The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1910-08-07
HIS OBJECTIONS TO
V|ADUCT PROPOSAL
r. P. M'NALLY GOES INTO
Details
CALLS IT OUTRAGEOUS
CALLS IT OUTRAGEOUS
Believes City should Go Ahead and
Build yiaduct and Charge 1t
Up to Auditing Prop
erty Owners

To the Editor of The Age Herald:
The discussion of the viaduct prop
osition which the railroads have made
to the city is of such vital Importance
to the citizens that, with your public
spirit and kindly permission, will sub
NIT the following on the subJectr
In the first place 1 wish to say that.
in my opinion, it is one of the nerv:cst
propositions that has ever been made
to intelligent human beings If not
that, 1t is huge bluff. and If not the
latter, then it ia a joke. 1t seems
to be too frivolous to be treated sert-
ously, and too serious to be treated
frivolously. There should be no meet
ing next Thursday evening to treat on
the terms offered the city by the rail-
roads. 1t should be called off. If
they had asked for the city hall the
people would be less astounded. 1t
may be cheaper because 1t may be worth
less than the terms the railroads pro-
pose. There is no proposition to make,
except to build the yiaduct in the way
the city desires and as expeditiously
as possible.
They propose to construct a 60-foot
viaduct, either at Twenty-eighth street
or on First avenue at the option of the
city.
Why should this not be an 80 foot
viaduct, and at both places mentioned?
The railroads have created dangerous
crossings at Twenty Twenty
m, TIT,
have closed up everything from Tween
ty-fourth ito Thirty second streets ana
then some more out toward Avondale
ad infinitum. As matter of fact they
have been occupying these streets for
years without paying the city one cent
for the use of them. Some of these
roads have been using them for more
than 20 years. 1t is good thing
for the city that the statute of limi-
tations does not run against 1t as to
it's streets.
Taking the matter up seriatim, here
is what they propose to do:
1. The railroads to construct at their
own expense the structure between ap-
proaches and maintain same except
sidewalks and roadway. Every humble
property owner must If the city so
directs, maintain the sidewalk and road
in front of his premises. Then Is the
rule to be different as to these rich
and powerful corporations? Is tn cir
duty to the public less? They get and
have gotten franchises from Birming-
ham and Jefferson county worth to
them hundreds of thousands of dollars,
some of them absolutely free of charge
and otheres for nominal sums; some
of them had land grants of every 9TH
er section within certain distance
from their rights of way, and others
were aided magniicently in a financial
way by the state of Alabama.
When improvements are made on streets
they are charged against the abutting
and intersecting property. OF course the
property owners pay for it. No citizen
would have the quintescent presumption
to propose that the city maintain his
sidewalks or road. Mind you, they have
designs upon the word maintain" not
repair This is fine word jugglery.
Secondly, 1.-The city to construct and
maintain the approaches" Here again
hobs up the question, like Banquo's ghost,
why should the city do this? Who has
created the dangerous conditions which
necessitates the building at all of VIA
duct? If the railroads will remove the
cause of the trouble--their tracks-from
the streets and avenues, there will be
no necessity for viaducts, or for ap-
proaches or the maintenance of same. In
other words, is this not taking advan-
tage of their own wrong in squatting
upon the public streets and avenues of
the city, creating nuisance at these
places by making the crossings danger
GUS, monopolizing to their exclusive use
the public domain, and then telling the
city to make 1t safer for them by con-
structing viaduct, and to then give them
all the streets and avenues they have
been enjoying unmolested these many
years, because one good turn from the
city deserves another-from the city.
Secondly, o. "And assume the damage
to all abutting property other than that
of the railroads" The railroads have
caused the necessity for abutting damage,
then why should they not shoulder it?
The city can eliminate all this talk of
viaduct by proceeding to improve First
avenue SO as to make 1t safe, and then
open all its streets and improve same
across to the Southside. Gates and safe
ty switches can be Installed, as at Twen-
ty-ninth street, the said improvements
charged against the abutting property
owners who are the railroads themselves.
This can be done with no expense to
the city, and the city owes 1t to the
citizens to do 1t at once. and regardless
of the viaduct proposition. If the rail-
roads will get off the city's streets there
will be no need of viaduct, or for any
one to assume abutting damage.
Secondly, (c) "And maintain the road
way and viaduct." Do they mean for
the city to maintain the roadway and
viaduct" of the approaches or that be-
tween the approaches which would be the
main structure? If the latter is meant
they have already agreed to do the re-
verse, as will be seen by reference to
their first paragraph above Tt Is indef-
mite as are other Of their p propositions
Secondly (d) IF Twenty-eighth street
is selected by the city, all streets and
alleys between the west line of Twenty
fifth street and the west line of Thirty
second street shall be closed and not
opened thereafter They do not use
the technical term ''vacating'' said
streets, but their language is just as
comprehensive. For all practical pur-
poses these streets are now closed but
the city has the right to pen them
thereafter" IT. these streets are va