The San Francisco call., 1909-01-28
INDIA BASIN PLAN
BITTERLY OPPOSED
Enemies of Bill Make Poor
Showing Before Joint Com
mittee of Legislature
Imperative Need of Additional
Docking Facilities Shown
During Hearing
Especial Dispatch 10 The Call

lSpecidl Dispatch 10 The Call
CALL HEADQUARTERS, CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE BUILDING. sACRA-
MENTO, Jan. 27.-That San Francisco
mas imperative and immediate need of
additional dockage facilities in the
India basin;
That everybody except the owners
or the lands to be condemned favors
the Islais creek project;
Ihar the state may still hold title
to the 6S submerged blocks and that
condemnation proceedings may be un-
necessary, and
That steps may be taken, by extend
ing the seawall, to shut out from water
frontage the lots purchased from the
Fair estate by the Law brothers.
These were some of the interesting
ing OF the Islais creek project before
the joint committees on commerce and
labor of the two houses of the legis-
lature.
The hearing. which began at o'clock
and adjourned near midnight, devel-
oped considerable rancor on the part
OF the agents of the ship owners and
other opponents of the Islais creek
scheme.
Does San Francisco really need the
% blocks Of the Islais basin and can
the city secure good title to the land?
These were the questions to which SEN
ator Wright of San Diego. chairman of
the committee on commerce and navi-
cation, tried to hold the discussion.
But there was too much scrap" I'm the
air and the controversy ranged over a
wide field.
OPPONENTS OF BILLS
George McRae, Leonidas Scoofy, Wal
lace Bradford and Henry Munroe ap-
nc - cd .k,s~ -
other interests hostile to the Islais
creek project.
On behalf of the Islais creek asso-
citation and the Mission promotion as
ISOLATION appeared Matt Sullivan, Su-
pervisor George Center, James Rolph
Jr., Eustace Cullinan, Isidor Jacobs, c.
L. McEnerney, Frederick ]. Churchill
and William III. Ford.
G. L. McEnerney, consulting engineer
for the Mission promotion association.
outlined the Islais creek project by the
aid of maps and diagrams. He pointed
out the SO submerged blocks which it
is proposed to acquire for harbor de-
velopment and explained that the state
had parted with them in the early tide
land grants.
Senator Wright raised the point as to
whether the present private owners had
acquired title from the federal govern
ment or the state.
IF their title came from the state
he said, IT don't think their title is
good"
Wright brought out by questions that
the two and a half miles between the
Pacific Mail dock and Islais creek is
unavailable for development, because
the China basin is leased to the Santa
Fe and the rest of the front, with the
exception of the private docks at the
Union Iron works and the sugar re-
finery, is physically difficult of improve
ment in comparison with the Islais
creek basin.
NEEDS LAND NOW
How soon will San Francisco need
those 10 blocks that are in dispute?'
asked Wright.
Right now," answered McEnerney
THE harbor commissioners say that on
account of the loss of business that
will be caused by the Dumbarton cutoff
additional harbor front must be avail
able If the state is to hold it's own.
Eighty per cent of the city's business
can reach that part of the front more
easily than any other part"
McInerney explained that the 63
blocks were assessed for 600, or 1
cent per square foot. At a 10 per cent
valuation, he said. this would place
the present value at $46100
George Center declared that the city
could not compromise by leaving any
of the Islais land in private owner
ship. He argued that the great in
crease Of commerce due to the compile
tion of the Panama canal would make
the increased harbor facilities impera-
tive.
I'VE are sorry we have to condemn
| this land he said, but we have to-
Every organization in San Francisco
is in favor of the project. The only
opposition comes from those whose
land is to be condemned"
Senator Caminetti brought out the
fact that when the seawall is extended
the private wharves of the Union iron
works, the sugar refinery and the
Santa F'e would be shut out from water
frontage.
George McRae, during his speech, was
warned by the chairman not to cast
reflections upon the San Francisco legis-
lators. Captain G. w. Tibbets also
spoke. The closing argument for the
champions of the bill was made by
Matt Sullivan, who swept away every
objection to its passage in a mastery
| summary. The committees will meet
again to consider the arguments SUBJ
mitted to them.