Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1910-07-28
MUCH TALK ABOUT DEPOT
Committee and Prominent Citi.
zens Say City Needs New One.
Central Vermont People Claim That II
IL Good Enough and Much More
Modern Than the City Hall
and Some Other BuIIdings.

burlington and representative citizens or
Huntington met yesterday afternoon In
the county court room and discussed
with the state public service commission
and the representatives of the Central
Vermont railway, the Rutland railroad
and the Champlain Transportation com
pany the need of such station, the prac-
tibility OF erecting new station and com
PARSONS of the present station with
stations in other cities of equal size. The
hearing was continued to nine O'Clock
this morning.
AT the hearing. which was entirely In
formal. the Central Vermont railway was
represented by Its attorney, c. w Wit
tiers, the Rutland railroad by Attorney
r. w. Lawrence, the Champlain Trans
portation company by Attorney A. 6.
Whttemore and the bondholders OF the
Central Vermont railway by Attorney II
II. Powers. city Attorney Villas repre-
scented the petitioners of Burlington. All
Of tho members Of the public service com
mission were present with the exception
of tho clerk. X. W. Spear.
The local citizens examined yesterday
afternoon We're G. l.. Allen. ex-Gov. L.
a. Woodbury.. Henry Holt, G. s. Isham
and Mayor Burke. All of these gentle
men were emphatic in their statements
that the city needed new station: that
the present structure was inadeuuate:
that II was lacking in architectural lines.
that it was source of danger to the pub-
lie; that new union station should he
built below Battery street, near the foot
Of King street. and that the taxpayers Of
should vol tn
station.
The hearing was opened by Chairman
Redmond Of the public service commits
sion. when he read communication sub
mitted 10y the Central Vermont railway
which was a denial of the allegations
made in the petition to the commits SION
crs by the committee of H.
The railway company denied that the
s,ation, as It stands at present was built
In 1852, and that it was built for one road
only. II denied that cars were smaller
then than now and it admitted that some
shifting was done in the trainshed 1t
denied that there were more trains now
than Formerly, except the trains that
come in from the north on the Rutland
railroad and II was also denied that the
passenger 'ratfic had greatly increased
The communication stated that the pres
ent station would amply accommodate
four times the number of passengers that
now travel through it.
Coming along TO the matter OF archi-
lecture. the communication stated that
the city hall was erected before the rail-
way station and insisted that any unfav-
orable Impressions travellers might re-
n hn oil
surroundings at the station and the
streets that lead from the station to the
center Of the city. rather than from the
station itself. In this connection the
| paper laid special stress on the antiquity
ana poor accommodations afforded In the
city hall, as compared with the railway
| station.
The denial insisted that the present
station was modern. attractive and con-
venient, it having toilet rooms and other
modern conveniences. The company uro-
pose. however to make a new waiting
room 70: women, % by 10 feet a smoking
room for men. containing 200 square feet
place the heating plant on the west side
Of the tracks and erect sheds at both
| ends of the station so that passengers
entering and leaving cars outside the
train shed will be protected from the
| weather
r. W. Lawrence, representing the Rut-
| land railroad. said that since 19O the
| Rutland railroad had been running its
| trains through the present station as n
| tenant of the Central Vermont railway.
| At the time the Rutland Canadian road
was built the company proposed TO erect
| station facilities Of its own in this city
| but was refused this right by the courts
| The present status of the road as a ten
ant of the Central Vermont vas ostah-
lished by the State Supreme Court and
would continue so until such status was
| changed by the court
The Rutland road feels, he continued,
| that the Central Vermont railway has
more interest in new station because it
| owns the present facilities The Rutland
officials also feel that the present site
meets all the requirements of Burlington.
and that the Rutland road Is not In n
financial condition to help build new
station.
A. G. Whittenore. representing the
| amplain TRANSFORMATION company, said
| that the company did not feel that any
| order could he made to compel the COM
pany to build station. as the company
| already has a station of it's own. which
amply provides for all the business It
| handled.
THE WITNESSES.
| c. f.. Allen. the first witness examined
testified that the population of the city
in 1850 was 7,7l3, including that of South
Burlington. In 1895 the waiting room y,
the station was changed from the Yves,
to the east side Of the structure, and that
with that exception, the station was
practically the same as when FIRST erected
The witness stated that IN lq05 he mad,
$34 ! 25,663 We're expended in the purchase
ana sale Of goods and general business In
the city. He thought that the present
station was not large enough. that It wa,
too short, and was INADEQUATE in evc,N
way
Ex-Gov. l. A. Woodbury. testified thai
he was engaged in the lumber business OF
the lake front for 10 years and was wei
acquainted with the facilities OF tn,
present railroad station. He said tina. al
lines or business in the city had great,
Increased with the exception of the lumber
business. He said that he was on tn,
station Improvement committee In 1895
ana that. although the committee drew
the plans OF the improvements made a
'hat time, sucn as changing the waiting
room to the east side of tho station, 4
was not satisfied with the conditions ant
FELT that new station ought to be built
II took under consideration, however. thu