Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1911-12-07


ment for the College street elimination
before the question Of the ownership Is
settled between the city and the Central
Vermont.
Attorney c. ". Writer'S would not state.
In reply to questions by X. l.. Brown.
just what the Central Vermont does claim
with respect to ownership of land west
of Battery street In the vicinity of col
lege street. Mr.. Writers did state however,
that if the Central Vermont plan was not
adopted, his company would raise every
available issue concerning ownership
that it had at its command
with respect to the division Of the ex-
pense for the Improvements proposed IN
the Central Vermont plan. the Central
Vermont attorneys stated that the two
roads should bear the expense evenly.
DETAILED IMPORTATION LACK
ING
Except in general way tive Cen
trail Vermont has not given any de-
tailed information before the coum1s-
sion of the expense Of the proposed
improvements. The figures given have
been, for the most part. lump sans
covering the work.
Acknowledgement Sargent stated
that he thought the commission was
entitled to a clear statement of just
where the Central Vermont stands
with regard to the expense.
According to the figures the Central
Vermont engineers, the city could ne
assessed. for elimination of grade
crossings, on about $4,000, exclusive
OF land damages. This assessment
could not be over 10 per cent if the
railroad was built after the streets
We're laid out and Il per cent. If the
streets were laid out after the railroad
was built. No assessment could be
made unless the railroad crosses a
public street.
And right here comes the PROPOSE
ton that the public service commits
sion is up against. Who owns COL
lege street below Battery street? II
II Is not a public highway the city and
State cannot be assessed for a portion
OF the expense made necessary by tle
elimination of that crossing. as pro-
posed in the Central Vermont plan.
The estimated cost of the elimina-
ton of the grade crossing at College
street under the Central Vermont plan
would be about 100000.
SWITCHING OPERATIONS EN-
planned.
John Burke, yard master for the
Rutland road had the stand for some
time at the morning session. lie ex.
planned in detail the operation Of
switching in the present RUTLAND
yards and the number of cars hand, i
zach day and the manner of handlin =,
them. His testimony for the most
| part was confined to details of switcn-
! ing operations ana the manner Of
! handling trains. The evidence tended
ito show, for tha most part, that the
/ changes proposed by the Central Yer
mont of the Rutland ward arrange
ments would make switching opeIa-
tons much more difficult for the Rut-
land.
These details were all pointed out
on large blueprint. showing the
yards as they exist at present. The
Central Vermont pam, showing the
proposed changes, was placed Just
above on the frame. Up to noon Yes
terday these two maps were all that
had been presented to the commission.
The Rutland Plaza had not been con-
sidered up To 10 o'clock.
These two plans were used by ;he Rut'
land attorneys to show the diffcultS
that would he experienced by the Rut-
/ land road If the Central Vermont plans
were adopted. as compared with the dit
( ficultios as they exist to-day. Mr. Burke
had the matter OF details of sWtchinl
operations wen in hand, and gave the
commission good idea of the method.
used In handling freight in the yards
| RUTLAND ROAD WOULD BE HAM
PERED.
The hearing was resumed at tive
o'clock. I'VE will now continue this tai,
of Woe" said Chairman Redmond.
The first witness called WAS $. +
Kramer, train master OF the RUTLAND
road. Mr. Kramer qualified as a railroa,
expert by stating that he had had .
years experience as railroad man. Thu
witness said he had studied the propose,
plan of the Central Vermont and did no
consider that the plan As proposed for iA
Rutland yard provided adequate facilitie
for handling trains. He said that it wOul,
be necessary to have much more tract
room than was proposed in the Contra
Vermont plan
Il a smaller plan was submitted by Attor
ney Lawrence, showing how the Rutlan,
/, considered the Central Vermont pla
would have to be modified in respect T.
, the Rutland yards. This small plan con
tanned layout of the tracks that wou
be needed south of the present draw
bridge and extending to Lakeside cross
e ing. Mr.. Kramcr's testimony related al
most entirely to the details of switchin
| in the Rutland yard,
I MIR. Kramer said # would hc iinposshl
1 to compensate the Rutland road for In
, loss of the north-end of it's yard. con
o corning the COST of an additional switch
ing engine. the witness said the annua
y cost would be about $1,000 a year
a The principal contention made by In
+ Rutland thus far against the Contra
Vermont plans has been the propose
change from douhle-cnd yard to
' stub-end yard for the Rutlands us,
e This would leave no opening into tn
0 Rutiand's yard from the north and tn
e Rutland engineers claim this arrange
= ment would make necessary n larG
, amount of Interference with the traffi
: south Of the drawbridge