Perth Amboy evening news., 1923-03-14

CASES HEARD
Case of 0Gtavio Galassi Dis
posed of Yesterday After
noon by Commissioners

Until March 20. The sessions here
yesterday began at 10 o'clock in the
morning and ended about 8 O'CLOCK
in the afternoon, following a recess
Of one hour for luncheon. The John
O'B1ck case was completed at the
morning session, and at the after
noon session the case of Octayio
Galassi, whose property is located
west OF Washington street, was
brought to g close.
r. d. Van Duzer, of the real estate
department of the Lehigh Valley
railroad, was the first witness. He
was questioned as to re value of the
land by William A. Barka1ow of the
Central railroad. Mr.. Van Duzer
said that the land was worth $1,S75
and the building worth $4,000. The
twenty-five feet needed from the
front of the property by the railroad
company, Mr.. Van Duzer said, was
valued at $254.25. Mr.. Van Duzer
then went into details concerning the
rules at which he arrived at these
figures. "-' y
On cross examination, in answer
to questions asked by David T.
Wilentz, representing the GaIassi in
terests, Mr.. Van Duzer declared that
tHS PlOPeltS Mas BOILu 30 q IIOnl
foot. The questioning then went to
the Wolfson and Toolan property,
which the railroad has already pur-
chased. In thSt instance it was point
ed out that the land had been valued
at $1,S75 and the building $4,000 and
Mr.. Van Duzer pointed out $685.
sentimental damages, which in
cluded a profit over the purchase
price. Even in view of the fact that
Galassi property has a greater
depth than the Wolfson and Too1an
property MI. Van Duzer held that it
is not worth more than the other
property. He was also OF the opinion
that the property would be just as
valuable without the twenty-five feet
needed by the railroad as it is with
it. '7 |@'i1~7~ @7
l.. w. Newcomb, of the real estate
department of the Central Railroad
followed Mr.. Van Duzer on the
stand. He answered yes to a ques-
ton from Mr.. Lyon as to whether
or not it is true that the railroads
to settle matters quickly will pay
more for property than it is some
times worth. He declared that he
told all property owners that the
Public Utility Commission has order
ed that twenty-five feet be taken
for street purposes and that unless
they moved their houses back the
railroad company would do it.
Edwin Fraser was the next wit
ness for the railroad companies. He
declared the land to be worth $50
per front foot, $4,000 for the land
and $4,000 for the building. The
twenty-five foot strip Of the front
needed for the street, Mr.. Fraser
valued at 5000. He declared that
he would not change his opinion if
he owned the property or if it was
not to be taken by the railroad com
pany.
On o examination Mr.. Wilentz
Mr.. Fraser if he had ever
made an offer Of $4,000 for the
building. Mr.. Fraser denied that he
he offered Mr.. Cerulo, the owner
Mr.. Fraser testified that he is not a
professional appraiser. He declared
that when he went to Cerulo to pur-
chase the property he told him that
wanted to purchase it for the
railroad.
Charles L. SteuerWaId testified as
to the value Of the property as fol-
lows: Land, S2,150: building, $4,000,
and the twenty-five feet strip, $400.
Mr.. ~Steuerwald declared that the
land that faces the railroad track
will not accommodate a freight car.
John Miles, q mover called by the
railroad company, estimated that it
would cost $3.50 to move the build
ing back and that he vas ready to
enter into a contract for the moving
of the building back. Mr.. Miles, on
questioning by Mr.. Wilentz, admitted
that the building was a hard M to
move. He also admitted that if the
house was his he would consider |
tearing it down rather than moving
MI. Kunzie, an architect Of the
Central Railroad, was the next wit
ness. He testified that the viaduct
would be a good looking structure,
although not particularly ornamen- |
tai. He also testlned as to the
widths of the side walks and streets
after the work is completed and
compared these with the streets as
they are today. ~'7 '''
Aylin Pierson, Of this city, an ar
chitect, placed on the stand by Mr..
Wilentz, presented plans for the re-
construction of the Galassi building
which he said would cost $9,960.50.
He declared that he didn't think the
building could be removed to an
other location as it is built in so
many units, the first being a one
story and a half structure, to which
the other units were added. Upon
a question from Mr.. Lyon, as toI
the worth of'the building being So
86o.50, Mr.. Pierson said that was
what he considered a reasonable
market value. A new building the |
same size, he said would cost $4,000.
Sophps Greisen, who inspected the
building to ascertain if it is practi-
cal for moving said that 1t would
not be safe to move it. If it was his
Mr.. Greisen declared, that he would
tear it down.
Hans Krogh, testified that the
building could be moved, but in or
der to do so the first story would
have to be torn down. Mr.. Krogh
considered it would cost between
$1,000 and $1,000 to build a build
ing that size.
Charles Schonceit and Nathan
Margaretten also testified as to the
value OF the property.
Mr.. Ceru1o, the former owner of
the building when put on the stand
told of the visit Mr.. Fraser made to
the store, and his offer of $500 for
the property, and how when an
agreement would not be reached he
came back again later. In the mean
time, however, Mr.. Cerula had sold
the building for $4,000 and he tes-
titled that when he informed Mr..
Fraser of this fact Mr.. Fraser asked,
why he didn't give it to him. He