The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-10-17

provement of North avenue by set
 ting back ti4e curbs of the unusually
 wide walks and thereby effecting a
 wider roadway, Zalmon GoodseIl. one | of the most active members of the
 tion, advanced suggestion that com pelled the close attention of the Com
 mon Council
 l He pointed out that North avenue
 which with Boston avenue, it's contin
 uation to the east, is a section of the
 old Kings Highway from New York
 to Boston, is the logical course for | automobile traffic passing through the
 city. To that end, he advocated | making the street 75 feet wide instead
 of 70, and 50 feet from curb to curb.
 North avenue is a part of the Kings Highway from New York to Boston.
 It enters from Fairfield just west of
 SAe Mountain Grove cemetery at
 Mocdy's Mill. The highway followed | the general line of North avenue
 through the north end of the city
 across through Old Mill Green and in | to the town of Stratford, on the line
 of what is now known as Boston ave- nue. Boston avenue is one of the
 widest highways in both Bridgeport | and Stratford, and it joins Barnum | avenue near the crest of a hill in | Stratford. The section is fast filling | with residences owing to the build
 ing boom caused by the recent re- markable influx of population in the l east end of Bridgeport and west end of Stratford
 He suggested that the towns of Stratford and Fairfield should be en- listed in the plan, and that by taking care, of a part of the work each year | if nnnId hp 1r7 | that there would be no necessity of bonding the city for the work, Then automobiles passing through Bridge port could follow the fine northern
 route and escape the congestion of the center and thus ameliorate traffic would pass over Boston avenue into Barnum avenue, Stratford and back of Black Rock into Fairfield.
 | The hearing on the petition of St. Patrick's parish brought out a large delegation of North End residents. ! Arrayed against the petitioner are the | .Olivet Congregational church, and the Calvary parish, and a number of res | ldents of the street Their principal l objection to the widening is that it i will entail the loss of shade trees | The opponents through Judge Carl | Foster, who represented half a doz- | en of the opposition, claimed that they | would be forced to lose Is trees on the | south side and IS on the north side of l the street.
 Attorney Hugh Lavery appearing | for the petitioner refuted this argu- | ment. He said the trees were not so | located that all would necessarily be | lost. Attorney Lavery contended that | the petitioner believing the improve
 ment would work such a benefit to | the North End had not deemed it nec- essary to agitate in it's favor and to that end had not gone to the ex- tremes of the opposition such as cir | culating petitions for general sigma ture. Had such a course been pursued said he, he could have submitted 2,500 signatures to the petition HeN said the opposition was only that which is l. always experienced when change for the whole good is proposed, and it comes from a very small proportion of | the whole number to be affected.
 There were three remonstrances, one from the Oliyet church congregation, one from the residents of the vicinity
 and one from the property owners. Attorney Lavery representing the petitioner said that the petitioner held 325 feet of property fronting on the thoroughfare it is proposed to widen.
 The petitioner seeks to have North ave-
 nue widened from Main street as far
 as Whitney avenue. The end of the proposed improvement is set at Whit ney avenue because this is the point from which there must be a change in grade when the New Haven road ele yates the tracks of the Berkshire di- vision thus eliminating the grade
 crossing in North avenue
 Attorney Lavery pointed out that no
 part of the private property Or fences
 of residents is to be disturbed; that
 the North Avenue proposition was
 merely. the same proposition as has
 been successfully dealt with in State
 ct frr Dor nkI kI1n
 thoroughfares. He mentioned the
 names of Dr. Budau. J. J. Scanlon
 and Mr. Connors as property owners
 who favored the project.
 MT. Goodsell detailed interestingly
 his idea of the proposed change. He
 said that from Park avenue, west, the
 street is 50 feet wide, and from Park
 avenue east it is 40 feet wide Go back
 into the early records, said he. They
 will show that the street should be 100 feet wide. The residents along the thoroughfare are "squatters', said he,
 and he added that his own family are
 among them. Even with a 75 foot
 highway. the property owners are getting F and one-half feet more than really belongs to them under the old layout. They have no cause to com plain he argued if they are asked to
 give up what doesn't belong to them.
 Judge Foster said that of the A owners of property, IT were opposed.
 He mentioned as opposed the Olivet church. G. A. Jamieson, George F. Dawson. William Tait, A. L. and F. c. Porter, Grace Caldicott, Thomas F. Burns, Mary F. Wheeler, Henry R. Parrott. o. H. Hall, Calvary Parish. Maria M. Best, Nellie P. Bassett, Han- nah J. Williams. Mary F. Whitney. Judge Foster said the opposition arose because there was no necessity shown for the work, that of the 2,0S3 feet of frontage involved in the proposed street changes owners of 1920 were op- posed; also that there would be loss of shade trees. He said that the resi- dents did not want the thorOughfare changed into an automobile route.
 He said St. Patricks church was a handsome edifice, but that there were other handsome buildings in the street, | the owners of which did not want the trees removed, but referred that part | of the beauty should be concealed. A ! number of property owners spoke along the same line.
 Attorney Lavery then said that the argument that North avenue was as wide as other thoroughfares was not convincing-that because State street l was narrow it isn't wise to keep North |