Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-02-19
BY DECISIVE VOTE
Senate OmitS B0r!and Amend
ment From District Bill.
ITEM OF STREET EXPENSE
Proposed Assessment on Adjacent
Property Defeated, As to 10.
PROVISION MADE FOR PARKS
Appropriation for Small Reservations
ITEM OF STREET EXPENSE
PROVISION MADE FOR PARKS
Appropriation for Small Reservations
Increased to $40, ooo-Protracted
Debate Yesterday Afternoon.

| Rejection by an overwhelming vote
| of the so-called Borland amendment.
| proposing to assess part of the cost of
street improvements against abutting
! property. was the main feature of the
Senates action on the District of Co.
lumbia appropriation bill yesterday
afternoon. The debate lasted three
hours Most of the minor amendments
recommended by the Senate committee
on appropriations and several others
offered by individual senator's were
agreed TO. thus giving the Senate's APP
prevail to many small salary increases
| opposed by the committee. The larger
| contested items in the bill. such as
the reference of the payment of the
! debt to the controller of the Treasury,
the erection of new high schools and
the purchase of land for the enlarge
ment of the park system in Klingle
valley and Piney Branch valley, were
left undecided when adjournment was
| taken, shortly after o'clock.
One of the most important amendments
looking to the extension of the park Sys-
tenn in the National Capital was adopted
OIL the suggestion of Senator BriStOw or
Kansas. He proposed that the appropria-
| ton of S15.CoO for the condemnation of
| small park areas at the intersection or
streets outside of the limits Of the original
| city of Washington should be increased to
$4,000
| 1T seems that $1,000 is here apprO-
| priated for small parks, and that the
necessities for parks in Washington are
| for small parks" said Senator Bristow
in urging his amendment There are a
| lot of amendments which the committee
seem to have incorporated in the bill en-
larging the parks out in the vicinity or
| Rock creek. where there are 1900 Or 100
| acres of magnificent forest parks. and in
the city. where there is congested popu-
| latiOn. there are no recreation grounds
| provided. Fifteen thousand dollars is ap-
| prOpriated for the small parks, when for
| parks that are really not needed there
| will be hundreds of thousands of dollars
| appropriated, if the bill is passed as re-
ported. to get parks out where the people
| do not live"
Curtis Accepts Amendment.
Senator Curtis, in charge of the bill,
admitted that an appropriation of $1,000
| had been recommended by the Commits
| sioners, and made no objection to the
proposed increase in the appropriation.
| The adoption OF the amendment followed
| Immediately.
| senator f1Oke SlIllIn beOi6 leu lhe-
| fight against the elimination of the Bor-
| land amendment as he had indicated he
| would do when the bill was first under
discussion in the Senate.
Il am very much opposed to striking
out that provision" Senator Smith said.
THAT is liberal rule to the property
holders. In many OF the growing cities
one-third of the expenses Is charged to
adjacent property holders and one-third
to the city proper.
Mt 10 of have nothing
but regard for the city and the District,
and l do not intend to seek in any way
to obstruct the progress of the city or TO
obstruct such legislation will help to
develop the city and to beautify it: but
only ask that property holders here be
treated as well and no better, with regard
to improvements, than the treatment
property holders receive in the average
city where the people control their own
affairs. If you build a new street through
any of the suburban property, to whom
does the benefit principally go? 1t goes
to the adjacent property owner; 1t does
not go to the public. If j have a piece
of acreage at the edge of the city and d
splendid new street is built through It.
who derives the chief benefit from that
new street? 1 do. as the owner of the
adjacent property"
Bristow Raises Point.
Senator Bristow interrupted to make
| the point that in many new subdivi-
| sions the land for the streets was do
mated to the District and the owners
of the subdivision paid the entire cost
of the street improvements.
''All the House provision required is
that in such improvements one-half
should be charged to the property
holders and one-half to the Treasury"
remarked Mr.. Smith
/ docs the senator think that If New
Jersey avenue should be resurfaced the
property owners on either side should
pay for that resurfacing?" asked SEN
! ator Brisrow.
| Il think the property holders even
| on that street should pay part of it, but
not all of it," replied Mr. Smith.
1T seems to me that 1T is simply a
| public highway in which the whole
community is Interested, added MIR.
| BrisIow.
But the passage over the street by the
| public said Mr.. Smith. gives the ada
| cent property its value; the more who
pass over it the more valuable the prop
| erty that abuts upon 1t. 1t is the passage
| in front of a mans property in city
! which makes the value of the property;
| the more who pass over~1t the more the
property increases in value as compared
| with the property o.. other citizens in
other parts of the city. / do not deny
that ordinary repairs should be kept up
| by the District; that the District should
! ton. repairing ordinary breaks until final
" the surface is SO worn out that new
surfaces must be made. While the public
| has used the street, the use by the public
| has increased the value Of the adjacent
| property.
Instance Cited.
| Take store property and what makes
| it's value? 1t is the number of people who
pass in front of it: it is the use by the
public in front of it that makes 1t val
liable for the merchant and increases the
rent.
Some of these appropriations are to
| build new streets. Some of the apprO-
| priatiOns which, / understand the COM
| mittee have added are for renewing old
streets that are worn out. while some
| are for entirely new streets. l cannot
| discuss each of these streets in detail
but l insist where the public has used to
| such an extent a street in front of a
| store property to wear 1t out. they
| have added to the rental value of the
property. and the owner has derived a
| benefit that the public at large have not
| had / think the division of one fourth
| a street and one-half to the public at
ment between the two.
Senator Newlands declared that there
| was an erroneous impression among
! many members of Congress about the
| payment for street improvements in new
Il