Evening star., 1913-02-06
STREET EXTENSIONS
Inequity of Congress in Deal
ing With the District.
BURDEN on TAXPAYERS
Suburban Capital Disseminated
Against Doubly.
NATIONAL PLAN. TOO COSTLY
All Expense Of New Streets First Put
on District and Now Three-Fourths
Of Improvement Cost.
NATIONAL PLAN. TOO COSTLY

The reduction Of the national contribu-
ton toward street improvement at the
| capital from 80 per cent to % per cent.
| in effect accomplished by the Borland
amendment to the District appropriation
| bill, brings into the limeight the ex-
traordinary nature of Washington's street
plan and the peculiar obligations i'm
| posed upon the nation in respect to its
| development, improvement and mainte-
nance.
Washington's street extension plans, as
| sanctioned by Congress. propose sub
| stantially the reproduction in the county
| of the street plan of the original city.
The avenues seeking extension propose
| to suffer no material contraction, and If
| all are carried through the belt of sub
| urban subdivisions and connected with
| the street plan provided by the amended
| highway act the scheme of streets of the
| new Washington, while occupying a
somewhat smaller percentage of area in
| thoroughfares, Will be on the same broad
| scale that of the original CITY,
But the plan of Washington, as conceived
by oIr forefathers. was on a national,
not local scale, the broad streets, ave-
nhes and alleys occupying more than
one-half the entire area. The scheme
would have been absurd for a self-sup-
porting, self-develOping Maryland village
or that day. Its extension at this time
to adjacent territory is equally absurd
as Well as grossly unjust and unbearably
oppressive unless the nation stands in the
same relation to the enlarged as to the
original city.
There is obvious lack Of equity in
any change by the nation Of it's estab-
4 lfsfed relation to the cost of street
| devefopment such as is proposed by the
/ Borland amendment; and there is con-
spfcuous unfa1rness In such alteration
tof relations to those taxpayers on un-
| improved streets who, having con-
tributed in taxes for years to- the i'm
fprovement of other streets than their
own, now find themselves deprived of
full reciprocal contributions from the
general revenues for their own benefit.
The character and extent of this un-
fairness and inequity are suggested
by Theodore w. Noyes in Finances
of the National Capital Partnership" in
discussing the kindred subject of the
wise and equitable apportiOnment of
| the cost OF street extension. as follows:
Capitals Extraordinary Street Plan.
The expense of the street system of
Washington is not to be endured unless
met by all the resources which combine
to make the National Capital worthy of
| the nation. If Congress will violate the
| obligations incurred at the founding Of
| the federal District, upon which the act
| of 1878 was based, and will say in legisla-
| tion concerning the extension of single
| streets separately and successfully that
the nation has no financial concern in the
modern capital save in the portion limit
| ed by the imaginary line Of Boundary
street, then the streets of the repudiated
section must be opened and improved on
the basis of cramped local resources. and
not on the national lines of the original
| city. But If, on the other hand Con-
hot ha nd
purpose of the highway act shall be car
ried out and that the Greater Washing
| ton or the coming century. for which we
mOderns will be held responsible, shall
not discredit the nation when compared
with the city planned by the forefathers
| then the violation of the organic act in
volved In the extension propositions must
be vigorously discountenanced.
Consider for one moment Washington's
original street plan Of which the use Is
suggested exclusively at private expense
for the extension of the nations city.
1t represents the hard bargain driven
John Law. a prominent citizen. who
came here at the city's birth, charged
In 1870. voicing a general complaint.
that the city had been made vast by the
politicians merely to crafty their Gu
pidity and tempt as many farmholders as
/ possible to give up half their property.
Even more bitter complaints were made
concerning the area appropriated for
StTeetS anu avenues, not merely One-half,
but all Of which was taken by the gov
eminent without compensation. The
property owners donated one-half of the
lots and all of the streets and avenues
to the nation: and the national repre-
sentatives showed shrewd appreciation of
the terms of the benefaction by setting
apart as streets more than one-half of
the total area Of the city. 1906 acres out
Of total Of Gill, a greater percentage
of street surface than in any other city
in the world. Its vastness has been we'll
pictured by imagining a street 100 feet
wide extending from Washington to New
York, to be graded, asphalted and sup
piled with cutters. curbstoncs, sidewalks.
drains. sewers. lamp posts and shade
trees. AS the Senate District committee
said in its report Of 1880:
THE plan of the city was formed by
the public authorities: the dimensions Of
the streets determined by them without
interference by the Inhabitants or regard
to their particular interest or conven-
fence. 1t is a plan calculated for the
magnificent capital of a great nation,
but oppressive. from its very dimensions
and arrangements to the Inhabitants If
its execution to any considerable extent
is to be thrown upon them. No people
who anticipated the execution and sub