a railroad desires to make any
such change it shall pay the whole eX-
pense thereof.
by special act of the Connecticut as
sembly the changes made necessary for
eliminating grade crossings by elevating
the tracks and constructing two additional
main tracks, etc, on the New York d-
vision of the Pennsylvania railroad the city
OF Bridseport was required to pay such
proportion of the cost should be deter
mined by agreement or by order of the rail-
road commissioners of the state.
In the same state the city of New Haven
paid One-haf of the cost of carrying the
steam railroad tracks over East Chapel
street.
by special act of the legislature of
Massachusetts providing for change of
grades, etc, on the Providence division of
the Pennsylvania railroad in the city of
Boston % per cent was paid by the rail-
road company and 45 per cent by the COM
monwealth, the city of Boston being re-
quired to refund to the state 80 per cent
of the whole cost.
For similar changes in Brockton. Mass,
including new stations. yards, tracks. etc,
the railroad company paid g per cent the
state p per cent and BrOckton 10 per cent
The law of the state of Massachusetts
now provides that, no matter from which
side an application is made to abolish grade
crossings, 60 per cent shall be paid by the
railroad cOmDaDV. - cent nv the at
and 10 per cent by the municipality
"A recent law of the state of New York
divides the costs of aboishing grade cross
ings as follows: Fifty per cant by the rail-
road company, % per cent by the state and
% per cent by the municipality.
I'm letter dated October 16, 1899, Mr.
William Jackson, city engineer of Boston,
states that in a special case involving an
expenditure of 81, 100000 the state and CITY
of Boston paid 40 per cent (of which the
city assumed 1873 per cent? and the railroad
company paid 53 per cent.
'In letter dated October It. 1899 Mr.
G. S. Webster. chief engineer of Philadel-
phia, states that in the construction of the
Pennsylvania avenue subway whereby six
teen grade crossings were abolished fnyoly-
| ing an expenditure of So, 900 600 the city
| paid one-half and the Philadelphia and
Reading Railway Company paid the other
one-haH.
1.-The foregoing are only a few of the
cases that have come to the knowledge of
your committee, and we content ourselves
Dy recltlnS tnem. we deem 1t too tedious
| TO go into details of similar cases. such as
Rochester and other cities in New York
and Pittsburg and other cities in Penn
sylvania, and especially in the case of the
Atchison. Topeka and Sante Fe railroad In
| St. Louis, Mo. where the conditions were
| nearly identical with ours on the Baltimore
and Ohio road.
Sole BENEFIT of Railway.
I'VE may be asked how much the city of
Baltimore, Md, contributed to the Balti-
| more and Ohio tunnel under said city. To
| the unbiased mind but one answer is neces-
sary. which is that no disadvantage was
suffered nor advantage gained by Baltimore
| in any Of the conditions OF changes, and
no equitable reason existed for the city to
pay toward accomplishing a shorter route
and saving in time for the great benefit of
the railroad company.
I'm several other cities under circum-
| stances similar to those that existed In Bal
| timore railroad companies have found 1t ad-
vantageous to themselves by shortening
| routes and saving time to do the whole
| work at their own expense.
I'm this city the jeopardy to life and limb
\ will be lessened, the loss of valuable time
I h-rI date avid nIctrr