Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1914-04-28

park ON the south side is incidental to
the approach to the station. If the
town of Crawford grows as fast as it
| has in the last ten years there viii be
| congestion of traffic at the crossing
of the railroad at both sides. The
time to make this change. and to
| make it according to the plans sub
mttted is now, because If it is left
| any longer the property value will in
| crease aud it will be a difficult matter
to handle.
THE most desirable plan is to
keep the railroad as low to the sur
face of the surrounding land as pos
| sible at the station and lower the
street in question slightly at that
point, and in that way adopt the
halfway plan.
Delay Means Added Expense.
1t is no answer to say that the i'm
proVement can wait until the conges-
ton forces n means of relief, for in
| the future it will mean an improve
ment at a much greater expense. The
| plan submitted to the board is the
best conception that one could have
| in a plan for an economical solution
| of the problem.
Former Judge Robert IL. Carey,
counsel for John Potter, one of the OBJ
| jecting property owners, who owns
a triangular brick building at the
intersection of Union and Eastman
avenues, was the next speaker. The
brick building is partly occupied by
the Crawford Chronicle. Judge Carey
explained that according to the plans
before the board if the proposed i'm
! proVement was carried out part of
the building, If not all, would have
| to be RACED.
1--WE do not want to discuss now
whether or not this is a dangerous
crossing" said Mr.. Carey. because
| think the board knows all about 1t
| In that respect l think the board 8
powers in this case are limited. The
board in this case must decide ac-
eording to the statutes which govern
our decisions. All plans submitted
for the elimination Of the grade cross
! ing provide for something other than
provided for in the statutes"
President Donges, of the board,
asked Mr.. Carey II 1t was his thought
that the Legislature had not given
p. the board the power to do whatever
necessary to accomplish the end in
view.
Necessary, that's the word" said
| Judge Carey. ITO do whatever is
necessary to accomplish the end In
question, but we contend that the
| taking of Mr.. Potter's property is not
| necessary and, therefore, the board
| has not the power to approve any
plans that may mean that this prop
erty will be taken in the proposed
change.
THE only reason for which you
can take the Potter property Is If
/ it's essential for the Improvement.
The question of identifying the place
is not the boards concern, That S
purely a local matter. There's no
! testimony to show that it is essential
to take the Potter property Tor TINS
change, except to add to the beauty
but the board has nothing to do with
identifying Crawford.
At this point Mr.. Holmes inter-
rupted Mr.. Carey by saying;
I'VE are not going to take the Pot
! ter property for the purpose OF max
/ ing a park, but to widen North ave"
nue." To which Mr.. Carey replied;
There is no need to widen North
avenue at all. There will be no con
gestion at that point. That's all Q
beautiful dream about Crawford
growing up and traffic being con-
/ gested at this point.
No Essential to improvements.
L don't think anyone can say that
| II is essential to the proposed inn
provement to take this property. Just
because some councilmen said oheY
were going to put this thing through,
that's no reason why this board
should say go ahead"
President Donges asked Mr.. Carey
if any irreparable damage would oe
done if the property was taken.
YES" was the reply. We don't
want the money for damages, we
want the property. We have the
best locations in Crawford for tho
business that is carried on in that
property. It's near the railroad and
| the centre of the town, and we don't
want to part with 1t. l think the
plan for the Improvement which
provides for the taking of this prop
erty is unfair and the taking of the
property unnecessary"
Frederick Taggart. counsel Tor GUS
| Wright, Inc, which concern has a
lumber yard few feet of which, ac-
cording to the plans, would be taken
for the change, entered much the
same objections as Mr.. Carey. He
also stated that it was unnecessary
to take any part of the Wright prop
erty Mr.. Wright also represented
A. l.. Miller. an objecting property
owner.
At the close of the arguments
President Donges stated that the
board would reserve decision and
take the matter into conference,