Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-01-14
STATEMENTS ARE ISSUED.
Shapiro and Cafritz Set Forth Their
Versions of Case.

Jacob e. Shapiro today made the
following statement in answer to testi
mony involving his name last night at
the Gibson subcommittee hearing:
II was asked by Mr.. Cafritz TO ap
pear at the condemnation proceedings
and to appraise the value of the land
near Sherman Circle to be condemned
by the National Capital Park Commits
sion for park purposes, which I did
feeling qualified to do so because oil
my developments there and the large
ownership OF land in the immediate
vicinity.
THE land is worth the appraisal ]
placed upon it. / was only one of the
witnesses asked by Mr. Cafritz. An
other who testified for Mr.. Cafritz and
placed an approximately similar ap
praisal upon the same property was
Mr. Frank Bell, vice president of the
e. F. Saul CO..
Cafritz Issues Statement
Mr. Cafritz issued the following state
ment:
"N the ownership OF practically
the entire section Of Petworth / have
done what 1 feel public-spirited citi
zen should do, and donated to the
District not only thousands of feet
of ground which made the realization
of Sherman Circle possible, but also
spent more than 100000 in helping
toward the Improvement OF streets
avenues and alleys to overcome the
impossible conditions that existed
there two years ago.
Furthermore, not later than last
Summer, when the District authori
ties, for lack Of public funds. APP
preached me for dirt with which to
complete the improvements in Sher
man Circle, / not only cheerfully con-
tributed the necessary dirt, but paid
for the hauling of it out OF my own
pocket, costing several thousands OF
dollars.
Regarding this particular triangle
for which the inference is made that
/ have held up the District, the facts
are these:
In Unfair Light.
II was asked by few members OF
the Petworth Citizens Association
some time ago upon what terms /
would transfer this triangle to the
public domain. In view of what /
had already contributed. I told them
that did not feel that / should do
nate 1t, but, although it was worth, at
q most conservative estimate, $11 900,
I would sell it to the District for
tOVV, W OC uSC0 AOA pal Puk POSG6s
The District declined this offer and
resorted to condemnation proceedings.
with the result that the commission
awarded $10,500, q very low appraise-
ment indeed, as any one conversant
with the conditions will agree. The
plot in question consists Of five lots
facing on Buchanan street, Kansas
avenue, Seventh street and Sherman
circle. Two Of the lots are corner
lots and are worth $4,000 each. The
remaining three lots are surely worth
$4,000 each. Thus, $10.500 is $500 be-
low their real value, and my offer to
the District Of $500 is $500 less
than they are worth for realty de-
velopment. The report places me in
a very unfair and unjust light. entire
ly contradictory to the facts and
wholly at variance with the helpful
attitude / have endeayored to main
tain toward the city's progress and
development. / have owned this land
for more than four years. Everybody
knew I was the owner, as is evidenced
by the approach made to me for help
in developing Sherman Circle. and for
the further contribution OF this par
ticular ground, which I offered to the
District at very nominal sum for
park purposes, and which a regularly
constituted condemnation jury ap-
praised at $10,500, but for which l.,
myself, would not hesitate to pay
81, 900, because 1t is worth 1t for
building purposes.