HE1613.NMTl9Jr"'''-'''™'^ 
 "ME2i;^f,5L°i'l?.?..9.<>iT.mittee on port and t 
 
n 
 
 
 Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924013692847 
 
April 22ncl, 1916. 
 
 Hon. John Pueeoy Mitchel^ 
 
 Mayor, and Chairman of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment: 
 
 Sir — The Committee on Port and Terminal Facilities submits here- 
 Avith a comprehensive report upon the plans for the relocation and 
 improvement of the west side tracks of the New York Central Eailroad 
 Company within the City of New York, pursuant to Chapter 777 of the 
 Ivaws of 1911. 
 
 On September 28, 1911, the New York Central Eailroad Company 
 filed plans for its. proposed west side improvement as required by the 
 statute. A report upon these plans as modified in conference was 
 received by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment from its Com- 
 mittee on Port and Terminal Improvements on March 27, 1913, and after 
 a number of public hearings the matter was referred back to Committee 
 for further consideration. With the organization of the present Board 
 of Estimate and Apportionment the plans were referred to this Com- 
 mittee and since then have been the subject of its most earnest considera- 
 tion and attention. Section two of the statute provides that the Board 
 of Estimate and Apportionment at any time after the filing of the original 
 plans of the railroad "may make and submit to said railroad company 
 plans and profiles showing such changes as said Board may see fit to 
 propose in the railroad or railroad structures, yards, stations or terminal 
 
 facilities of said railroad " The plans submitted to the 
 
 Board of Estimate and Apportionment on April 7, 1916, and explained 
 in detail in this report, are those in accordance with this section of the 
 statute. 
 
 The west side facilities of the New York Central Railroad for many 
 years have presented a municipal problem of the first importance. They 
 have been entirely inadequate to handle effectively the large and growing 
 business which has been compelled to pass over them. The tracks have 
 encumbered city streets with attendant danger to life and with a toll of 
 accidents which has been a matter of grave public concern. They have 
 marred Riverside Park with an ugly commercial fringe, and the noise 
 and dirt of operation has created a nuisance in front of one of the most 
 attractive residence streets in the City of New York. 
 
 With these conditions in mind, in working out a settlement, the 
 
Committee sought to secure a proper railroad plan together with the 
 wiping-out of the railroad nuisance. 
 
 In the plan now presented to the Board the Committee considers that 
 it is providing adequately for the present and all reasonable future needs 
 of shippers in parts of the City affected by this settlement. 
 
 From the standpoint of city planning the Committee considers that 
 it has secured in the present tentative agreement a notable success. All 
 grade crossings have been eliminated. A new park at Inwood Hill 
 possessing natural beauties unsurpassed by any of the existing city 
 parks is provided. Fort Washington Park, at present marred by an 
 unsightly gash, is to be restored through the complete roofing of the 
 railroad cut and the parking of the reclaimed area. 
 
 The most important advantage, however, will accrue to Riverside 
 Park, which under the plan now presented, will be freed entirely from 
 the railroad nuisance, all tracks being carried in tunnel or under roofed 
 subway with the Park developed over the top and on the outshore side. 
 This will mean permanent ^otection against the commercialization of 
 the Riverside waterfront. (3^ / K'^ "^ l"? '/ 
 
 South of 59th street the Committee has found a solution which, in 
 its opinion, is much more advantageous from the standpoint of shippers 
 than that presented in 1913 and which is equally good, viewed as part 
 of the city plan. 
 
 To work out the policies outlined above, has meant an exhaustive 
 series of negotiations with the officers of the railroad company and con- 
 ferences with civic organizations which have required an amount of 
 patience and time which it is difficult for those not present at the con- 
 ferences to appreciate. The Committee has been most fortunate in hav- 
 ing the active support and co-operation in all of these conferences of his 
 Honor the Mayor, who as chairman of the committee of the last Board of 
 Estimate and Apportionment which handled this matter possessed a 
 familiarity with the entire subject greater than that of any other City 
 official. 
 
 In the working out of the plan now submitted to the Board the 
 Committee has given careful attention to all of the criticisms and suo-- 
 gestions which have been submitted to it, and has endeavored to meet 
 those criticisms which appeared to be sincere and intelligent and to adopt 
 those suggestions which would add to the civic advantages of the pro- 
 posed settlement. 
 
In the detailed presentation of the present plan which follows, the 
 Committee has compared it at each point with the plan of March 27, 1913, 
 that being the plan officially before the Board and the one with which its 
 members and the public generally are familiar. 
 
 City Iiine to Southerly Side of the Harlem Ship Canal. 
 
 The trackage between the City line and. the northerly line of the 
 Harlem Ship Canal has presented no difficulties. Owing to the physical 
 conditions at this point, it is possible to permit the railroad company 
 to adopt a trackage plan entirely satisfactory to it without involving any 
 questions of civic importance. The only track plan which required de- 
 tailed consideration by the Committee was the proposed connection 
 between the Spuyten Duyvil & Port Morris Eailroad and the bridge 
 across the Ship Canal. It was apparent that a connection was necessary 
 to permit business of the Harlem and Putnam Divisions to pass over the 
 west side tracks. The operating restrictions upon the radius of curvature 
 necessarily determined to a large extent the exact location of the north 
 end of the bridge across the Ship Canal. The present plan secures 
 proper operating conditions and appears to the Committee to be satis- 
 factory from a civic standpoint. 
 
 Vigorous objection was made during the public hearings upon the 
 1913 report to the continuance of a railroad crossing of the Ship Canal 
 by bridge. Section three of the enabling act provides that: 
 
 " The said plans and profiles to be submitted by said company 
 shall also show such changes as may be necessary or required to 
 construct a tunnel or tunnels and approaches thereto, to carry 
 tracks of said railroad below the surface of Spuyten Duyvil Creek 
 at or near its junction with the North Eiver, at such depth as to 
 leave at least twenty-five feet in the clear from the top of such 
 tunnel or tunnels to the surface of Spuyten Duyvil Creek at mean 
 high tide." 
 
 The wording of the statute is somewhat ambiguous. The contention 
 of the railroad company is that it neither says nor means that all tracks 
 are to be carried in tunnels and that if such a provision had been included 
 in the statute it would be impossible to ''omply with it owing to the 
 excessive additional expense and difficulties in operating conditions. 
 Your Committee personally, and through its engineers, devoted a large 
 
amount of time to a detailed study of this question. It reached the con- 
 clusion that to secure freight tunnels with grades allowing efficient oper- 
 ation would cost an amount which it was not feasible to consider spend- 
 ing for the relatively slight advantage of avoiding one more high level 
 bridge across the Harlem Ship Canal. The Ship Canal, as the Board is 
 aware, is crossed at the present time by nine such bridges with a clear- 
 ance of approximately twenty-four feet above mean high water. The 
 Committee does not consider, therefore, that the placing of a new railroad 
 drawbridge with the same clearance slightly to the east of the present low 
 swing bridge would constitute a serious interference with water traffic. 
 The Secretary of War has recently drawn in the pierhead and bulkhead 
 lines at the southern entrance to the Canal, insuring a wide entrance 
 channel. It has been decided by the Federal Government to straighten 
 the channel by the removal of the bend at the Johnson- Iron Works. These 
 changes will greatly improve navigating conditions. The present plan 
 therefore provides for a railroad drawbridge with 24-foot clearance above 
 mean high water located on a new line adjusted to permit proper con- 
 nection at its northern end with the tracks of the Spuyten Duyvil & Port 
 Morris Railroad and at its southern end with a new tunnel constructed 
 under Inwood Hill. Two clear channels between piers, each one hundred 
 feet in width, are provided. 
 
 It was suggested in the 1913 report that the bridge be constructed 
 at two levels, one for the railroad tracks and the other for a highway 
 crossing to connect Inwood Hill with the Eiverdale section of the Bronx. 
 This suggestion was made because of the proposal to adopt a city plan 
 for Inwood Hill providing for a lower drive approximately along the 
 line of the present Bolton road in addition to the extension of Riverside 
 Drive along the crest of the hill. The Committee on City Plan has 
 recommended the abandonment of the lower drive and therefore it is 
 unnecessary to reserve the right to build a highway level in connection 
 with the proposed railroad bridge. 
 
 Traekag-e from the Southerly Line of the Harlem 
 Ship Canal to the Southerly Line of Dyckman 
 Street. 
 
 Inwood Hill possesses natural beauties unsurpassed on Manhattan 
 Island. It has a heavily wooded western slope which remains almost 
 entirely unspoiled by artificial improvements. It is the natural continua- 
 
tion of Riverside Park and if properly treated should prove one of the 
 most attractive waterfront parks in the City. The original plans ol 
 the railroad would have ruined irretrievably this entire slope for park 
 purposes. It was proposed to elevate the tracks along the present right 
 of way upon embankment and viaduct, leaving them entirely uncovered. 
 The report of 1913 provided for the construction of a tunnel between 
 the Ship Canal and a point near the northerly side of Dyckman street 
 and recommended the acquisition of the present railroad right of way, 
 together with the entire westerly slope of Inwood Hill for park purposes. 
 The present Committee has given detailed study, both through carefully 
 prepared plans and through a number of personal inspections on the 
 ground to the possibility of shifting the tunnel as proposed in the 1913 
 report considerably to the east and to bring it to the northerly line of 
 Dyckman street directly under the viaduct proposed to carry the con- 
 nection of Riverside Drive with the new roads laid out for the top of 
 Inwood Hill. It developed that such a line with the necessary additional 
 tunneling north and south of Dyckman street would involve an expendi- 
 ture of over two million dollars in addition to that necessary to carry the 
 tunnel upon the line proposed in the 1918 report. Examination of the 
 plans showed the possibility of constructing a tunnel by the cut and cover 
 method upon the line shown in the plans now submitted in such a manner 
 that the existing slopes could be restored and, in many cases, greatly 
 improved for park purposes. A careful study showed that few trees ol 
 any importance would be interfered with by the type of construction pro- 
 posed. The Committee therefore adopted the alignment shown upon 
 the present plans as that which offered the greatest civic advantages 
 at a fair and reasonable cost. 
 
 The Committee recommends that proceedings be initiated as soon as 
 possible for the acquisition of the necessary land for a new park at 
 Inwood Hill. The park has already been placed upon the City map. 
 
 The section between the southerly line of the Ship Canal and Dyck- 
 man Street was the location named in the State Barge Canal Act for 
 the so-called " Port of Call " and proceedings have been begun for the 
 taking of title to land under water required for this purpose. The 
 Committee is informed by the State Engineer that the port of call is 
 simply a temporary stopping-place for boats awaiting final instructions 
 as to their ultimate destination and not a terminal for the receipt or dis- 
 charge of freight or for any other purpose except that noted. The Com- 
 
missioner of Docks has suggested that a very much better site can be 
 found for the port of call and barge canal terminal if desired at the bend 
 at the Johnson Iron Works after the Harlem Ship Canal is straightened. 
 There are certain manifest advantages to the State in making the change. 
 The proposed new site is perfectly sheltered, whereas the North Kiver 
 site is exposed to drifting ice and similar dangers. At the request of the 
 Committee, the Commissioner of Docks has been in consultation with 
 the State Engineer and he reports to the Committee that he will probably 
 be able to secure a favorable adjustment of the matter. 
 
 Tlie Crossing' of Dyckman Street. 
 
 The plan of March 27, 1913, proposed that the grade of Dyckman 
 street, which now slopes gently toward the river, be changed by raising 
 it from Broadway to the easterly line of the railroad company's right of 
 way. At this point, it was to be carried its full width across the railroad 
 tracks and connected with the outshore section by ramp down to a pro- 
 posed new railroad yard south of Dyckman street. This plan appeared 
 at the time to be the best form of compliance with the specific provision 
 contained in Chapter 777 of the Laws of 1911 that Dyckman street should 
 be carried over the tracks by bridge "with a net clearance above said 
 tracks of at least sixteen feet." A careful restudy of the situation has 
 convinced the Committee that to adopt this treatment for Dyckman street 
 would create conditions which should not be imposed upon this thor- 
 oughfare. 
 
 Dyckman street is the only level cross-island street in the Borough 
 of Manhattan north of Manhattan street. It is a natural business artery 
 of a section which is growing very rapidly and which requires easy and 
 convenient access to the Hudson river. The recent successful establish- 
 ment of a ferry from the foot of Dyckman street to Palisade Interstate 
 Park has shown conclusively the mistake of interposing the barrier of 
 a ramp between the waterfront and the upland. The Corporation Counsel 
 has advised the Committee that the provision for an undergrade crossing 
 at Dyckman street is not mandatory and may be disregarded in plans 
 prepared by the City modifying the original plan filed by the railroad 
 company. The present plan therefore provides for elevating the tracks 
 across Dyckman street. 
 
Railroad Yard to the South of Dyckman Street. 
 
 The plan of March 27, 1913, provided for a railroad delivery yard 
 south of Dyckman street. The opinion was expressed in that report that 
 the establishment of such a yard was of much importance to the northern 
 part of Manhattan Island and to a very large section of the Borough of 
 The Bronx. Considerable opposition developed at the public hearings to 
 the establishment of the proposed Dyckman street freight yard. Further 
 study has convinced your Committee that a railroad yard at this point 
 is not absolutely necessary at this time, although the reasonable demands 
 of the near future may require some additional facilities. The railroad 
 company was not insistent upon its yard needs at Dyckman street and 
 was willing to abandon its plan. The plan now submitted omits the 
 yard and therefore makes unnecessary the lease to the railroad of 160,000 
 square feet of city property which it was proposed in 1913 to grant to the 
 railroad. The Commissioner of Docks has under way the preparation of 
 plans for the proper development of the Dyckman Street waterfront and 
 ferry terminal. 
 
 Section Bet^veen Dyckman Street and the Southerly 
 Line of Fort Washing-ton Park. 
 
 The plans submitted show four tracks between the southerly line of 
 Dyckman Street and the southerly line of Fort Washington Park (in 
 addition to two future tunnel tracks under the Ship Canal). This com- 
 pletes a proposed four-track main line between the northerly line of the 
 Ship Canal and the southerly line of the Park and is the same trackage 
 recommended in the 1913 report for this section. Owing to the topog^ 
 raphy there was no need for providing for the covering of the tracks 
 between the north end o!f the park and Dyckman Street. The slope 
 between Riverside Drive and the river at this point is very high and steep. 
 
 Passing through Fort Washington Park the present plan differs ma- 
 terially from the adjustment suggested in the report of March 27, 1913. 
 The railroad runs at present partly through a cut approximately thirty 
 feet in width carrying two tracks. It owns, however, a right of way in 
 width sufficient, if fully excavated, to carry four tracks. This excavation 
 could be made by the railroad company without reference to the present 
 settlement. The plan of March 27, 1913, provided for the abandonment of 
 the present right of way and the deflection of the tracks to the east 
 
8 
 
 through a new tunnel to be constructed very largely at the expense of the 
 City. It was estimated that this tunnel would cost |1,800,000.00. Of this 
 sum it was proposed that the City should pay |1,500,000'.00, this being the 
 estimated excess cost over the open cut proposed by the railroad company 
 and adequate for its operating requirements. 
 
 Detailed study of the deflected line disclosed that the construction 
 of the proposed tunnel would inevitably destroy a large number of trees, 
 upon the existence of which much of the beauty of Fort Washington Park 
 depends. For this reason the solution proposed was opposed by a number 
 of civic organizations. The Committee now recommends that the 1913 
 plan be abandoned and that the railroad company be permitted to widen 
 its cut sufficiently to allow four-track operation at this point and that 
 the new cut be completely covered. This is the treatment apparently 
 specifically contemplated in section three of the enabling act. The plans 
 submitted herewith show a typical covered section. It is arranged that 
 this cover is to be so constructed that the cut may be filled in solidly and 
 that the area thus reclaimed be made an integral part of the Park. 
 
 Trackag-e Between Fort Washing'ton Park and West 
 
 153d Street. 
 
 Beginning at the southerly line of Fort Washington Park the plans 
 submitted herewith show a six-track main line. This is the same trackage 
 shown upon the plans originally submitted by the railroad company and 
 vigorously opposed by a number of civic organizations. The claim has 
 been made that the prospective traffic of the railroad company does not 
 justify the construction of a main line of more than four tracks. It has 
 also been claimed that if the railroad company can do its business over 
 four tracks between the southern end of Fort Washington Park and the 
 Harlem Ship Canal it can also do it upon the same number of tracks 
 south of the Park. It is extremely difficult to forecast the tonnage 
 which will pass over the New York Central Railroad Company's line if 
 improved in the manner proposed. It is, however, undeniable that there 
 will be a very large increase in traffic. In fact the prospect of such an 
 increase is the only justification for the expenditure by the railroad com- 
 pany of the very large sum necessary to improve its road as proposed. 
 Your Committee has reconsidered the matter with very great care in 
 view of the opposition referred to. It appears to the Committee that 
 
9 
 
 practically all of the objection to a six-track main line has been elimin- 
 ated by the additional tunnel sections provided for in this proposed 
 settlement. There caai be practically no added civic burden in a six- 
 track main line in tunnel over a four-track main line similarly treated. 
 As the major part of the main line tracks are to be completely covered 
 from 151st Street to 135th Street and from 128th Street to 72d Street, 
 the Committee considers that it has met whatever objections were 
 reasonably interposed to the main line trackage recommended in the 1913 
 report. It seems to your Committee to be very short-sighted policy to 
 cut down the number of main line tracks requested by the New York 
 Central Railroad Company as its best estimate of its future requirements 
 for the proper handling of its freight business into the Borough of Man- 
 hattan. 
 
 Another strong argument in favor of permitting the company to 
 construct a six-track main line is the desirability of providing tracks for 
 passenger trains. The company's legislative franchise under which the 
 west side tracks were built provided for the transportation of passen- 
 gers as well as freight. As a matter of fact the company still maintains 
 a nominal passenger service between 30th Street and Spuyten Diiyvil. 
 The Committee thinks that a large extension of this passenger business 
 will undoubtedly be desirable in the near future. It considers that tlie 
 adjustment of main line trackage brought about by the settlement now 
 under consideration must be final and that if provision for passenger 
 accommodation is to be made at all over this line it should be made now 
 as part of the proposed agreement with the railroad company. The offi- 
 cers of the railroad company have stated to the Committee that the Park 
 Avenue tracks leading into the Grand Central Station are congested to a 
 point where they can forsee that some day it may be necessary to sup- 
 plement them, if service is to be maintained at the proper degree of effi- 
 ciency. The west side trackage seems to be the only available outlet to re- 
 lieve Park Avenue. It is not possible to permit the use of any of the north 
 or south avenues, all of which should be reserved for possible local sub- 
 ways. The provision for passenger service was strongly urged upon the 
 Board of Estimate by a number of civic organizations. The Committee has 
 not had before it for consideration at this time the matter of a cross-town 
 connection between the Park Avenue tracks and the west side line. It 
 feels, however, that by providing for six main line tracks between 72d 
 Street and 177th Street the door is kept open for whatever plan may be 
 
10 
 
 worked out in the future for such a connection under proper conditions 
 and restrictions. The argument that the existence of a four-track line 
 between Fort Washington Park and the Ship Canal should govern the 
 entire main line trackage does not impress your Committee as sound. 
 It is a comparatively short stretch of track which could be operated m 
 such a manner as not to interfere with the rest of the main line operation. 
 Your Committee recommends therefore that the railroad be allowed to 
 construct a six-track main line between the southerly boundary of Fort 
 AVashington Park and its yard south of 72d Street. Between the south- 
 erly line of Fort Washington Park and 151st Street no provision is 
 made for the covering of the tracks, the topography of this section being 
 such that it seems unnecessary to cover. The right of the City to cover 
 these tracks in the future will, however, be reserved in the contract with, 
 the railroad company, together with the right to construct a city street 
 over the right of way with water mains and all usual sub-surface struc- 
 tures carried under the roof with proper clearance above the tracks. 
 
 Proposed Yard Between 153d Street and 133d Street. 
 
 One of the most serious problems presented for solution was the 
 disposition to be made of the request of the railroad company for per- 
 mission to construct a largely expanded railroad yard between 155th 
 street and 137th street. The report of March 27, 1913, proposed to 
 allow the railroad company to fill in the existing cove at this point out to 
 the bulkhead line and permit it to construct its tracks over land owned 
 by the company and land in the bed of Twelfth Avenue and various cross 
 streets to be purchased from the City. This plan also contemplated the 
 construction of three commercial piers between 141st street and 143rd 
 street, and two float bridges between 143rd street and 145th street. 
 
 That some yard facilities should be allowed to serve the Harlem 
 Valley appears to the Committee to be undeniable. The existing yard 
 which provides nominally for approximately 450 cars, is entirely inade- 
 quate to provide for the needs of the large section of the City which 
 must depend almost entirely for its shipments of a number of the neces- 
 sities of life upon the facilities offered by the railroad company in the 
 vicinity of Manhattan Street. The present yard is not only poorly arranged 
 but is unsightly in the extreme, and owing to its operation by steam 
 locomotives is a local nuisance which should be eliminated as promptly 
 
11 
 
 a« possible. The Cominittee is fully alive to all of the objections which 
 have been and can be urged against the location of any yard outshore 
 of Riverside Drive. It has therefore given the most earnest consideration 
 to the various plans which have been submitted for the possible cutting- 
 down of the yard area as reported on March 27, 1913, and for the reloca- 
 tion of the yard at some other point. The suggestion that 12th Avenue 
 be opened through this section and that covered platforms be provided 
 between the new 12th Avenue and the main line tracks has been carefully 
 studied. The possibility of utilizing the "blocks between 12th Avenue 
 and Broadway south of 135th Street has been examined with the utmost 
 care but without reaching satisfactory results. Suggestions for shifting 
 the yard to the east side of the City and for relocating it in the neighbor- 
 hood of Marble Hill have all been considered. In its study of the Manhat- 
 tanville yard requirements the Committee has had the benefit of the 
 judgment and advice of the Harlem Board of Commerce, the leading local 
 commercial body. A representative committee of this association visited 
 the site with members of the Board of Estimate's Port and Terminal 
 Committee. Their arguments have greatly impressed the Committee 
 and have persuaded it that it would be unwise from, a commercial stand- 
 point not to permit the railroad to establish a yard which would provide 
 adequate service for the large and growing commerce of this section 
 of the City of New York. 
 
 At the same time the Committee was not willing to approve any plan 
 for a yard which did not protect properly the beauty of Riverside Drive 
 and the interests of property located on its easterly side. The City's 
 engineers were instructed to design a yard which would be adequate 
 from an operating standpoint and which at the same time would meet 
 any reasonable objection which could be raised by the local interests 
 involved and the requirements of city planning. The Committee 
 considers that a successful solution has been found in the plan sub- 
 mitted herewith. By shifting the southern boundary of the yard south 
 from 137th Street to 133rd Street it was possible to reduce its width 
 materially at all points where it was opposite important sections of 
 Riverside Park and Drive. It is proposed to cov6r the major portion 
 of the main line tracks between 151st Street and 135th Street and to 
 extend Riverside Park to the westerly edge of the roof. This will provide 
 an effective screen. The proposed yard ^vdll be very much less ohjection- 
 able than present conditions. 
 
12 
 
 The piers and float bridges have been eliminated in order to protect 
 the waterfront against further commercialization and your Committee 
 further required that as part of the settlement the railroad company 
 cede to the City whatever land under water it owns outshore of the yard 
 as now designed. 
 
 The Harlem Board of Commerce has recommended the construction 
 of a marginal street outshore of the proposed yard along its entire length. 
 The Committee does not consider this desirable or necessary at this time 
 and does not recommend if as part of the present settlement. It is 
 perfectly feasible to construct such a street in the future if it is ulti- 
 mately decided that it is desirable. A marginal way is provided, how- 
 ever, as far north as 143d street. Overhead bridges have been provided 
 at 145th street and 151st street. The waterfront development north of 
 143d street is being worked out independently of the settlement herein 
 proposed. 
 
 Tracks Across Manhattan Valley. 
 
 Various 'studies have been made for the crossing of Manhattan 
 Valley. Chapter 777 of the Laws of 1911 provides for the carrying of the 
 main line tracks over all streets from West 129th street to West 135th 
 street and also over West 138th street. It has been urged by certain civic 
 associations that this elevated structure be carried under the existing 
 viaduct across Manhattan Valley. The engineering advisors of the Com- 
 mittee have reported to it that while this plan would be feasible it would 
 be unduly expensive and without compensating advantage. It would 
 mean the entire reconstruction of the viaduct and would present serious 
 and extensive complications in going under the retaining wall at 135th 
 street. The slight possible advantage in the partial screening of railroad 
 operation across the valley produced by this plan did not appeaj to the 
 Committee as sufficiently strong to outweigh the obvious objections to it. 
 
 The line shown upon the present plans appears to your Committee 
 to be the most satisfactory which could be worked out for this section. 
 It carries the tracks through private property and across public streets 
 with a full clearance of fourteen feet and on a line practically parallel 
 and adjacent to the west of the present viaduct structure. A freight 
 station is provided to serve the Harlem district. 
 
 Across the Manhattan Valley most of the tracks will be entirely 
 
13 
 
 screened by the buildings wliicb the railroad company proposes to erect. 
 It is recommended that the contract between the City and the railroad 
 company provide for limiting the height of all buildings west of the 
 viaduct so that they will not extend above the deck of this structure 
 and cut off the river view. It is also recommended that careful restric- 
 tions be imposed prohibiting the use of the roofs for advertising purposes.. 
 Although not part of the present plan, the Board's attention is 
 directed to the possibility of utilizing certain of the blocks for market 
 purposes east of the viaduct and south of 135th street not long enough 
 for yard purposes. Track connection could be readily secured from the 
 elevated structure proposed in this report and a site could be secured 
 admirably adapted for a terminal market. The suggestion is made, 
 however, simply as an incidental matter which presented itself 
 in connection with the Committee's study and which possibly may be 
 worthy of the attention of those city authorities directly charged with 
 the working out of plans for market development. 
 
 Tracks Along- Riverside Park 
 
 Chapter 777 of the Laws of 1911 provided that the plans to be filed 
 by the railroad company should show a 
 
 " covering or roof or typical sections of a covering or roof to be 
 used as a part of the park system of said city, with the necessary 
 abutments and supports over the tracks now or hereafter con- 
 structed by said railroad company along the Eiverside Park south 
 of 122d street." 
 
 The plan reported by the former Committee on March 27, 1913, com- 
 plied with the provisions of the statute and provided for the complete 
 ■covering of all tracks along the park from 122nd Street to the south line 
 of 72nd Street and for the extension of the park area over this roof to 
 the extreme westerly boundary of the railroad right of way. At the 
 public hearings a very vigorous opposition developed to the plan as pre- 
 sented. Apparently the basis of this opposition was two-fold : First, it 
 was contended that the plan as presented opened the way for the com- 
 mercialization of the waterfront along Riverside Park for its entire 
 length. Second, it was objected that the plan distorted the natural 
 ■topography of the park in such a way as to destroy much of its beauty 
 4ind that by interposing a barrier between the upland and the water- 
 
14 
 
 front it made it impossible to develop the park as a real waterfront play- 
 ground which it was designed to be. 
 
 The Committee yields to no one in its regard for the preservation of 
 the Riverside Drive waterfront against impairment and destruction, 
 either through railroad or general commercial development. Much of 
 the fear apparently existing in the public mind concerning the commer- 
 cialization of this territory arose from a report presented to Mayor 
 Gaynor on December 27, 1910, by the then Commissioner of Docks, the 
 Hon. Calvin Tomkins, and by the Commissioner of Parks for Manhattan 
 and Richmond, the Hon. Charles B. Stover. It was proposed in the 
 report that the strip of land between 81st Street and 129th Street be 
 reclaimed by outshore filling and that waterfront development be made 
 of the type found in certain foreign ports providing for a combination 
 esplanade and commercial wharf. So much of this report as provided 
 for land reclamation was approved and has been in process of carrying out 
 for a number of years. The fact that filling has been under way has 
 apparently misled certain citizen bodies into the belief that the first step 
 was begun for carrying into effect the remaining recommendations of the 
 joint report referred to. As a matter of fact the Board of Estimate and 
 Apportionment has repeatedly specifically repudiated the suggestion that 
 it would be proper to provide for further commercial development out- 
 shore of Riverside Park. The present administration of the Department 
 of Docks is thoroughly in sympathy with this view and has consistently 
 taken steps to reduce the present use authorized by existing statutes. 
 One of the first acts of the present Commissioner of Docks was officially 
 to withdraw the application which had been made to the Secretary of 
 War for an extension of pierhead and bulkhead lines outshore of the 
 commercial areas at 79th Street and 96th Street, indicating a definite 
 policy not to extend the present commercial areas. As the second step 
 in the carrying out of this policy, the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, 
 changed the waterfront plan for the commercial area at 79th Street so 
 as to eliminate three unbuilt piers which were projected and which were 
 included on the official plan. In order to make this positive gain more 
 secure against future attack, the Secretary of War was requested to 
 change the established lines and it is now an accomplished fact. It is 
 the hope of the Committee that ultimately one of the existing piers in 
 the 79th Street reservation can be removed, leaving but one pier, whicli 
 M-ill be necessary to take care of local river traffic. 
 
15 
 
 The Commissioner of Docks reports that notwithstanding the lease, 
 he has every reason to believe that the present unsightly coal pocket at 
 West 96th Street will be materially modified and possibly completely 
 removed in the near future. 
 
 With these facts before it the Committee decided that no half way 
 measures were adequate for the treatment of the Kiverside Park water- 
 front and that it was essential that, a plan should be secured which 
 not only would not impair the park but which would add to its beauty 
 and effectiveness and provide a physical barrier between the railroad 
 tracks and the waterfront, The present plan was therefore worked out, 
 which, in the Committee's opinion, provides an ideal solution of this 
 very perplexing problem. The railroad company contended long and 
 earnestly against the adoption of a tunnel under the Riverside Park and 
 Drive, claiming that aside from its cost it woTild mean great injury to 
 Park, Drive and property owners. The Committee insisted that the 
 railroad company assume the added financial burdens of the present plan, 
 which possesses all of the advantages of a complete tunnel plan without 
 its disadvantages. The present plan is a combination of tunnel and 
 roofed subway carefully adjusted to fit in with the topography of the park 
 slopes and so designed that it will allow effective parking along the entire 
 right of way. As part of the settlement the railroad company agrees 
 to pay the sum of |300,000 to restore the park, which is to be expended 
 under the direction of the Department of Parks for the simultaneous 
 carrying into effect of the park restoration with the completion of the 
 relocated railroad line. The settlement now proposed will entirely elimi- 
 nate the railroad nuisance from the Riverside Park waterfront. The pres- 
 ent plan provides for solid park slopes outshore of the railroad structure 
 at all points except along the two present commercial areas at 79th Street 
 and 96th Street. It will not only place the tracks entirely out of sight, but 
 will do so in a manner which will enhance the value of the Park and which 
 should be refiected in the added comfort of those living along Riverside 
 Park or using the Park and the Drive for pleasure purposes. It will pro- 
 vide a waterfront which can be treated in a manner which will make it 
 unsurpassed among the waterfront parks of the world and will provide 
 the nucleus of a city plan for this section of which the entire community 
 may well be proud. A substantial area will be added to the park. 
 
 Between a point in the vicinity of 82nd street and the south line of 
 72nd Street conditions are such that it is necessary to provide a roofed 
 
16 
 
 subway. All of the reasonable objections raised to the structure sug- 
 gested in the report of 1913 have been eliminated by the provision of 
 pai'k slopes outshore. It is proposed to permit the company gradually 
 to fan out its tracks south of 81st Street for leads into the 6Qth Street 
 yard. These lead tracks are absolutely necessary for efficient operation, 
 and will enable the railroad to move its trains promptly from the main 
 tracks into the 60th Street Yard, and thus remedy present evils. 
 
 It should be borne in mind in connection with the consideration 
 of the entire line, and particularly with reference to the Riverside Park 
 tracks, that operation under the new plan will be entirely by electricity, 
 which in itself will mean a very great gain for the City, greatly reducing 
 the noise, dirt and odors of operation. 
 
 The Committee approves the suggestion that the refuse disposal and 
 coal plants on Riverside Drive be relocated so far as possible at a point 
 south of 72nd Street. 
 
 The railroad company has consented reluctantly to a plan for the 
 carrying across its tracks of a viaduct in the line of West 70th street 
 leading to a new^ refuse disposal plajit on the waterfront. This is an 
 important gain which should not be underestimated. 
 
 To enable the City to carry out its plan the company has agreed 
 to cede to the City approximately five hundred feet of waterfront and 
 land under water directly south of West 72d street as part of the general 
 land adjustment. 
 
 When the new facilities are completed it will be possible either to 
 remove the present covered street cleaning structure from West 79th 
 street to the new location or, with slight changes, to convert it into a 
 much needed shelter for the use of officers and men of visiting naval 
 fleets. This is a matter which can receive further study and attention in 
 the light of future conditions. 
 
 Railroad Yard Between 72d Street and 59th Street. 
 
 The Committee was not materially concerned with the track layout 
 provided in the company's yard between 72d street and 59th street beyond 
 assuring itself that the arrangement was economical and did not require 
 an undue amount of lead trackage north of 72d street. The Committee's 
 engineering advisors reported to it that the trackage recommended north 
 of 72d street was necessary for proper yard operation south of that point, 
 
17 
 
 and the yard plan submitted herewith is recommended for approval upon 
 the basis of their advice. It is proposed as part of this settlement to 
 convey to the company in fee the beds of streets included within the 60th 
 street yard, reserving to the City an easement for a viaduct structure 
 in the line of West 70th street. These streets were all closed by an act 
 of the Legislature and have been entirely unavailable for public use for 
 a great many years. The sale of the fee to the railroad company will not 
 in any manner change the actual existing conditions nor will it prejudice 
 the rights of the City. There is no object in crossing the proposed rail- 
 road yard except in the manner for which provision is made. 
 
 Trackagre Bet-ween 59tli Street and 30tli Street. 
 
 The report of March 27, 1913, provided that the tracks of the rail- 
 road company should leave the yard at West 59th street in a curve 
 carried across private property between 11th and 12th avenues. Under 
 this plan Lue oiocKs between 54th street and 45th street would have 
 been divided practically in two and a large portion of De Witt Clinton 
 Park would have been destroyed. It was proposed under this plan to 
 leave the railroad tracks upon the surface and to construct over them a 
 new elevated 12th Avenue connected with each of the cross streets by 
 ramps with a 3 per cent, grade. Between 45th and 46th Streets the 
 tracks, under the 1913 plan, were to be carried up by ramp to an elevated 
 structure crossing 42d street with a full clearance of fourteen feet, and 
 continued on this structure along the waterfront into the proposed new 
 yard at 30th Street. The Construction of this ramp would have meani 
 the closing of at least two and possibly three streets. 
 
 The plan was recommended by the former Committee to fit in with 
 the plan for reserving the section between 57th Street and 43d Street 
 for new long steaanship piers. It was considered at that time wise to 
 carry the railroad tracks sufBciently far inshore to allow for the building 
 of eight of these piers. A careful re-study of the situation by the Com- 
 missioner of Docks subsequent to the making of that report has con- 
 vinced the Committee that it will not be necessary to provide for any 
 1200-foot piers in this section as originally proposed. This decision of 
 the Committee's has been approved by the unanimous opinion of leading 
 representatives of each of the steamship lines engaged in first-class 
 passenger transatlantic business at meetings duly held for the purpose of 
 discussing the subject. These gentlemen all agreed that the prospect of 
 
18 
 
 passenger steamers requiring berths of more than 1,050 feet in length, 
 was so remote as not to require serious consideration in the building of 
 these new piers. The pier and a half now building at 44th Street and 
 46th Street provide for 1,000-foot berths with provision left for a pos- 
 sible extension fifty feet further inshore. The Dock Commissioner 
 is alao of the opinion, and the Committee concurs in it, that it is un- 
 necessary to provide for the large number of piers originally suggested. 
 Owing to the fact that one of the Barge Canal terminals is to be located 
 in this section and in view of recent waterfront readjustments which 
 have placed a number of ships operating to the Mediterranean in the 
 section north of 50th Street, it will not be desirable to carry out the plan 
 as originally proposed. The Commissioner of Docks recommends that 
 opportunity be reserved for the building of two more piers in addition 
 to those now under way, and that 1,050 feet be taken as the limit of 
 length necessary to be provided. After very careful study and con- 
 sideration, the Committee recommends a modification of the railroad 
 alignment recommended by the former Committee so that the tracks be 
 carried along the westerly side of the present line of 12th Avenue be- 
 tween 59th Street and 52d Street, at which point they be curved back, 
 crossing property between 51st Street and 42d Street where it is proposed 
 that the tracks again be carried along the lines of 12th Avenue and the 
 marginal way as laid out on the City map. It is proposed in connectioRi 
 with this modified alignment that instead of elevating any portion of the 
 street the tracks themselves be carried upon an elevated structure the 
 entire distance between 59th Street and the 30th Street yard. It will 
 be possible under this plan to provide for railroad connection between, 
 the elevated structure and the second stories of the proposed new long 
 piers. The Commissioner of Docks is not convinced that this rail con- 
 nection is desirable. There seems to be a very great difference of opinion 
 among steamship men as to the feasibility of utilizing effectively railroad 
 tracks upon the type of pier planned for this locality and largely used 
 for passenger and package freight business. The Commissioner, however, 
 drew the plans for the pier under construction at the foot of 46th Street 
 in such a manner that structural provision is made to carry tracks upon 
 the second story of the pier. This provision added so slightly to the cost 
 of the structure that it appeared unwise to foreclose the possibility of 
 placing railroad tracks upon the pier through failure to provide for the 
 necessarv foundations. 
 
19 
 
 Under the plan now proposed it >vill be necessary to do a small 
 amount of regrading on the cross streets between West 43d and West 
 51st streets. All of this regrading would be necessary in any event in 
 order to make the proper connection between the readjusted 12th avenue 
 and marginal way and the upland. It will also be necessary to open 12th 
 avenue and the marginal way between 37th street and 42d street. This 
 should be done in any event, irrespective of the present settlement. 
 
 The tracks of the New York Central are so located under the present 
 recommendation that there is ample room outshore of them to build a 
 two-track structure for other roads to carry tracks which should be 
 owned by the City and reserved for possible use by all railroads under 
 proper restrictions. It is to be noted that these tracks have been kept to 
 the west of the New York Central Company's line, so that they may have 
 direct rail access to the City piers. 
 
 While unwilling in connection with this agreement to definitely 
 arrange for the handling of foreign traffic over the tracks between 59th 
 street and 30th street, the officials of the railroad company stated to your 
 Committee that in all probability it would be possible to arrange in the 
 future for the handling of such business up to the capacity of the tracks. 
 
 In order to make the reservation of provision for City-constructed 
 tracks of greater value the Committee insisted that the New York Central 
 Railroad Company should build its structure of sufficient strength to 
 carry the inshore side of a City line to be built in the future. This will 
 make it unnecessary to encumber the streets with more than one addi- 
 tional line of columns and greatly lessen future expense. 
 
 The original plan carried the tracks across private property in the 
 blocks between West 45th street and West 41st street. The change 
 which the Committee now suggests carries the tracks further west begin- 
 ning at the south side of West 45th street in a reversed curve to that 
 originally laid out. 
 
 Between West 38th Street and West 30th Street it is necessary to 
 provide for leads into the upper story of the proposed reconstructed 30th 
 Street yard. The plan reported on March 27, 1913, provided for carrying 
 these tracks along the present bulkhead. 
 
 The Commissioner of Docks has pointed out tne very great desira- 
 bility of keeping this elevated structure as far back from the waterfront 
 as possible in order to provide for inshore lengthening of piers in this 
 section for the future demands of commerce. It is improbable that any 
 
20 
 
 further extension of the pierhead line at this point will be permitted by 
 the Secretary of War and any increase in facilities must therefore be 
 secured by inshore cutting. The Committee is of the opinion that suffi- 
 cient room should be left for the lengthening of all piers between 41st 
 Street and 30th Street to 800 feet, and the railroad company has con- 
 sented to a readjustment of its tracks, removing them back from the 
 waterfront sufficiently far to permit the ultimate development proposed. 
 
 Pier Adjustment in Connection with the 30th Street 
 
 Yard. 
 
 The New York Central Company is at present the lessee from the 
 City of certain piers in the vicinity of the 30th Street yard, and proposed 
 as a part of this settlement that the City sell to it the fee of these and 
 other piers outshore of the 30th Street yard and to be used in connection 
 with it. The Committee was unwilling to consent to the alienation of 
 any of this pier or wharf property and it was finally decided that the 
 matter should be referred to the Dock Commissioner to be worked out in 
 connection with other waterfront plans under consideration and that the 
 Committee would recommend to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund 
 a sufficiently long term lease of the necessary piers to protect the railroad 
 company, reserving title in the City of New York and providing for a 
 proper rental of the property used. This matter will be made the subject 
 of a supplemental report by the Commissioner of Docks to the Commis- 
 sioners of the Sinking Fund, who are the officials charged with leasing 
 City property. 
 
 Thirtieth Street Yard. 
 
 At few points along the line were greater physical improvements to 
 be secured than in connection with the rebuilding and modernization of 
 the railroad's West 30th Street yard. The company is planning to spend 
 many millions of dollars to secure a thoroughly efficient freight terminal 
 designed to handle a tremendously increased business. At present the 
 company's j^ard tracks occupy the entire section between West 37th 
 Street and West 30th Street between 11th and 12th Avenues between 
 West 33rd Street and West 30th Street between 11th and 10th Avenues 
 and between West 30th Street and West 29th Street between 9th and 10th 
 Avenues. This means that three streets are entirely closed to traffic and 
 
21 
 
 that the vemaining streets in the section are crossed by dangerous sur- 
 face railroad tracks. The plan herewith submitted provides for elimina- 
 tion of all grade crossings east of 12th Avenue and for the opening 
 through to the waterfront of all the streets now closed. This readjust- 
 uient will be of tremendous advantage to the City. 
 
 The company proposes to construct new streets on two levels in the 
 lines of 31st street and 32d street between 10th avenue and 12th avenue, 
 and 33d street, 34th street, 35th street and 36th street between 11th and 
 12th avenues. The company agrees to pave both levels with the most 
 modern improved type of pavement, to be submitted before laying to the 
 Board of Estimate and Apportionment for its approval. The City is to 
 agree to maintain the pavement after it is laid as in the case of all City 
 streets and to clean and police both levels. The City also is to agree to 
 provide ordinary street lighting for both levels during the same hours 
 during which the streets of the City generally are lighted. The railroad 
 company will furnish all necessary supplementary lighting. 
 
 Trackag-e South of Tiii]:>tieth Street. 
 
 ]^o section has presented more difficulties than that between the 30th 
 street yard and the southern terminus of the road. The railroad com- 
 pany originally requested permission to construct a two-track elevated 
 railway southward along the marginal way from 30th street to 23d 
 street and thence along West street to Cortlandt street, with a two-track 
 branch at the junction of Canal and West streets along Canal street to 
 Varick street. 
 
 The former Committee in its report of March 27, 1913, for reasons 
 set forth in elaborate detail in that report, rejected this elevated plan 
 and recommended that the company be forced into a two-track subway 
 south of 30th street under 10th avenue to 15th street, thence under 
 Gansevoort Market to Washington street, thence under Washington 
 street and Canal street to Varick street, at which point it would enter 
 the lower level of a reconstructed yard at St. John's Park. This plan 
 had the merit of freeing the waterfront from the exclusive control of the 
 New York Central Eailroad and of ending the nuisance and danger of 
 street surface operation. Its obvious disadvantage lay in its cost and 
 in the difficulty of utilizing the line for a feeder to the buildings and 
 property along the route. 
 
22 
 
 This situation was perfectly apparent to the members of the former 
 Committee, but they considered that the disadvantages of an elevated 
 freight railroad in the public streets were sufficiently great to outweigh 
 the difficulties incident to a subway line. It was also felt that the City's 
 waterfront should be free for a comprehensive plan of terminal develop- 
 ment which would include not only the New York Central Eailroad but 
 possibly all carriers reaching the west side of Manhattan Island. All 
 efforts to arrive at such a terminal plan have proved futile in the past, 
 but it seems possible that the future may produce some form of improved 
 waterfront terminal to take the place of the present relatively cumber- 
 some and expensive method of railroad waterfront terminal handling. 
 
 The present Committee sought a solution which would preserve the 
 obvious advantages of flexibility possessed by an elevated structure 
 without its incidental civic objections. The plan presented for approval 
 provides for the acquisition by the New York Central Railroad Company 
 of a private right-of-way through the blocks between West 30th Street 
 and Canal Street and the construction of an elevated structure which will 
 occupy city streets only for the purpose of crossings. The plan, if 
 carried into effect, will mean that the elevated structure will be almost 
 completely screened from view except at street crossings, all of which 
 can be made without interference with traffic between the waterfront and 
 the upland. These street crossings can be made sightly and are not open 
 in the Committee's opinion to the objections raised to a transverse elevated 
 structure running through public streets. From the standpoint of com- 
 mercial utility there is no comparison between the solution now suggested 
 and that proposed in the 1913 report. The elevated road will peimit the 
 full utilization of all blocks through which it passes for factories and 
 warehouses and should vitalize a vast section of the Borough of Manhat- 
 tan now retarded in its progress and which will be given an opportunity 
 to attain the position of importance which its location deserves. It frees 
 the waterfront and all north and south thoroughfares for other uses, 
 permitting the working-out of whatever comprehensive plans for joint 
 municipally or privately-owned terminals may be suggested in the future 
 by the City's expert advisors. Operation over this elevated will be by 
 electricity in modern form to be approved by the Board of Estimate and 
 Apportionment, and provision will be made for a type of road bed which 
 will reduce noise and dust to a negligible quantity. The proposed solution 
 should receive the enthusiastic support of all civic and commercial bodies. 
 
23 
 
 The practical difficulties in carrying an elevated structure across 
 Canal Street and into the property now occupied as the St. John's Park 
 yard of the railroad has led to an abandonment of this property and the 
 relocation of the terminal on the blocks directly north and east of Canal 
 and AA est Streets. It will be necessary in this connection to close Spring 
 and Charlton Streets between Washington and West Streets in order to 
 secure proper loading platforms. The Committee does not consider that 
 the closing of these streets is of serious civic concern. 
 
 The present plans show an extension of the terminal tracks over the 
 sidewalk of West Street between King Street and Canal Street with a 
 full, clearance of fourteen feet. Provision will be made in the contract 
 for the paving of this area with a type of pavement to be approved by the 
 Board of Estimate and Apportionment. 
 
 The shifting of the southern terminal of the road from St. John's 
 Park to the new location proposed should not inconvenience business 
 interests which have grown up in reliance upon the facilities offered by 
 the St. John's Park terminal. 
 
 Provision will be made in the agreement between the railroad com- 
 pany and the City for the Company to save the city harmless from any 
 cost or expense caused through the construction of this line south 
 of 30th Street in the manner proposed. 
 
 The company's franchises south of Canal street are to be surrendered 
 to the City. 
 
 Surface tracks where not used on the new plan, on 11th Avenue 
 south of 60th Street, on 10th Avenue, West Street and Canal 'Street are 
 to be abandoned to the City upon the completion of permanent substi- 
 tute facilities as provided in the new plans. 
 
 Real Estate Adjustments. 
 
 To carry the proposed settlement into effect will require a substan- 
 tial relocation of the railroad company's right of way for practically the 
 entire length of the line. In certain places the land required for the new 
 right of Avay and additional railroad facilities is privately owned, in 
 which insta,nces the railroad company will acquire the necessary rights 
 and title. In a large number of other cases the rights and titles needed 
 by the railroad company are owned by the City of New York. In all 
 such cases a careful appraisal of the market value of the fees and 
 
24 
 
 easements iuvolTed has been made by the Real Estate Expert for the 
 Comptroller. On the other hand the City should acquire certain portions 
 of the abandoned right of way of the railroad company and certain land 
 under water and rights in marginal streets and bulkheads owned by the 
 railroad company for the protection and improvement of its parks and 
 waterfront property. These parcels have also been appraised by the 
 same Expert. In addition to the parcels shown in these schedules the 
 Committee proposes that the City acquire for park purposes certain lands 
 on the westerly slope of Inwood Hill, and that after acquisition the rail- 
 road company be furnished with the necessary easement for right of way 
 in tunnel through the hill as a substitute for its present right of way on 
 the waterfront. 
 
 The real estate balance between the railroad company and the City 
 shows a net credit to the City of New York of |6,109,S99. 
 
 An analysis of the real estate to be transferred by the City to the 
 railroad company shows that practically all of it is made up of parcels 
 which could not be utilized for city purposes and rights under city parks 
 and streets which do not in any way affect the value of the city's holdings. 
 In other words, although the city proposes to transfer real estate and real 
 estate rights totalling |11,094,381, it is really not surrendering anything 
 of substautial value for other city uses. On the other hand, the City is 
 securing from the railroad company land which can be profitably used 
 in extending and improving its parks and in protecting its park water- 
 fronts from commercialization. It is important that these facts be kept 
 clearly in mind in considering the financial adjustment for the bearing 
 of the cost of the proposed railroad outlined later in this report. 
 
 In appraising the lands and easements which are to be sold to the 
 New York Central Eailroad Company by the City of New York, and the 
 lands and easements which are to be purchased by the City of New York 
 from the Railroad Company, it has been necessary to consider the fol- 
 lowing propositions: 
 
 The value of the present surface occupation of certain streets by the 
 ^ew lork Central Railroad which are to be surrendered to the City of 
 ^ew York. •'^ 
 
 The vahe of lauds and lands „„der water owned by the City „t 
 
25 
 
 The value of permanent overhead rights to be granted to the New 
 York Central Eailroad by the City of New York. 
 
 The value of lands and lauds under water in streets of the City of 
 New York, opened, or unopened, discontinued and closed, the fee of which 
 is to be acquired from the City by the New York Central Railroad Com- 
 pany. 
 
 The value of surface rights in streets to be granted to the New York 
 Central Eailroad Company by the City of New York. 
 
 The value of lands and lands under water, the title of the Railroad 
 Company to which is to be sold to the City of New York. 
 
 The value of lands and lands under water, owned, occupied or con- 
 trolled by the City of New York, not included within the present right of 
 way of the Railroad Company, in which the permanent easements nec- 
 essary or required by the Railroad Company are to be sold to the Rail- 
 road Company by the City of New York. 
 
 The value of lands and lands under water in streets of the City of 
 New York, opened or unopened, discontinued and closed, the fee thereof 
 to be acquired by the New York Central Railroad, over which the City of 
 New York is to retain permanent overhead rights. 
 
 The value of lands and lands under water, owned, occupied and con- 
 trolled by the City of New York, not included within the present right 
 of way of the Railroad Company, in which the permanent easements 
 necessary or required by the Railroad Company for the purposes speci- 
 fied in Chapter 777 of the Laws of 1911, are to be sold to the Railroad 
 Company by the City of New York. 
 
 In all cases where the Railroad Company secures permanent over- 
 head rights or permanent subsurface easements, the price is fixed on the 
 basis of 17% per cent, of the value of the fee. 
 
 Where the fee of lands owned by the City of New York is granted 
 to the Railroad Company, the price is fixed as of the full market value 
 thereof. 
 
 In those cases wherein the Railroad Company gives up its present 
 surface occupation and surrenders the same to the City, the price is 
 fixed on the basis of 33>^ per cent, of the value of the fee. 
 
 In those lands where the Railroad Company is securing from the 
 City of New York surface occupation of new streets and avenues, the 
 price is fixed on th^ basis of 50 per cent, of the value of the fee. 
 
 In fhose cases wherein the City of New York grants to the Railroad 
 Company permanent surface and permanent overhead rights in streets 
 
26 
 
 and avenues, the price is fixed on the basis of 67>4 per cent, of the value 
 of the fee. 
 
 In all cases where the Railroad Company grants to the City an ease- 
 ment over its lands, the price is fixed on the basis of llyi per cent, of 
 the value of the fee. 
 
 In order that the Committee might have before it the necessary infor- 
 mation concerning the status of the railroad company's title to lands 
 in its right of way, a request was made to the Corporation Cfounsel to 
 nave an exhaustive title search made of all of the real estate parcels 
 involved in the settlement proposed. This was done and a complete 
 report is submitted herewith as Appendix " A " for the information of 
 the Board. There has been from time to time a considerable amount of 
 uninformed and loose discussion concerning these real estate titles and 
 the Committee decided that the only way to avoid further misunderstand- 
 ing was to include the technical report upon titles. 
 
 Cost of the Improvement and Financial Adjustment. 
 
 The report of March 27, 1913, proposed that the City should adjust 
 the real estate transfers upon the basis of a net balance in favor of the 
 City of 17,486,300.50. It was proposed in that report that in securing 
 certain civic advantages in the railroad plan north of 72nd Street the 
 City should make the following contributions to construction : 
 
 To a tunnel through Inwood Hill |1,600,000 . 00 
 
 To a tunnel through Fort Washington Park 1,500,000 . 00 
 
 To a roofed structure under Riverside Park, 122nd Street 
 
 to 72nd Street 4,222,413.00 
 
 Making a total City contribution of |7 322,413 ToO 
 
 This figure, balanced against the amount in the City^s favor on real 
 estate transfers, left a net cash balance payable to the City on the entire 
 settlement of |163,887.50. 
 
 The cost of carrying out the plan submitted in this report north of 
 72nd Street is substantially many million dollars in excess of the plan 
 outlined in the report of 1913. The major part of this excess in cost is 
 due to the insistence by the Committee upon a tunnel plan for Riverside 
 Drive and the covering of the main line tracks between 135th Street and 
 151st Street. Moreover, the balance in favor of the City on real estate 
 transfers under the present proposed settlement was reduced from 
 17,486,300.50 to .f6,109,899 because of the larger quantities of Railroad 
 
27 
 
 property granted by the railroad company in cari-ying out the present 
 settlement. The Committee consistently contended that even in spite 
 of the smaller balance for real property which it was in a position ti> 
 furnish in carrying out the plan along the lines of proper city develop- 
 ment that the railroad company should nevertheless consent to the as- 
 sumption of the greatly increased cost of the present plan as an offset for 
 the facilities which it was securing under the settlement now proposed. 
 The Committee contended that the right to enlarge those facilities was 
 worth to the railroad company the difference in cost between the financial 
 requirements of the 1913 plan and those of the present settlement. The 
 representatives of the railroad company argued long and earnestly 
 against this position of the Committee and requested various material 
 compensating offsets, all of which the Committee declined to grant. 
 Finally it was conceded reluctantly by the company that it would assume 
 the entire cost of the improvement over and above the contribution of 
 the real estate owned by the City and necessary to carry it out. 
 
 The City is therefore in a position to secure this tremendously im- 
 portant improvement with all its direct and indirect advantages witliout 
 the expenditure of a cent of money and with a surrender of property 
 and property rights, the major part of which are practically valueless 
 for general civic purposes. 
 
 The Committee has already presented the technical plans to carry the 
 recommendations of this report into effect as required by Chapter 777 
 of the Laws of 1911. That act provides for the exhibition of these plans 
 at the Grand Central Station during their consideration and for not 
 less than thirty days. The Board of Estimate and Apportionment has 
 fixed April 25, 1916, for a public hearing upon the plans in order that 
 there may be full public understanding and discussion, before their final 
 adoption. 
 
 In conclusion, the Committee desires to emphasize the very great 
 advantages accruing to the City of New York through the adoption of the 
 plan which it is presenting. If it is carried out it will mean the entire 
 eliminatioii of grade crossings ; the creation of a splendid new park at In- 
 Avood Hill ; the enlargement and improvement of the existing Fort Wash- 
 ington Park ; the final completion of Eiverside Park as a real waterfront 
 recreation ground; the modernization of the railroad company's yards 
 at Manhattanville and at 60th Street, with the attendant commercial 
 advantages which will necessarily follow; the construction south of 59th 
 Street of an efficient freight railroad terminal designed to handle ade- 
 
28 
 
 quately a tremendously increased freight business, and the provision of 
 new and enlarged freight terminals at 30th Street and at Canal and West 
 Streets. This entire improvement will be comparable with the splendid 
 Park Avenue improvement carried out by the same company. These ad- 
 vantages will be secured to the City of New York without the expenditure 
 of City funds and without the surrender of any of the City's waterfront 
 to the exclusive use of the railroad company. The settlement has ex- 
 tended over a number of years and considerable public impatience has 
 been manifested at times to what appeared to be unreasonable delay in 
 reaching a final conclusion. The Committee submits, however, that the 
 results which have been attained have fully justified the painstaking care 
 and attention which have been devoted to it and have demonstrated 
 that the Committee Avas right in not permitting itself to be forced into 
 making a report until the matter was in such shape that it could present 
 to the City for its acceptance a solution which it could heartily rec- 
 ommend. 
 
 The Committee desires to express its thanks for their valuable work 
 in connection with this settlement to Mr. R. C. Harrison, First Deputy 
 Commissioner of Docks; Mr. Ernest P. Goodrich, Consulting Engineer 
 of the Borough of Manhattan ; Mr. Charles W. Stanif ord, Chief Engineer, 
 Department of Docks ; Mr. John F. Sullivan, Consulting Engineer of the 
 Bureau of Contract Supervision of the Board of Estimate and Appor- 
 tionment, Mr. Charles A. O'Malley, Chief of Division of Real Estate of 
 the Department of Finance, and Mr. E. J. Freedman, Assistant Cor- 
 poration Counsel. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 COMMITTEE ON PORT AND TERMINAL FACILITIES. 
 WILLIAM A. PRENDERGAST, 
 
 Comptroller ( Chairman ) . 
 MARCUS M. MARKS, 
 
 President of the Borough of Manhattan. 
 LEWIS H. POUNDS, 
 
 President of the Borough of Brooklyn. 
 R. A. C. SMITH, 
 
 Commissioner of Docks. 
 
29 
 
 APPENDIX "A." 
 
 Hon. Wm. a. Peendergast, 
 
 Comptroller and Chairman, Committee on Port and 
 
 Terminal Facilities of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment. 
 
 Sir.— In response to your request for advice as to the title of The 
 New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company to the right 
 of way and roadbed upon which it operates its railroad, I submit the 
 following facts and conclusions : 
 
 Rig'lits of the Railroad Company to Operate on its 
 
 Present I^ocation. 
 
 As to the route below 59th Street no questions of title have arisen 
 because the railroad is operated upon public streets, title to which is 
 unquestionably vested in the City subject to use by the Railroad Company. 
 
 In connection with the removal of the tracks of this railroad com- 
 pany from the present right of way, by either elevating them, putting 
 them underground, or relocating them at a distance further east of their 
 present location between 59th Street and Spuyten Duyvil Creek, the 
 all-important question to determine is: 
 
 ^'S'hat title has the railroad company to its right of way in tiiis 
 district? 
 
 This question has given rise to much discussion and contention, 
 some going even so far as to claim that the railroad company had no 
 rights at all but that The City of New York owns the entire right of way 
 and could compel the railroad company to remove its tracks therefrom 
 without compensation or without the City furnishing a new right of way 
 elsewhere in lieu of the present one. 
 
 In the first place, before entering upon any discussion of the title 
 of the railroad to the road bed at its present location, it seems advisable 
 to dispose of the question of the right of the company to operate its rail- 
 road on its present right of way or on any other right of way within the 
 City limits. 
 
 The railroad company was organized under and pursuant to the 
 provisions of chapter 216 of the Laws of 1846 and was known as the 
 
30 
 
 Hudson River Eailroad CompaBj and by that act Avas given a franchise 
 to operate a railroad between Albany and New York City, provided, 
 however, that within the City limits the assent or consent of the City s 
 authority should be first had and obtained. 
 
 In the year 1847 the Common Council of the City adopted an 
 Ordinance granting permission to the railroad company to construct a 
 double track of rails with suitable turnouts, along the Hue of the Hudson 
 River from Spuyten Duyvil Creek to near 68th Street; occupying so 
 much of the 12th Avenue as lies along the shore, thence winding from 
 the shore so as to intersect the 11th Avenue at or near 60th Street. 
 
 As we are dealing only with this district it is unnecessary to give 
 the details of the balance of the route to Canal and West Streets. 
 
 It is also unnecessary to state in detail the provisions of this ordin- 
 ance, other than those which are material to the right to operate, which 
 are as follows : 
 
 " Section 3. The said Company shall, within one year from 
 passage of the said ordinance, and before entering upon any con- 
 tract for grading, file in the ofiice of the Street Commissioner a 
 map showing the location and intended grade of said railroad 
 
 " Section 6. This ordinance shall not be construed as bind- 
 ing upon the Corporation, nor shall it go into effect until the said 
 Hudson Hiver Railroad Company shall first duly execute, under 
 their corporate seal, such an instrument in vtriting, covenanting 
 and engaging, on their part and behalf, to stand to, abide by and 
 perform all such covenants and requirements contained in the 
 2d and 3d sections of this ordinance, as the Mayor and the Council 
 to the Corporation shall by their certificate approve, and not 
 until such instrument shall be filed, so certified, in the office of the 
 Comptroller of the City." 
 
 This ordinance was adopted by the Board of Aldermen April 30, 
 1847. by the Board of Assistant Aldermen May 3, 1847, and approved 
 by the Mayor, May 6, 1847. 
 
 The Agreement referred to in section 6 of the ordinance above 
 quoted was entered into by the said Company, was dated August 12 
 1847, and was acknowledged by the President of the Company, William 
 Chamberlain, with its corporate seal attached and was filed in the office 
 of the Comptroller of the City of New York August 19, 1847. 
 
31 
 
 This Agreement after stating in detail the conditions imposed by the 
 Ordinance contained the following provisions: 
 
 "* * * « * * ♦* 
 
 "And, that the Company will, within one year from the 
 passage of the said ordinance, and before entering upon any con- 
 tract for grading, file, in the Office of the Street Commissioner a 
 map showing the location and intended grade of said railroad. 
 
 " And, lastly, that the said Company will stand to, abide by 
 and perform, all and singular, the conditions and requirements 
 contained in the second and third sections of the said ordinance." 
 
 Said Agreement bears the following endorsements : 
 
 " I, William V. Brady, Mayor of the City of New York, do 
 hereby certify that I approve of the preceding covenants as being 
 in compliance with the ordinance of the corporation approved 
 May 6, 1847, referred to in said covenant. 
 
 " Wm. V. Brady, 
 
 " Mayor." 
 
 " I, Willis Hall, Counsel of the Corporation of the City of 
 New York, do hereby certify that I approve of the preceding cove- 
 nant, as being in compliance with the ordinance referred to in the 
 above certificate. 
 
 "Willis Hall, 
 " Counsel of Corporation." 
 
 As a matter of fact the map in question was before the Mayor and 
 Counsel of the Corporation at the time their signatures were attached 
 to the agreement filed by the Eailroad Company, said agreement con- 
 taining a recital as follows : 
 
 a * * * * » « ** 
 
 " Whereas, Pursuant to said ordinance and the acts incor- 
 porating said Company and acts amendatory thereof, the said 
 directors have located the said railroad in the City of New York, 
 according to the map prepared to be filed herewith entitled ' Map 
 showing the location and intended grade of the Hudson Kiver 
 Eailroad in the City of New York.' " 
 
 Within the year provided for in the ordinance of the City and the 
 agreement of the Eailroad Company, the said railroad company filed, 
 in the office of the Street Commissioner of the City and in the Eegister's 
 Office of the County of New York, the map showing the location and in- 
 tended grade of said railroad. 
 
32 
 
 All the jurisdictional requirements necessary to enable the railroad 
 company to proceed were complied with and the road was constructed 
 within the right of way located on said map and the right of way m use 
 to-day coincides, except for slight variations caused by sinkage and 
 settlement, with the lines so located. 
 
 In the Act of 1846, the corporate existence of the Hudson River 
 Railroad was fixed at 50 years. 
 
 By Chapter 917, Laws of 1869, provision was made for the con- 
 solidation and merger of existing corporations into one corporation, 
 which should have a corporate existence of 500 years. Under the pro- 
 visions of this act the Hudson River Railroad Company and other 
 companies merged and consolidated into the New York Central and 
 Hudson River Railroad Company, having a corporate existence of 500 
 years. 
 
 Believing that this merger and consolidation did not extend the 
 consent of the City to the Hudson River Railroad Company from 50 years 
 to the 500 years of the new corporation, the Board of Estimate on May 
 28, 1909, duly adopted a resolution requiring the company to remove its 
 tracks from the streets of the City between Spuyten Duyvil Creelc and 
 St. John's Park, on the grounds that its franchise to operate thereon 
 under the said consent had ceased. 
 
 An action was thereafter begun by the New York Central and Hudson 
 River Railroad Company against the City to restrain the threatened 
 removal of the tracks by the corporate authorities. 
 
 In this action, the nature and extent of the franchise, the occupa- 
 tion of the right of way under the Act of 1847, the consent of the City 
 by the ordinance of 1847, and the merger and consolidation under the 
 Laws of 1869, were passed upon by the Court of Appeals, 202 N. Y., 212. 
 In that case the Court decided as follows : 
 
 " The right of the New York Central and Hudson River Rail- 
 road Company as now exercised to maintain tracks in 10th 11th 
 and 12th Avenues and West Street in the City of New 'York 
 was originally derived from the State through the Legislature and 
 not from the City, by a franchise which was not limited in its 
 duration. The Legislature intended that the right should be en- 
 joyed by the successors of the grantee, and hence, the railroad 
 cranpany is entitled to an injunction restraining the City and its 
 officers from removing or attempting to remove such tracks " 
 
33 
 
 Judge Bartlett in his opinion, among other things said : 
 
 " * * * We are satisfied that the duration of the franchise 
 was not thus limited, but the limitation applied to the corporate 
 existence of the Hudson River Eailroad Company only (which 
 might be extended) and not at all to the location of its tracks in 
 the streets of New York. * * * 
 
 " The assent of the City did not assume to prescribe any limit 
 of time during which such occupation of the streets should con- 
 tinue. As has already been intimated, we think no such limitation 
 of the franchise is to be found in the Charter of the Hudson River 
 Railroad Company * * *. 
 
 " The street franchise is granted in a different section of the 
 statute, quite disassociated from the time limit. The language 
 leaves the duration of the franchise wholly indefinite and unde- 
 termined. It was unquestionably in existence, and in the lawful 
 enjoyment of the Hudson River Railroad Company when that cor- 
 poration was merged with the New York Central in 1869 * * *. 
 
 " We see no escape from the conclusion that by means of this 
 enactment (Laws 1869, Chap. 917) and the proceeding thereunder 
 the Legislature transferred to the plaintiff the franchise in the 
 New York City Streets which it had originally 'bestowed upon the 
 Hudson River Railroad Company in 1846. * * * 
 
 " The right of the respondent to resist the attempt of the City 
 to compel the removal of its tracks in the absence of any action 
 to that end on the part of the State is clear, whatever may be the 
 power of the Legislature in the premises. 
 
 " In granting a franchise of this character, indefinite as to its 
 duration, the Legislature evidently contemplated that it should be 
 enjoyed 'by the successor or successors of the immediate grantee, 
 if that grantee should cease to operate the railroad between Albany 
 and New York, either in consequence of ceasing to be a corpora- 
 tion or for any other reason * * * 
 
 " In the case at bar the Legislature did not in express terms 
 extend the life of the corporation upon which the franchise in 
 question was bestowed, but it provided for the continuance of that 
 life iby means of its merger into a corporation which should live 
 500 years. * * * The question upon which this litigation 
 turns is whether the plaintiff can lawfully be put off the streets 
 by the City of New York. The act of the Legislature which per- 
 mitted the Hudson River Railroad Company to go there sixty-five 
 years ago and which the Legislature has seen fit to leave in full 
 force and effect ever since, compels us to answer that question in 
 the negative." 
 
34 
 
 I have quoted fully from the opinion of the Court of Appeals for 
 the purpose of accentuating the fact, that irrespective of any ques- 
 tions of title to land in the right of way or adjacent thereto, the rail- 
 road company has a franchise, upheld 'by the highest court in the State 
 in unmistakable language, to operate a railroad within the City limits, 
 upon and along the right of way now occupied by the railroad of which 
 it cannot be deprived except by due process of law in which case it 
 would Tbe entitled to just compensation. 
 
 Bearing this important fact in mind the question of titles will now 
 be taken up as follows : 
 
 1st. The City's title to lands under water prior to the passage of 
 the ordinance of 1847. 
 
 2d. The effect of the ordinance of 1847 upon the title of the City. 
 
 3d. The title of the railroad company to the lands formerly under 
 water between 60th and 72d Streets and the title of the City to the lands 
 formerly under water within the lines of the streets and avenues within 
 that area and occupation of the same by the railroad company in connec- 
 tion with what is called the 60th Street Yard. 
 
 4th. The title of the railroad company to its right of way 'between 
 60th Street and Spuyten Duyvil Creek. 
 
 A careful and exhaustive examination of the titles affecting the 
 premises in subdivision 4 was made by title examiners of real estate 
 in the Bureau of Street Openings of the Law Department of the City of 
 New York and upon the facts and information obtained the following 
 discussion of the above subdivisions is based : 
 
 1. The City's title to lands under water prior to the passage of 
 the ordinance of 1847. 
 
 By the 3d section of the Dongan Charter, all the waste, vacant and 
 unappropriated lands on Manhattan Island extending to low water mark 
 around the island were conveyed to the Mayor, Aldermen and Com- 
 monalty of the City of New York. The land under water between the 
 high and low water marks is commonly designated as the Tideway. 
 
 The Dongan Charter was confirmed by an act of the Colonial Legis- 
 lature May 6, 1691. 
 
 The Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Lowndes vs. 
 Huntington, 153 U. S., p. 1 with regard to this act at page 26, said : 
 
 " No question exists as to the validity of these ancient charters 
 m that they were broad enough to include oyster rights in the 
 
85 
 
 waters within them. The subsequent legislation of the colony and 
 the State affirm their validity. Thus on May 6, 1691, the colonial 
 legislature passed an act, entitled ' An act for settling, quieting 
 and confirming unto the cities, towns, manors and freeholders 
 within this province their several grants, patents and rights 
 respectively.' " 
 
 The Dongan Charter was also confirmed by the Montgomery Charter 
 of 1730, which, however, conveyed no lands under water in the locality 
 under consideration. 
 
 The Montgomery Charter was confirmed by Chapter 582 of the Laws 
 of 1732. 
 
 These charters to the City were confirmed by the 1st Constitution of 
 the State of New York adopted in 1777 and have been ratified and con- 
 firmed 'by every Constitution since adopted. 
 
 By letters patent from the People of the State of New York, dated 
 March 25, 1826, lands under water in the locality under consideration 
 between low water mark and a line 400 feet outshore thereof were granted 
 to the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York. 
 
 By Chapter 182 of the Laws of 1837, Thirteenth Avenue from Ham- 
 mond (now West 11th Street) to 135th Street was laid out as the exterior 
 street along the easterly shore of the Hudson Eiver. 
 
 Twelfth Avenue was extended from its then northerly terminus to 
 135th Street and the intersecting streets were also extended out to said 
 exterior street and the lands under water of the State between the 400 
 foot of the letters patent of 1826 and the westerly side of the new 13th 
 Avenue were conveyed to the City, said act providing that said letters 
 of 1826 should be held to cover the same as if specifically included therein. 
 
 By these various charters, letters patent and acts of the Legislature, 
 the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York became 
 vested with the title to the lands under water along the easterly shore of 
 the Hudson Eiver between high water mark and the westerly side of 
 13th Avenue from Hammond (now West 11th) Street to 135th Street 
 and with title to the lands under water along the easterly shore of the 
 Hudson Eiver between the high water mark and a line 400 feet outshore 
 of low water mark from 135th Street to Spuyten Duyvil Creek. 
 
 The title of the City to lands under water in this locality was further 
 extended outshore by letters patent from the State of New York dated 
 April 28th, 1871. 
 
3G 
 
 In this connection, the location of the high water mark becomes im- 
 portant. In the locality in question no water grants of any importance 
 were issued by the City prior to the adoption of the ordinance of 1847. 
 
 Under and pursuant to Chapter' 115 of the Laws of 1807 a com- 
 mission was appointed to determine upon and adopt a street lay out sys- 
 tem for the upper section of the City and place the sa,me upon a map to 
 be " The Map or Plan " of the City. Such Commissioners duly reported 
 and made a map which is known as the Street Commissioners' Map but 
 it is drawn to a very small scale. 
 
 Thereafter a contract was entered into by the City with John Eandel 
 to make surveys and maps on a larger scale on which the street lay out 
 system was to be shown together with the line of high water. 
 
 Such surveys and maps were made and filed in the Street Commis- 
 sioners' Office in the year 1820 and are known as Eandel's Map. This 
 map is universally accepted by Surveyors and Title Examiners as correct. 
 
 2nd. The effect of the ordinance of 1847 upon the City's title 
 
 This ordinance was adopted by the Common Council and gave the 
 consent of the corporation to the construction and operation of the road 
 withm the City limits. 
 
 _ It can in no wise be construed as a grant of any title of the corpora- 
 tion to the lands under water owned by it. At the time of its adoption 
 
 ?«A ^T7T '^ *^' ^'''^'''^ ^'^^"^ Ordinance, adopted February 22d 
 1844, and of Chapter 225, Laws of 1845, ratifying such ordinance the 
 Common Council were deprived of any power to make grants of land 
 under water and the sole power to make such grants was onferred 
 upon the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund. conferred 
 
 No claim is made by the Eailroad Conrnnn-tr -+110+ „ 
 
 ever issued to it by the cimissionerso't^eSrkLrFunT" '"'' "" 
 
 Before the consent given by said ordinance became onerativ. n 
 of location and grade of the road had to be filed a^.? ^ '"''P 
 
 abide by and conform to all the conditio! in 1 o.. "^T""^"* *« 
 executed by the Railroad Company and filed "' ''*' '"^ '^^ 
 
 Upon the filing of the map and the agreement vaf. ^ . 
 became a part of the ordinance and together ITth.. ! "^ ^'" ^^^^ 
 tained constituted a license from the C?tv to 7 f^""^ "^^^^^^ ^0^- 
 
 tion, during the con>orate exrenee of t'he r^ S "'*''"' ""P^^^ 
 of the lands under water, owned by the Citv n Tn '^^'^^''^ '^ "^""^^ 
 the right of way as shown upon the^locatiS map ^^^'^^ *'^ '"^'^ '' 
 
37 
 
 Occupation under such license carries with it no title and such 
 occupation no matter how long continued can never ripen into a title 
 by adverse possession because the entry upon the lauds under water was 
 under the license and recognition of the superior title in the City. 
 
 3rd. The title of the railroad company to the lands formerly under 
 water between 60th and 72d Streets and the title of the City to the 
 lands formerly under water within the lines of the streets and avenues 
 within that area and occupation of the same by the Eailroad Company 
 in connection with what is called the 60th Street Yard. 
 
 The entire district between 60th and 72d Streets is covered by water 
 grants authorized to be'issued by the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund 
 to the adjacent upland owners between the years 1852 and 1871, sub- 
 sequent to the construction of the railroad on the right of way located on 
 the map of 1847, filed by the railroad company as required by the Ordi- 
 nance of 1847. 
 
 Between 60th and 65th Streets, with the exception of the block be- 
 tween 63rd to 64th Streets, these grants extended only to the Central 
 Park Commissioners' Bulkhead Line established in 1867 and confirmed 
 by the Legislature in 1868. This line was located at 60th Street, about 
 174 feet 6 inches westerlv of the westerly line of 12th avenue and at 65th 
 Street about 200 feet westerly from the westerly line of 12th Avenue. 
 Between 63rd and 64th Streets the grant extended out to 13th Avenue. 
 
 The lands under water outside of the Central Park Commissioners' 
 Bulkhead Line in front of these blocks and between 63rd and 64th 
 Streets, the lands under water outside of 13th Avenue were not con- 
 veyed and title thereto is in the City. 
 
 Between 65th and 72nd Streets the water grants conveyed lands 
 under water out to 13th Avenue, established as hereinbefore stated. 
 
 All the grants contained an exception of the lands under water 
 forming the streets and avenues or parts thereof and the Court of Ap- 
 peals has repeatedly held that under the language used in the grants, the 
 title never passed to the grantees but remained in the City. 
 
 Title to these streets and avenues, notwithstanding the Act of Legis- 
 lature hereinafter referred to, never was acquired by the railroad 
 company. 
 
 This section will now be divided in two parts, viz., between 60th 
 and 65th Streets and between 65th and 72nd Streets. 
 
 All the uplands and lands under water between 60th and 65th 
 
38 
 
 Streets westerly of the right of way, with the exception of such uplands 
 and lands under water between high water line and the Central Park 
 Commissioners' Bulkhead Line, and in the block between 63rd and 64th 
 Streets out to 13th Avenue within the lines of streets and avenues, is 
 vested in the Eailroad Company. 
 
 The Eailroad Company applied, in the month of May, 1874, to the 
 Board of Docks, for a lease of all lands under water from the center of 
 60th to the center of 65th Street, inclusive, belonging to the Mayor, 
 Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York. 
 
 On June 22d, 1874, a lease was executed by the Dock Commis- 
 sioners and the officials of the Railroad Company for a term of ten years 
 with four renewals of ten years each, covering lands under water within 
 a specified area, with the privilege to fill in and reclaim lands under 
 water between the shore line and the bulkhead to be constructed. 
 In the lease the City's rights to the lands within the lines of the streets 
 were fully protected by a clause providing that any and all streets and 
 avenues laid down on the map of the City should be opened as public 
 highways by the Railroad Company whenever directed so to do by the 
 City. 
 
 The Railroad Company is at present in possession of the lands 
 within the lines of the streets in this district covered by the water 
 grants above referred to under this lease, which does not expire until 
 the first day of August, 1924, subject, but for the act hereinafter referred 
 to, to the covenant to make such streets when required by the City to be 
 made. 
 
 The land within these various streets in this section, so far as it 
 consisted of original uplands, was acquired in various street opening 
 proceedings not necessary to refer to in detail, except to say that it 
 forms an exceedingly small area, and is also subject, but for the act 
 hereinafter referred, to the covenant to open the streets when directed. 
 
 Between 65th and 72d Streets. 
 
 All the uplands and land under water westerly of the right of way 
 with the exception of the uplands and lands under water between the 
 high water mark and 13th Avenue within the lines of streets and avenues 
 are vested in the railroad company by deeds and by virtue of a condemna- 
 tion proceeding. 
 
 The nature of the title acquired by the railroad company in this 
 proceeding, as well as the title of the City to the lands under water 
 
39 
 
 within the street and avenue lines, was passed upon by the Court of 
 Appeals in the Matter of the application of N. Y. 0. and Hudson E. 
 R. R. Co., 77 N. Y., 248. 
 
 In this application the railroad company originally included the 
 lands and lands under water within the lines of the streets and avenues 
 in this district, but, upon objection of the Corporation Counsel, an order, 
 was entered eliminating such lands and lands under water from the pro- 
 ceeding. 
 
 With regard to the streets. Miller, J., in the opinion of the Court 
 of Appeals, said : 
 
 " The petitioners do not seek in this application, nor could 
 they acquire title to lands forming part of the streets and avenues 
 in question, for the reason that they belonged to the City, for the 
 benefit of the public at large and cannot be condemned.' 
 
 With regard to the title acquired by the railroad company, Miller, 
 J., said : 
 
 " So far as the rights of owners of land adjacent to the 
 streets and avenues are concerned, they have no direct interest 
 in the question which arises in reference to the same, for the 
 grants under which they hold the lands under water expressly 
 declare that they shall forever thereafter continue and remain 
 public streets and avenues. The petitioners can only acquire 
 the rights of the owners of the premises under the grant to them ; 
 and such acquisition would be subject to all the covenants, con- 
 ditions and provisos which are stated and recited in the grant and 
 which constitute a material and important part of the same." 
 
 In the year 1880 a lease was executed and delivered to the railroad 
 company of all the lands 'under water belonging to the City between 
 65th and 72d Streets, the premises leased being colored red and orange on 
 the map attached to the lease, for a term of ten years from May 1st, 
 1880, with the privilege of two renewals of ten years each. 
 
 The portion colored orange represented the land within the lines 
 of the streets and avenues, and portion colored pale red represented the 
 lands under water exterior to the bulkhead to be constructed. 
 
 Years after the execution of this lease it was discovered that in the 
 premises colored pale red was included land under water between 67th 
 and 69th Streets, which had been granted by the City to the Executors of 
 Sarah Talman, deceased, and a proportionate reduction in the rent was 
 made. 
 
40 
 
 This lease also contained a covenant on the part of the railroad 
 company to make the streets and avenues when directed so to do. 
 
 This lease expired May 1st, 1910, but the railroad company has 
 remained in possession under yearly permits upon the same terms and 
 conditions. 
 
 From the foregoing facts it will be seen that the City's rights in and 
 to the streets and avenues in this area were amply and fully protected. 
 
 Were it not for the act of the Legislature hereinbefore only referred 
 to no questions could have been raised by the railroad company as to 
 the City's title to the lands and lands under water within the lines of the 
 streets and avenues in this area. 
 
 The effect of this act will now be considered. 
 
 The act in question was Chapter 714 of the Laws of 1887, and was 
 entitled as follows : 
 
 "An act for the improvement of the City of New York 
 between the southerly line of 60th Street and the southerly line 
 of 72d Street, lying west of the easterly line of the lands now 
 held by the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad 
 Company." 
 
 Only section 1 is material to the questions of title under considera- 
 tion herein and said section is as follows : 
 
 " Section 1. It shall be lawful for, and the New York Central 
 and Hudson River Railroad Company are hereby authorized, to 
 cause a parapet wall to be erected and thereafter maintained 
 upon a line bounding their terminal yard on the North River on 
 the east, on the westerly line of Eleventh Avenue from tSie 
 southerly line of Sixtieth Street to the southerly line of Sixty- 
 first Street, and from thence northerly on the easterly prop- 
 erty hue of said company and until it intersects the northerlv 
 line of Seventy-second Street, at a point distant six hundred 
 and eleven and five-tenths feet westerlv from Eleventh Ave 
 nue; and all the portions of the streets "hetween the said loall 
 and the North or Hvdson River, including Tioelfth Avenue are 
 herehy discontinued upon the map or plan of the city and closed" 
 
 «. l°„"^^l.^'''* P?""'^ *^^ ^''''^^ "northerly line of Seventy-secona 
 Street m this section must be read as " southerly line of Seventy-second 
 Street " for the reason that the title of the act limits the improvement to 
 such southerly line. P^ovement to 
 
 _ The last clause of this section closing the streets and 12th Avenup 
 m this area has been the foundation of all the contention made by the 
 
41 
 
 railroad company that it became seized of the title to the -lands filled in 
 within the lines of the streets and Twelfth Avenue. 
 
 But fortunately for the City, an Act similar in its terms has been 
 construed by the courts. 
 
 In the year 1887 an act was passed by the Legislature authorizing 
 the laying out and construction of a marginal street on the East Eiyer 
 beween 64th and 86th Streets and providing, although not specified in 
 the title of the act, for the closing of an Exterior Street, previously laid 
 out, between 86th Street and the Third Avenue Bridge. Chapter 697, 
 Laws 1887. 
 
 An action was begun by the Consolidated Ice Company, the successor 
 in title to a grantee of the City under a water grant containing an ex- 
 ception of the lands under water within the 'lines of the streets laid out, 
 against the City, to determine its claim of title to the lands under water 
 within the lines of the Exterior Street claimed to have been closed and 
 discontinued by the aforesaid act. 
 
 On appeal to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, the Court 
 in discussing the effect and scope of the act in question said : 
 
 " Nor can the plaintiff derive any aid from Chapter 697 of 
 the laws of 1887. That portion of section 7 which in terms re- 
 peals the act of 1852, so far as it authorizes the street, is probably 
 an infringement of the State Constitution, article 3, section 16, as 
 it can scarcely be stretched sufficiently to fall within anything con- 
 tained in the title, or to which reference is therein made. But if 
 it were otherwise by its very terms, the title to the land is con- 
 firmed in the City, and the plaintiff could take nothing thereby. At 
 most, if it could be held to apply it could only be held so_ to 
 operate as to work a discontinuance of the street, but the title 
 of- the City thereto would not be affected or impaired. " 
 
 The decision of the Appellate Division was affirmed by the Court 
 of Appeals, 166 N. Y. 92. 
 
 Applying the principles decided in this case to the act herein under 
 consideration it follows that the provisions of the act must be limited 
 to the southerly side of 72d Street and have no effect upon the title of 
 the City to the lands within the lines of the streets and 12th Avenue de- 
 clared to be closed by the Act. 
 
 It only remains to dispose of the lands within the lines of 72nd 
 Street. 
 
42 
 
 This street as we have shown was not closed, by Chapter 714 of the 
 Laws of 1887 and the lands within the lines of this street were excepted 
 in the grants of lands under water south and north thereof. 
 
 The conclusions, therefore, with respect to the area between 60th 
 and 72nd Streets west of the right of way of the railroad are as follows: 
 
 1. Between 60th and 63d Streets and between 64th and 65 
 Streets, the railroad company is seized of the title in the blocks out to 
 the Central Park Commissioners' bulkhead line and, in front of these 
 blocks. The City is seized of the title to the lands under water, subject 
 to an easement of access to the bulkhead and piers vested in the railroad 
 company. %l 
 
 2. Between 63d and 64th Streets and between 65th and 72d Streets 
 the railroad company is seized of the title in the blocks out to 13th 
 Avenue and, in front of these blocks. The City is seized of the title to 
 the lands under water subject to an easement of access to the bulkhead 
 and piers vested in the railroad company. 
 
 3. The City of New York is seized of the title to the beds of all the 
 streets and 12th Avenue between 60th Street and the south side of 72d 
 Street subject to the right of occupation vested in the railroad company 
 by virtue of the leases hereinbefore referred to. 
 
 4. The City of New York is seized of the title to the bed of 72d Street 
 and the railroad company is wrongfully in possession of the same. 
 
 The title of the railroad company to its right of way between 60th 
 Street and Spuyten Duyvil Creek and in The Bronx. 
 
 The title to so much of the right of way as was original 
 upland and as was lands under water within the lines of watero-rants 
 issued by the City, is vested in the New York Central and Hudson Eiver 
 Eailroad Company under and by virtue of 144 Deeds, a Condemnation 
 Proceeding and by Adverse Possession. 
 
 Of these deeds, 70 in number, contain either one or the other or both 
 of the following clauses : 
 
 " For use and purpose of the party of the second part for track 
 and roadway and for the proper appendages to such track and 
 roadway and for no other use and purpose. 
 
 " It is understood that this conveyance is made for the T)urr.o<^P 
 and subject to the provisions of the Act entitled 'An Act tn 
 authorize the construction of a Eailroad from New Ynrlr +« a it.. 
 passed May 12th, 1846.' " ^^ Albany, 
 
43 
 
 The general trend of the decisions of the Courts of this State are 
 to the effect that such clauses are covenants and not conditions and do 
 not operate so as to prevent the railroad from conveying a fee. 
 
 The act of 1846, as amended hy chapter 30 of the Laws of 1848, 
 authorized said company to acquire property in fee by gift, purchase or 
 condemnation proceedings. 
 
 As to the five parcels acquired by condemnation proceedings, chapter 
 30 of the Laws of 1848, amending chapter 216 of the Laws of 1846, pro- 
 vides : That upon confirmation of the report of the commissioners " the 
 corporation shall become seized in fee of all lands, real estate and 
 property described." 
 
 With regard to the 11 parcels in this district to which the search 
 has shown that the railroad company has no record title, the facts are 
 that the railroad company has been in the continuous occupation and 
 possession of said parcels in so far as such parcels consist of upland or 
 lands formerly under water covered by water grants from the City since 
 the construction of the road and has since such time maintained and 
 operated its road over said parcels for nearly 70 years. 
 
 With regard as to whether a railroad can acquire title by adverse 
 possession, the Court of Appeals in the case of Long Island E. R. Co., vs. 
 Mulry, 212 N. Y., 108, said: 
 
 " I think that a claim to the rightful possession of land under 
 such an easement is clearly hostile to the fee owners by reason of 
 this perpetuity and is the assertion of a title which adverse pos- 
 session will render unassailable when the requisite period of time 
 has elapsed." 
 
 This case reaffirmed a similar principle of law laid down in the 
 case of Miner vs. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., 123 N. Y., 242. 
 
 At this point it becomes necessary to consider the effect of the pro- 
 ceeding to open 12th Avenue from 59th Street to 153d Street. 
 
 In such proceeding the City acquired the fee subject to street uses. 
 Awards were made to owners and to the Hudson River Railroad Com- 
 pany which latter awards, we understand, have never been accepted. 
 
44 
 
 Twelfth Avenue So Far as it Affects the Rig-ht of Way 
 of the Railroad Company. 
 
 The lines of 12th Avenue so far as the same extended over upland 
 were shown on the Eandel Map of 1820. 
 
 Chapter 182 of the Laws of 1837 provided for the extension of 12th 
 Avenue from its northerly terminus at 36th Street to 135th Street. 
 
 In 1869 by a proceeding duly initiated, 12th Avenue was legally 
 opened from 59th to 153d Street. It was never physically opened a'bove 
 60th Street, except between 129th and 135th Streets. 
 
 The right of way of the railroad company falls within the lines of 
 12th Avenue as opened in this proceeding as follows : 
 
 The easterly line of the right of way crosses the w^esterly line of 12th 
 Avenue at an angle at about 75th Street and continues until at 78th 
 Street it crosses the easterly line of 12th Avenue. 
 
 Between 78th and 82d Streets the entire right of way is within the 
 lines of 12th Avenue. 
 
 The right of way then diverges westerly until the easterly line thereof 
 crosses the westerly line of 12th Avenue at about 86th Street. 
 
 Between 86th and 91st Street no part of the right of way is within 
 the lines of 12th Avenue. 
 
 Just south of 91st Street the easterly line of the right of way again 
 crosses the westerly line of 12th Avenue at an angle and so continues 
 up to alDout 93d Street, at which point such easterly line crosses the 
 easterly line of 12th Avenue. 
 
 'Between 93d Street and 107th Street the entire right of way is 
 within the lines of 12th Avenue. 
 
 At about 107th Street the right of way diverges westerly again until 
 between 110th and 111th Streets the easterly line of the right of way 
 crosses the westerly line of 12th Avenue. 
 
 Just south of 112th Street the easterly line of the right of way again 
 crosses the westerly line of 12th Avenue until at 114th Street, about one- 
 half of the right of way is within the lines of 12th Avenue. 
 
 Between 114th and 120th Streets from 20 to 30 feet of the easterly 
 portion of the right of way are within the lines of 12th Avenue. 
 
 Just north of 120th Street the right of way again lies westerly of 
 12th Avenue. 
 
 Between 120th and 135th Streets no portion of the right of way 
 
45 
 
 except a small triangular parcel at 126th Street is within the lines of 
 12th Avenue. 
 
 Between 135th and 141st Streets the easterly line of the right of 
 way crosses the westerly line of 12th Avenue at the southerly line of 
 135th Street and continues so until at 138th Street the entire right of 
 way is within the lines of 12th Avenue and then continues westerly 
 until between 140th and 141st Streets it again crosses the westerly line 
 of 12th Avenue. 
 
 Northerly of 141st Street, no part of the right of way is included 
 within the lines of 12th Avenue. 
 
 The conclusions arrived at as to the title of the railroad company 
 to its right of way are as follows : 
 
 1. Wherever such right of way occupies and is constructed upon 
 lands under water, not granted to private individuals by the City, the 
 title to such lands under water is vested in The City of New York subject 
 to the right of the railroad company to use and occupy the same for 
 railroad purposes. 
 
 If a change of right of way is made the title of the City becomes 
 freed from the right of user in the railroad company. 
 
 2. Wherever such right of way passes over and the railroad is 
 constructed upon premises, whether uplands formerly owned by private 
 individuals or lands formerly under water granted by the City to private 
 individuals, and which the railroad has acquired under the deeds herein- 
 before referred to conveying such premises for railroad purposes, the 
 company can convey good title to the City. 
 
 3. Wherever such right of way passes over and the railroad is con- 
 structed upon premises whether uplands owned by private individuals 
 or land formerly under water granted by the City to private individuals, 
 title to which was acquired by the railroad company in a condemnation 
 proceeding. 
 
 The company can convey good title to such premises to the City. 
 ■ 4. Wherever such right of way passes over and the railroad is 
 constructed upon premises whether upland owned by private individuals 
 or lands under water granted by the City to private individuals, to 
 which the search has disclosed that the railroad company has no record 
 title, the company has acquired a title by adverse possession and it can 
 convey good title to the City. 
 
46 
 
 5. Wherever such right of way passes over and the railroad is con- 
 structed upon premises whether uplands formerly owned by private 
 individuals or lands formerly under water, granted by the City to private 
 individuals, and which the Railroad Company has acquired under the 
 deeds hereinbefore referred to, conveying such premises without restric- 
 tion, the fee title is vested in the Railroad Company and it can convey 
 good title to the City. 
 
 In the district between 60th and 141st Streets the foregoing general 
 conclusions must, by reason of the acquisition of the fee of Twelfth Ave- 
 nue in street opening proceedings, be modified to the extent that wherever 
 any portion of the right of way falls, passes over or the railroad is con- 
 structed upon premises within the lines of 12th Avenue, the title to 
 such premises whether acquired by the railroad company by deed, by 
 adverse possession or by condemnation proceedings, became vested in 
 the City subject to the use by the railroad company. 
 
 If a change of right of way is made, the City's title to premises 
 within the lines of 12th Avenue becomes freed from the railroad's right 
 of user. 
 
 The railroad company has acquired title in fee to premises at cer- 
 tain localities east and west of the right of way. 
 
 At Dyckman Street the deed by which the railroad company acquired 
 title to the Station Property contains a reverter clause to the original 
 grantor. 
 
 Whatever title the railroad company has acquired is subject to a 
 number of mortgages riven as securities for bonds issued and on a trans- 
 fer of title by the railroad company releases must be o'btained. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 LAMAR HARDY, 
 
 Corporation Counsel. 
 April 18, 1916. 
 
47 
 
 APPENDIX " B." 
 
 Appraisals of Lands, etc., in Connection with tbe 
 West Side Improvement Between The City of Xew 
 York and the New York Central Railroad Com- 
 pany. 
 
 summ;aey. 
 
 Lands and 
 Easements Sold Lands and 
 
 by the City Easements Sold 
 of New York by Railroad 
 
 to the Rail- Company to the 
 road Company. City of New York. 
 
 Land Sheet No. 4 |499,958 $469,051 
 
 Land Sheet No. 6 100,739 277,586 
 
 Land Sheet No. 10 1,739,887 780,578 
 
 Land Sheet No. 13 727,026 229,233 
 
 Land Sheet No. 18 4,253,409 565,876 
 
 Land Sheet No. 19 505,103 626,040 
 
 Land Sheet No. 20 493,918 634,960 
 
 Land Sheet No. 21 554,385 442,381 
 
 Land Sheet No. 27 1,315,724 746,663 
 
 Land Sheet No. 30 149,052 1,284 
 
 Land Sheet No. 32 17,751 85,800 
 
 Land Sheet No. 35 52,470 20,550 
 
 Land Sheet No. 38 184,959 104,480 
 
 $4,984,482 
 For a release of City's record title 
 in and to premises over which 
 the Railroad Company has a per- 
 petual right of user 500,000 
 
 $11,094,381 
 
 Total Credits. 
 
 City of New York $11,094,381 
 
 Railroad Company 4,984,482 
 
 Balance in favor of the City $6,109,899 
 
48 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold ly the City of New York to the Railroad Co., 
 Credit City of New York (Sheet No. 4). 
 
 Fee of Land 
 In Block bounded by Canal, Spring, West 
 
 and Washington Sts 22,800 S. F. 
 
 In Spring St. bet. West and Washington 
 
 Sts 15,200 S. F. 
 
 Fee 38,000 S. F. at |9, |342,000 
 
 Fee of Land 
 In Charlton St. bet. West and Washington Sts., 14,300 
 
 S. F., at |6 ■ 85,800 
 
 Perpetual Easement in 
 West St., Canal to block bet. King and Houston 
 
 Sts., 28,168 S. F., at |8 |225,344 
 
 King St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 10,075 
 
 S. F., at |6 60,450 
 
 W. Houston St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 4,225 S. F., at |6.60 27,885 
 
 Clarkson St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 2,210 S. F., at 15.60 12,376 
 
 Leroy St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 2,380 S. F., at |5.60 13,328 
 
 Morton St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 2,312 S. F., at |5.60 12,947 
 
 Barrow St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 2,244 S. F., at |5.60 12,566 
 
 Christopher St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 3,852 S. F., at |8.00 30,816 
 
 W. 10th St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 1,675 S. F., at |5.00 8,375 
 
 Charles St., bet. West and Washington Sts., 
 
 1,650 S. F., at $5.00 8,250 
 
 1412,337 
 On the basis of Seven-tenths of one per cent, capitalized at 
 
 4 per cent, per annum 72 158 
 
 1499,958 
 
49 
 
 Credit Raileoad Company ( Sheet No. 4 ) . 
 
 Lands and Easements 8old by the Railroad Company to the City of New 
 
 York. 
 
 Eelinquishment of Surface Easement on 
 Hudson St., Nortli Moore to Canal St., 41,350 
 
 S. F., at 18.40 1347,340 
 
 Canal St., Hudson to West St., 27,820 S. F., 
 
 at 18.00 222,560 
 
 West St., Canal to Charles Lane, 104,664 S. F., 
 
 at 18.00 837,312 
 
 11,407,212 
 On the basis of 33 1/3 per cent, of the value of the fee |469,071 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the City of New York to the Railroad Co., 
 Credit City of New York {Sheet No. 6). 
 
 Perpetual Easements in the following Streets : 
 
 Charles Lane, 495 S. F., at |4 |1,980 
 
 Perry St., 1,650 S. F., at |5 8,250 
 
 W. nth St., 1,980 S. F., at $5 9,900 
 
 l?ank St., 2,700 S. F., at |5 13,500 
 
 Bethune St., 2,000 S. F., at |4.50 9.000 
 
 W. 12th St., 1,980 S. F., at $4.50 8,910 
 
 Jane St., 1,650 S. F., at |4.50 7,425 
 
 Horatio St., 1,650 S. F., at $5 8,250 
 
 Gansevoort St., 1,800 S. F., at f 6 10,800 
 
 Gansevoort to Little W. 12th St., 14,112 S. F., 
 
 at 16 84,672 
 
 Little W. 12th St., 3,420 S. F., at $6 20,520 
 
 Gansevoort and West Sts., 24,200 S. F., at |5.50 133,100 
 
 W. 13th St., 3,180 S. F., at |5.20 16,536 
 
 W. 14th St., 5,400 S. F., at |7.20 38,880 
 
 W. 15th St., 600 S. F., at |5 3,000 
 
 10th Ave., W. 14th to W. 17th Sts., 22,209 S. F., 
 
 at f 6 133,254 
 
 W. 17th St., 2,520 S. F., at |5 12,600 
 
 W. 18th St., 1,980 S. F., at $5. . . .• 9,900 
 
 W. 19th St., 1,980 S. F., at 15 9,900 
 
 W. 20th St., 2,040 S. F., at |5 10,200 
 
 W. 21st St., 1,980 S. F., at $5 9,900 
 
 W. 22d St., 2,760 S. F., at |5.50 l^ASO 
 
 $575,657 
 On the basis of 171/2 per cent of the Fee $100,739 
 
50 
 
 Lcmds and Easements Sold hy the Railrmd Co. to the City of New York, 
 Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 6). 
 
 Eelinquishment of Surface Easement on 
 Land in West St. from Charles Lane to Loew Ave. and on 
 10th Ave. from Loew Ave. to W. 22d St., 138,793 S. F., 
 
 g^lM |83.^,7o» 
 
 On the 'basis "of" 33 1/3 per cent, of the value of the Fee $277,586 
 
 Bands and Easements Sold by the City of New York to the Railroad Co. 
 Credit City of New York {Sheet No. 10). 
 
 W. 23d St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 4,600 S. F., 
 
 at|8 136,800 
 
 W. 24th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 1,980 S. F., 
 
 at $5 9,900 
 
 W. 25th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 1,980 S. F., 
 
 at $5 9,900 
 
 W. 26th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 2,040 S. F., 
 
 at|5 10,200 
 
 W. 27th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 1,980 S. F., 
 
 at |5 9,900 
 
 W. 28th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 1,980 S. F., 
 
 at $4.50 8,910 
 
 W. 29th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 2,200 S. F., 
 
 at 14.50 9,900 
 
 10th Ave. and 30th St. Intersection, 7,800 S. F., 
 
 at |6 46,800 
 
 32d St., bet. 10th and 11th Avea, 48,000 S. F., 
 
 at |5 240,000 
 
 31st St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 48,000 S. F., 
 
 at |5 240,000 
 
 30th St., bet. 10th and 11th Aves., 29,866 S. F., 
 
 at |5 149,330 
 
 37th St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 1,500 S. F., 
 
 at 15 7,500 
 
 36th St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 33^210 S. F., 
 
 at |5 166,050 
 
 35th St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 41,400 S. F., 
 
 at 15 207,000 
 
 34th St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 81,750 S. F., 
 
 at $6.50 531,375 
 
 33d St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 43,400 S. F., 
 
 . at $4 173,600 
 
 32d St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 43,200 S. F., 
 
 at |4 172,800 
 
51 
 
 31st St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 45,000 S. F., 
 
 at $4 180,000 
 
 30th St., bet. 11th and 12th Aves., 23,200 S. F., 
 
 at |4 92,800 
 
 11th Ave., 33d to 35th Sts., 25,215 S. F., at |6. . 151,290 
 
 11th Ave., 30th to 33d Sts., 74,150 S. F., at |6 . . 444,900 
 
 12th Ave., 37th to 40th Sts., 65,530 &. F., at $6 . . 393,180 
 
 13,292,135 
 On the basis of seven-tenths of one per cent, capitalized at 
 
 4 per cent, per annum |576,123 
 
 Surface Eights to be granted Kailroad Co. 
 13th Ave. and 12th Ave., bet. 27th and 31st Sts., 
 
 to Pier 71, 19,600 S. F., at |6 |117,600 
 
 At Pier 73, 2,475 S. F., at $8 19,800 
 
 A-t Pier 74, 2,850 S. F., at f 8 22,800 
 
 At Pier 75, 7,800 S. F., at |8 62,400 
 
 At Pier 76, 7,800 S. F., at |8 62,400 
 
 1285,000 
 On the basis of 50 per cent, of value of the Fee 142,500 
 
 Surface and Permanent Overhead Rights to 
 ■be granted to the Eailroad Oo. , 
 12t.h Ave., 30th to 37th Sts., 187,320 S. F., at f7. . $1,311,240 
 
 Pier 75, 1,320 S. F., at |8 10,560 
 
 Pier 76, 1,320 S. F., at |8 10,560 
 
 31st St., 4,800 S. F., at $4 19,200 
 
 32d St., 4,800 S. F., at |4 19,200 
 
 33d St., 4,600 S. F., at f4 18,400 
 
 34th St., 8,250 S. F., at |6.50 53,625 
 
 35th St., 7,920 S. F., at |5 39,600 
 
 36th St., 6,120 S. F., at $5 30,600 
 
 11,512,985 
 On the basis of 671/2 per cent, of the value of the Fee 1,021,264 
 
 Total $1,739,887 
 
52 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the Railroad Co. toJheCity of New York, 
 Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 10). 
 
 Relinquishment of Surface Easement on ^ „_ , ^^„ 
 
 10th Ave, 22d to 31st Sts., 50,700 S. F., at |5 . . |2o3,500 
 
 11th Ave., 27th to 34th Sts., 46,150 S. F., at .f4.50 207,625 
 
 11th Ave., 34th to 40th Sts., 40,240 S. F., at |4. . . 160,960 
 
 2,135 
 
 On the basis of 33 1/3 per cent, of the value of the Fee. . . . |207,378 
 
 12th Ave. and Marginal Way, 116,600 S. F., at 
 
 $7.50 1874,500 
 
 W. 31st St., 10th to 12th Aves., 89,400 S. F., at 
 
 14.50 402,300 
 
 W. 32d St., 10th to 12th Aves., 54,600 S. F., at 
 
 $4.50 245,700 
 
 W. 33d St., 10th to 12th Aves., 43,800 S. F., at 
 
 14.50 197,100 
 
 $1,719,600 
 On the basis of 33 1/3 per cent, of the value of the Fee $573,200 
 
 Total $780,578 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the City of New York to the Railroad 
 Company, Credit City of Neio York {Sheet No. 13). 
 
 Permanent Overhead Rights on 12th Ave., South 
 Side of 40th St. to North Side of 59th St., 
 312,030 S. F., at $5 |1,560,150 
 
 On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the Fee $273,026 
 
 Pier No. 99 at 59th St.— 
 
 42,000 S. F. under pier at $4 $168,000 
 
 Cost of Pier and Shed less depreciation .... 250,000 
 
 ■ 418,000 
 
 Land in Marginal Street at foot of 59th St., 9,000 S. F. at $4 36,000 
 
 Total $727,026 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the Railroad Company to the City of 
 NeiD York, Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 13). 
 
 Relinquishing Surface Easement in 41st St. and in 11th 
 Ave., from 40th to 59th Sts., South Side of each street 
 137,540 S. F., at 15 $687,700 
 
 On the basis of 33 1/3% of the value of the Fee $229,233 
 
53 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the City of New York to the Railroad 
 Company, Credit City of Netc< York {Sheet No. 18). 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water West of Bulkhead Line ex- 
 tending to Exterior Grant Line, fee of which is to be 
 granted to Kailroad Co. by the City, between northerly 
 side of 59th St. and 70th St., 1,336,015 S. F., at $1 |1,336,015 
 
 Lands in streets between Bulkhead Line and West End Ave., 
 
 southerly side of 59th to 72d Sts., 807,100 S. F., at |3 . . 2,421,300 
 
 Land in 62d-63d-64th and 65th Sts., East of Eetaining Wall 
 of Railroad and West of West End Ave., 45,600 S. F., at 
 14.50 205,200 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water West of Eailroad right-of- 
 way in which City gives Railroad Co. permanent ease- . >■ 
 ment, including 72d St., 146,658 S. F., at |2 . |293,316 
 
 On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the Fee 51,330 
 
 Lands in Riverside Park from 72d St. to Southerly line of 
 
 79th St., 118,926 S. F., at |1.75 208,120 
 
 On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the Fee, |25,000 lot 
 25/100. 
 
 Lands within present right-of-way from South Side of W. 
 72d St. to South Line of W. 79th St. Easement to be 
 granted to Railroad by City : 
 
 89,840 S. F., at 35c : 31,444 
 
 On the basis of |2 per S. F. 
 
 Total 14,253,409 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the Railroad Company to the City of 
 New York, Ctedit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 18). 
 
 Relinquishing Surface Easement, West End Ave., 59th to 
 62d Sts., 17,560 S. F., at |6 |105,360 
 
 On the basis of 33 1/3% of the value of the Fee |35,120 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water between 70th to 72d Sts., 
 title to which is to be granted by Railroad to City, 
 254,430 S. F., at |1 ■ 254,430 
 
 Permanent Overhead Rights to be granted City by Railroad 
 Co. in 12th Ave., 70th and 71st Sts., 30,480 
 S.F.,at|3 $91,440 
 
 On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the Fee 16,002 
 
54 
 
 Lands within present Eight-of-Way, 76th St. to Northerly 
 limit of Sheet No. 18, title to which is to be granted by 
 Eailroad Co. to City, 40,322 S. F., at |2 80,644 
 
 Lands within present Right-of-Way, Fee to be granted City 
 by Railroad Co., 'South Side of W. 72d St. to South 
 Side of W. 79th St., 89,840 S. F., at f 2 l'<^9,680 
 
 Total 1565,876 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the Gity of New York to the Railroad, 
 Company, Credit City of New York (Sheet 19). 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water west of right-of- 
 way between W. 78th and W. 91st Sts., City 
 to grant Railroad Co. permanent easements 
 
 3,516 S. F., at 35c |1,230 
 
 On the basis of $2 per S. F. 
 
 Lands within Riverside Park, South Side of W. 79th St. 
 
 to North Side W. 97th St. : 
 
 In 79th St 9,500 S. F. 
 
 In 96th St 3,950 S.F. 
 
 Bet. W. 79th and W. 96th 
 
 Sts • 211,332 S.F. 
 
 North of 96th St. to end of 
 
 Sheet No. 19 9,324 S. F. 
 
 234,106 S. F., at |1.75 409,685 
 
 On the basis of |25,000 per lot 25/100. 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water within present right-of-way 
 in which City grants Railroad Co. permanent 
 easements : 
 From South Side W. 79th St. to North Side of 97th St., 
 
 269,108 S. F., at 35c 94,188 
 
 1505,103 
 On the basis of |2 per S. F. 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the Railroad Company to the City of 
 New York, Credit Railroad Company (Sheet 19). 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water within present Railroad 
 right-of-way. Title of the Railroad to be granted 
 to the City: 
 Between W. 79th and W. 96th Sts., 43,913 S. F., at |2. |87,824 
 
DO 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water within present Eailroad 
 right-of-way, Fee to be granted to City by Eail- 
 road Co. : 
 From South Side of 79th to North Side of 97th Sts., 
 
 269,108 S. F., at |2 538,216 
 
 Total $626,040 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the City of New York to the Railroad 
 Company, Credit City of New York {Sheet 20). 
 
 Land in Eiverside Park wherein City grants Eailroad Co. 
 permanent subsurface easements, 235, 583 S. F., at 
 11.75 $412,270 
 
 On the basis of 171/2% of the value of fee; Unit lot 25/100 at 
 $25,000. 
 
 Lands and Lands Under Water west of Eailroad right-of- 
 way, 7,080 S. F., at $2, |14,160 2,478 
 
 On the basis of 171^% of the value of the fee. 
 
 Lands in present Eailroad right-of-way ; City to grant Eail- 
 road Co. permanent easement therein, 226,200 S. F., at 
 $2, $452,400 79,170 
 
 $493,918 
 On the basis of 17%% of the value of the fee. 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the Railroad Co. to the City of New York, 
 Credit Railroad Cornhpam/y (Sheet 20). 
 
 Fee of present right-of-way to be granted to City by the 
 Eailroad Co. No Easement 91,280, Easement 226,200— 
 317,480 S. F., at |2 .' $634,960 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold ly tJw City of New York to the Railroad Co., 
 Credit City of New York (Sheet No. 21). 
 
 Lands and Land under Water included in pres- 
 ent Eailroad right-of-way fee to be granted 
 by Eailroad Co. to City and Easement from 
 City to Eailroad Co., 131,228 S. F., at $2 . . . $262,456 
 
 On the basis of 171/2 per cent, of the value of the Fee $45,930 
 
 Lands in Eiverside Park from North Side of 
 116th St. to South Side of 129th St., 144,051 
 S. F., at $1.75 • ^ • • 
 
 On the basis of 17% per cent, of the value of the Fee; Unit 
 
 $25,000 per lot 25/100 252,089 
 
56 
 
 Lands and Land under Water west of Railroad 
 
 right-of-way North Side of W. 116th St. to 
 
 South Side of W. 129th St., 33,292 S. F., 
 
 at |2 166,584 
 
 On the basis of ITi/a per cent, of the value of the Fee |11,652 
 
 Permanent Ove'rhead Eights to be granted Eailroad Go. 
 
 by City: ^ ^„^ 
 
 In W. 129th St., 10,350 S. F., at 521/00. (Basis |3 per S. F.) 5,434 
 In Manhattan St. and W. 130th St., 18,300 S. F., at STVaC. 
 
 (Basis |5 per S. F.) 16,012 
 
 In W. 131st St., 9,600 S. F., at 70c. (Basis |4 per S. F.) . . . 6,720 
 
 In W. 132d St., 9,600 S. F., at 70c. (Basis |4 per S. F.) . . . . 6,720 
 
 In W. 133d St., 9,600 S. F. at 61140. (Basis f3.50 per S. F. ) . 5,880 
 
 Fee of Land to be granted Railroad Co. by the City : 
 
 W. 129th St. to Manhattan St., 10,100 S. F., at |4 40,400 
 
 Manhattan St. to 12th Ave., 3,260 S. F., at |5 16,300 
 
 12th Ave., 133d to 135th Sts., 10,000 S. F., at |3.50 35,000 
 
 9,181 S. F., at 13.50 32,133 
 
 In 134th St., 18,600 S. F., at |3.50 65,100 
 
 Railroad to 132d St., 140 S. F., at |3.50 490 
 
 132d to 133d St., 4,150 S. F., at |3.50 14,525 
 
 1554,385 
 
 Lands and Easements 80M hy the Railroad Go. to the City of 'New York, 
 Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 21). 
 
 Fee of Railroad right-of-way to be granted to the City, 
 
 207,128 S. F., at |2 |414,256 
 
 Fee of Railroad to City, 129th to 130th Sts., 11,000 S. F., 
 
 at |2 22,000 
 
 Easement to City of New York to be granted 'by Railroad Co. 
 
 12th Ave., 133d to 135th Sts., 10,000 S. F., at 61i/4c.. . 6,125 
 
 (On Basis of |3.50 per S. F.) 
 
 1442,381 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the City of New York to the Railroad 
 Co., Credit City of New York (Sheet No. 27). 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water in Streets, Fee to be granted 
 to Railroad Co. by City: 
 
 ll^^f ?$«;,; • «; ^^'"^^ ®- ^- ^^ ^2.50 $87,500 
 
 135th to 136th Sts 38,600 S F 
 
 In 136th St 19'200 s! f! 
 
 136th to 137th Sts 23 750 S F 
 
57 
 
 In 137th St; 19 200 S. F. 
 
 137th to 138th Sts 4,535 S F 
 
 In 138th St 19'200 S. F. 
 
 138th to 139th Sts 10,660 S. F. 
 
 In 139th St 19,200 S.F. 
 
 139th to 140th Sts 17,030 S. F. 
 
 In 140th St 19,200 S. F. 
 
 140th to 141st Sts : 24,200 S. F. 
 
 In 141st St 18,000 S. F. 
 
 141st to 142d Sts 26,380 S. F. 
 
 In 142d St 14,670 S. F. 
 
 142d to 143d St 26,000 S. F. 
 
 In 143d St 10,740 S. F. 
 
 143d to 144th Sts 19,250 S. F. 
 
 In 144th St 5,390 S. F. 
 
 144th to 145th Sts 300 S. F. 
 
 In 145th St 6,400 S. F. 
 
 In 146th St 3,500 S. F. 
 
 In 147th St 4,000 S. F. 
 
 In 148th St 4,080 S. F. 
 
 In 149th .St 4,080 S. F. 
 
 In 150th St 3,420 S. F. 
 
 150th to 151st Sts 9,710 S. F. 
 
 In 151st St 780 S. F. 
 
 151st to 152d Sts 12,000 S. F. 
 
 In 152d St 1,200 S. F. 
 
 152d to 153d Sts 11,600 S. F. 
 
 In 153d St 1,462 S. F. 
 
 Total 397,777 S. F., at |2 |795,554 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water to he acquired in Fee by 
 Railroad Co. from the City : 
 
 135th to 136th Sts 18,500 S. F. 
 
 136th to 137th Sts 16,701 S. F. 
 
 137th to 138th Sts 5,000 S. F. 
 
 138th to 139th Sts 5,000 S. F. 
 
 139th to 140th Sts 14,000 S. F. 
 
 140th to 141st Sts 44,630 S. F. 
 
 146th to 147th Sts 13,500 S. F. 
 
 147th to 148th Sts 13,600 S. F. 
 
 148th to 149th Sts 13,600 S. F. 
 
 149th to 150th Sts 13,600 S. F. 
 
 150th to 151st Sts 4,570 S. F. 
 
 Total 162,701 S. F., at $2 |325,402 
 
58 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water and in streets wherein 
 
 perpetual surface rights and easements are to be 
 granted by City to Railroad Co. : 
 
 In 135th St 3,040 S. F. 
 
 135th-136th Sts 15,048 S. F. 
 
 In 136th St 4,560 S. F. 
 
 136th-137th Sts 15,200 S. F. 
 
 In 137th St 4,560 S. F. 
 
 137th-138th Sts. 15,048 S. F. 
 
 In 138th St 4,560 S. F. 
 
 138th-139th Sts 15,504 S. F. 
 
 In 139th St 4,408 S. F. 
 
 139th-140th Sts 15,200 S. F. 
 
 In 140th St 4,200 S. F. 
 
 140th-141st Sts 5,940 S. F. 
 
 Total 107,268 S. F., at $1 |107,268 
 
 On the basis of 50% of the value of the Fee Unit |2 per 
 
 S. F. 
 
 Total $1,315,724 
 
 Lands and Ea^sements Sold by the Railroad Co. to the City of ISfew 
 York, Credit Railroad Company {Sheet 27). 
 
 Lands and Lands Under Water wherein City is to be 
 granted by Railroad Co. permanent overhead rights : 
 
 In 135 St 11,500 
 
 135-136 St 18,800 
 
 In 136 St 5,640 
 
 136-137 St 24,000 
 
 137-138 St 24,000 
 
 138-139 St 24,000 
 
 139-140 St 24,000 
 
 140-141 St 24,000 
 
 141-142 St 24,000 
 
 142-143 St 24,000 
 
 143-144 St 24,000 
 
 144-145 St 26,600 
 
 145-146 St 26,600 
 
 146-147 St 22,725 
 
 147-148 St 22,140 
 
 148-149 St 22,140 
 
 149-150 St 22,140 
 
 150-151 St 22,140 
 
 151-152 St 11,840 
 
 415,895 S. F., at 35c $141,493 
 
 On the basis of 17%% at the rate of |2 per S. F. 
 
59 
 
 Lands and Lands Under Water Fee to be granted City by 
 Eailroad Co.: 
 
 141-142 Sts 9,000 S. F. 
 
 142-143 Sts.. 27,600 S. F. 
 
 143-144 Sts 51,985 S. F. 
 
 144-145 Sts 66,000 S. F. 
 
 145-146 Sts 15,000 S. F. 
 
 151-152 Sts 75,000 S. F. 
 
 152-153 Sts 58,000 S. F. 
 
 302,585 S. F., at |2 $605,170 
 
 1746,663 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the City of New York, to the Railroad 
 Company, Credit City of New York (Sheet No. 30). 
 
 Land in Riyerside Drive, W. 153d to 155th Street. Perma- 
 nent Eights and Easements to be granted Eailroad Co. 
 
 by City, 2,548 S. F., at $1.05 |2,675 
 
 On the basis of I71/2 per cent. Fee Value. Unit $15,000, 
 
 lot 25/100. 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water in which City grants Eail- 
 road Co. permanent surface rights and easements : 
 
 In 158th St 1,1^8 S. F. 
 
 In 158th St 576 S. F. 
 
 In 158th St 660 S. F. 
 
 2,384 S. F., at 75c. 1,788 
 
 On the basis of 50 per cent, of the value of the Fee. 
 Lands and Lands under Water and in streets, wherein City 
 grants Eailroad Co. the Fee: 
 
 153d St 1,380 S. F. 
 
 153d-155th Sts. . . . 15,627 S. F. 
 
 In 155th St 9,300 S. F. 
 
 155th-158th Sts. . . 18,838 S. F. 
 
 In 158th St 1,372 S. F. 
 
 158th-165th St«. . ._21^ S.^R ^^ ^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^^ 
 
 In 165th St 5,742 
 
 W. 165th to Ft. Wash- 
 ington Park •••• 37,272 ^3o^^gF^^t$1.00 43,014 
 
 $149,052 
 Total * 
 
60 
 
 Lands and Easements 8old by the Railroad Company to the City of 
 Wew York, Credit Railroad Company (Sheet No. 30). 
 
 Permanent Easement in 155th St., 1,120 S. F., 
 
 at 11.50 11,680 
 
 On the basis of ITi/g per cent, of the value of the Fee |294 
 
 Land and Lands under Water in which Kailroad Company 
 
 grants City of New York land in fee, 660 S. F., at |1.50 990 
 
 11,284 
 
 Lands and Easements 8old by the City of 'New York to the Railroad Co., 
 Credit City of New York {Sheet No. 32). 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water west of present right-of-way 
 in Ft. Washington Park, Fee to be granted Kailroad 
 Co. by the City, 5,164 S. F., at |1 |5,164 
 
 City to grant Railroad Co. permanent easement through 
 present right-of-way. Fee of which to be acquired by 
 the City, 71,929 S. F., at I71/2C. (On the basis of 171/2% 
 of the Fee. Unit |1 per square foot) 12,587 
 
 Total 117,751 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the Railroad Co. to the City of New York, 
 Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 32).' 
 
 Lands and Lands under Water included in present right-of- 
 way. Fee of which is to be granted to City by Railroad 
 Co., 85,800 S. F., at II |85,800 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold by the City of New York to the Railroad Co., 
 Credit, City of New York {Sheet No. 35) 
 
 Lands and lands under water to be acquired by R R Co 
 
 in fee, 46,485 sq. ft., at |1 sq. ft " |46 485 
 
 Permanent overhead rights to be granted by City to R R 
 Co. m Dyckman Street, 8,500 sq. ft., at |2 sq. ft 
 117,000. On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the fee 2 975 
 
 Lands and lands under water in which the City grants to R. ' 
 
 R. Co. permanent easements north of Dyckman Street 
 through Inwood Hill, 34,400 sq. ft., at 50c sq ft ' 
 !?17,200. On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the fee 3,010 
 
 152,470 
 
61 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the Railroad Co. to the City of New York, 
 Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 35) 
 
 Fee of lands and lands under water to be ceded to the City 
 by tbe Railroad in Inwood Hill, north of Dyckman 
 Street, 41,100 sq. ft., at 50c. per sq. ft |20,550 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold iy the City of New York to the Railroad Co.. 
 Credit City of New York [Sheet No. 38). 
 
 Easements in Lands in Inwood Hill, north of 
 Dyckman St. to Harlem River Ship Canal, 
 
 188,586 sq. ft., at 50c. sq. ft |94,293 
 
 On the 'basis of 17i/^ per cent, of the value of the Fee |16,501 
 
 Lands and Lands under water, the fee of which is to be 
 granted to the R. R. Co. by the City, North of the Har- 
 lem River Ship Canal, 168,458 sq. ft., at f 1 sq. ft 168,458 
 
 1184,959 
 
 Lands and Easements Sold hy the Railroad Co. to the City of New York, 
 Credit Railroad Company {Sheet No. 38). 
 
 Lands and Lands under water included in present right-of- 
 way the title of the R. R. to be granted to the City. 
 In Inwood Hill 'between Dyckman St. and Harlem 
 River Ship Canal, 203,935 sq. ft., at 50c. sq. ft *lUl,yb^ 
 
 Permanent overhead rights to be granted City 
 by Railroad Company for Hendrick Hud- 
 son Memorial Bridge, 14,360 S. F., at $1. |14,360 
 
 On the basis of 171/2% of the value of the fee ^"'^' 
 
 1104,480 
 
 M. B. B.OWN Printing & Binding Co., 37-41 Chambers Street, N. Y. 
 
May 12, 1916. 
 Hon. John Purroy Mitohel, 
 
 Mayor, and Chairman of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment: 
 
 Sir— At the close of the public hearing on May 10, 1916, the Board 
 referred back to the Committee on Port and Terminal Facilities its re- 
 port of April 22, 1916, in the matter of the improvement of the west side 
 tracks of the New York Central Eailroad for further consideration in the 
 light of objections raised to the report at the public hearings. 
 
 The Committee submits the following supplementary report cover- 
 ing the objections made by various individuals ajid civic organizations. 
 
 Certain broad objections in principle have been raised to the Com- 
 mittee's plan. The first of these is the claim that below 30th street the 
 plan gives to the New York Central Eailroad a monopoly of the terminal 
 business. 
 
 If this were true it would be a valid aod serious objection. It is there- 
 fore worth while to analyze the situation in detail. It is obvious that the 
 mere fact that the New York Central Eailroad Company is permitted to 
 construct a line for its own exclusive use does not give that company a 
 monopoly unless the road be so constructed or placed that it makes it 
 impossible or unduly difficult for future competing lines to serve the same 
 general territory. 
 
 It has been claimed that the elevated structure of the New York 
 Central Company will form a barilfer between the waterfront and the up- 
 land east of 10th avenue and Washington street, which will give the com- 
 pany a practical monopoly because of difficulty in crossing to territory 
 requiring rail service. 
 
 The road as shown upon the Committee's plan could not possibly 
 form such a barrier. The City retains the fee title to all of the cross- 
 streets except Spring and Charlton streets. It will be possible therefore 
 to cross the elevated structure of the New York Central in the public 
 streets at thirty-six points south of 30th street. The Committee has always 
 recognized that the matter of crossing the New York Central's structure 
 was important and the contract will contain a specific clause giving the 
 City the right to cross in the lines of streets either above, below, or at 
 the grade of the New York Central Company's elevated. 
 
It is of course obvious that there is no difficulty in reaching points 
 east of the proposed elevated structure from any line built south of Canal 
 street. 
 
 At all points south of 59th street where its line may be paralleled 
 by a municipally-owned elevated railroad structure if built in the future 
 the Company concedes to the City the right to switch from such struc- 
 ture across the Company's line to reach property on the eaisterly side. 
 
 It has been urged upon the Board with apparent sincerity and 
 earnestness that in order to avoid a monopoly by the New York Central 
 Railroad it is necessary to compel that company to permit the use of 
 its structures and terminals by any other railroad willing to pay for the 
 right. It has even been further urged that the company be compelled, 
 at the option of the City, to agree to merge its terminal facilities south of 
 30th street in any future general city terminal plan upon receiving com- 
 pensation to be adjusted in some manner fixed in the contract. The Com- 
 mittee can see no force or justice in the suggestion for the compulsory 
 admission of other railroads to facilities which the New York Central 
 is providing at enormous; cost. The Committee repeats the statement 
 made in its report of April 22d to the effect that the main reason for 
 compelling the New York Central to secure its own private right of way 
 south of 30th street was to free the city's waterfront for a possible mu- 
 nicipally-owned joint railroad terminal. The Committee is ready to give 
 consideration to a union terminal when convinced that it is desirable. 
 Apparently the argument is based on the plan vphich this Committee 
 forced on the New York Central south of 30th street, the railroad's 
 desire being to remain on the marginal way. The Committee finally con- 
 vinced the railroad and secured its consent to reach a small delivery sta- 
 tion at Canal street through a private right of way. It is this question 
 that has brought up the discussion of a so-called monopoly. 
 
 The Canal street station was considered by your Committee de- 
 sirable to reach certain classes of merchandise and to avoid long trucking 
 haul for business which has grown up in reliance upon facilities at St. 
 John's Park, particularly so as the St. John's yard was to be abandoned. 
 The actual capacity of the Canal street station will be 241 cars. The 
 business entering New York by one of the trunk lines from New Jersey 
 at one of its pier stations alone in the immediate vicinity of Canal street 
 would fill that station twice over. It will therefore be seen that there is 
 no force in the argument that this is to be a large terminal to which other 
 
8 
 
 railroads should have access. Certainly it has been made sufficiently 
 clear that the trunk line railroads other than the New York Central can 
 see no advantage in an elevated railroad terminal along the west side 
 waterfront. The Committee agrees, however, that despite the persistently 
 indifferent attitude of the New Jersey Roads, the possibility should be re- 
 served for securing such a union rail terminal in the future. There is 
 nothing in the plan for the improvement of the New York Central Rail- 
 road which interferes in the slightest degree with any reasonable future 
 development of the City's freight facilities. 
 
 It has been suggested that the possibility of securing full sub-surface 
 rights beneath the New York Central Railroad Company's structure and 
 yards should be reserved in order to provide for possible future subter- 
 ranean railroad crossings and stations forming freight terminals for one 
 or more of the New Jersey roads. This suggestion would be important 
 only if there were not ample room to the east of the New York Central 
 Company's proposed line for whatever subterranean crossings and sta- 
 tions may be desirable in the future. The New York Central tracks 
 south of 22nd street are at all points less than one city block east of the 
 waterfront, and between 22nd and 30th streets the distance is less than two 
 city blocks. The entire upland to the east is available for development 
 by other railroads, as is also the territory s.outh of Canal street. As 
 already stated, it is perfectly feasible to cross the New York Central 
 Company's line at a number of points, either by subway or by elevated 
 structure. If a union line is built along the waterfront it will be pos- 
 sible to tap the same blocks through which the New York Central Com- 
 pany will pass and from which it will probably secure business, as well 
 as all the territory to the east as far back as it is desirable to go. 
 
 The second, general question raised by objectors to the Committee's 
 plan was with reference to its adequacy in providing for proper park 
 treatment in the Riverside Park section and in connection with the new 
 park extension between 135th street and 151st street. 
 
 It has been said that the Committee's plan means the practical de- 
 struction of the natural beauties of the park and the substitution of an 
 artificial terrace so slightly covered with earth as to make it impossible 
 to carry out a proper scheme of park landscaping. Before submitting 
 its report of April 22nd the Committee devoted a very large amount 
 of time to a detailed study of various plans for the trackage in the 
 Riverside Park and Drive sections. It re-examined the proposal of the 
 
former Committee contained in its report of 1913 that the tracks be left 
 practically upon their present location widened to the westward and 
 with a cover constructed over them. It had studies prepared for tun- 
 neling under Eiverside Drive and examined a number of possible alter- 
 native routes between the Drive and the one finally selected for recom- 
 mendation. The route adopted seemed to combine most of the advan- 
 tages of a complete tunnel section without the difficulties and ex- 
 pense certain to be encountered in connection with a route further 
 to the east. After the tentative adoption of the route by the Committee 
 the Park Department was requested to submit its plans for park restora- 
 tion and extension upon the completion of the relocation of the rail- 
 road. The Committee's engineers were in constant consultation with 
 the Landscape Architect of the Park Department and the plans for park 
 treatment included in the Committee's report were the plans of the City's 
 landscape architect. Particular care was exercised to insure the avoid- 
 ance of destruction of the natural topography and the statements made 
 to the contrary at the public hearings are due to a misinterpretation of 
 the plans as presented. The Committee was convinced by the study 
 made by its experts that Riverside Park not only would not be injured, 
 but that it would be greatly improved by the carrying out of the proposed 
 plan. Fortunately since its report was presented an examination has 
 been made by Mr. Charles W. Leavitt, a park expert whose ability and 
 experience are so generally recognized as not to require discussion. Hia 
 examination bears out fully the opinions of the Committee's own engi- 
 neers. In the course of his report Mr. Leavitt says with reference to 
 the Committee's plan: 
 
 " The problem therefore seems to resolve itself into the ques- 
 tion as to whether or not shrubs, trees and other plants can be 
 planted about these walks and bridle paths and in proximity to 
 them, so that such plants will grow and form a beautiful and 
 natural appearance. I feel confident that there can be created a 
 condition which will be superior to that now existing along the 
 western portion of the present park and that there can be planted 
 in this new portion all the vegetation necessary to make a park, 
 with the assurance that it will grow and thrive and be satisfactory 
 in every way." 
 
 The Committee is convinced that upon the completion of the new 
 right of way and the restoration of the park area as proposed it will be 
 
practically impossible to trace any substantial portion of the railroad 
 right of way from an observation of surface conditions. 
 
 Objection has been made that the plans show the construction of a 
 slope of one and one-half to one to the west of the railroad structure and 
 that the plan for parking to the west is not indicated as something which 
 is to be carried out simultaneously with the completion of the railroad 
 improvement. It must be remembered that the plans and the report of 
 April 22nd concern themselves primarily with the proposed relocation 
 of the New York Central Railroad's tracks and with the incidental 
 changes which are to be made and the obligations which the railroad com- 
 pany is to assume in connection with them. The making of the park 
 to the west of the railroad improvement through the Riverside section is 
 something with which the railroad company is not concerned and which 
 The City must assume as part of its general park work. The Committee 
 on Port and Terminal Facilities is not charged with the working out of 
 general park plans beyond seeing to it that the terminal plans which it 
 recommends can be fitted properly into the ultimate city plans for the 
 development of its parks and other recreational equipment. This has 
 been accomplished in connection with the improvement along Riverside 
 Park. It seems hardly necessary to point out that with the completion 
 of the railroad improvement there will be a very proper demand from the 
 public generally for the completion of the extended Riverside Park and 
 the Board of Estimate should undoubtedly be prepared to meet this de- 
 mand when it comes. In the meantime it is not fair criticism of the 
 Committee's report to state that it is defective in not recommending a 
 present appropriation for a park which necessarily should not be con- 
 structed until after the completion of the railroad improvement. 
 
 The same situation is true between 135th street and 151st street. 
 The Committee's plan provides the sub-structure for the entire park 
 extension over the major part of the main line tracks proposed to be con- 
 structed in this section. It did not provide in detail for the park treat- 
 ment over this new roof. That does not mean that the Committee recom- 
 mends or expects that the structure will be allowed to remain uncovered 
 or that The City must not look forward now to the assumption of the 
 necessary obligation involved in this work. It is, however, new park con- 
 struction with which the railroad company has nothing whatever to do 
 and crceming which nothing could be placed in the contract between 
 The City and the railroad company beyond provision for adequacy of 
 roofed structure. 
 
So far as the obligation of the railroad company is concerned in the 
 matter of park restoration between 72nd street and 129th street, it has 
 been agreed that a cash payment of $300,000 is to be made by the com- 
 pany for expenditure under the direction of The City's Park Department. 
 This figure was arrived at by The City's own engineers upon a very careful 
 detailed estimate of the work required. 
 
 The Board has had filed with it a report by a former landscape archi- 
 tect of the Park Department criticizing the Committee's plan and chal- 
 lenging the adequacy of the amount to be paid for park restoration. This 
 veport contains the amazing suggestion that it would be preferable to 
 ijermit the railroad tracks to remain practically upon the present right 
 9f way and that they should not be covered. It seems hardly necessary 
 to discuss this suggestion seriously. The statement that such an uncov- 
 ered right of way would be as little Objectionable as the transverse roads 
 through Central Park is so obviously untrue in view of the character 
 of business which must necessarily pass over these tracks that detailed 
 refutation is unnecessary. The Committee has never for a moment con- 
 ceded that it could even consider the possibility of permitting the Eiver- 
 side tracks to remain unroofed, a thing which the railroad company, 
 looking at the matter simply from an operating standpoint, would very 
 greatly desire. In connection with the park restoration estimate it is 
 only necessary to point out that the figures contained in the report of the 
 former landscape architect of the Park Department contain an error 
 which proves conclusively that the figures were not prepared by him but 
 were taken from certain preliminary figures made by engineers for The 
 City and which contained inaccuracies which were subsequently corrected. 
 
 Certain general questions have been raised in opposition to the real 
 estate adjustment proposed in the Committee's report of April 22nd, 
 An attempt has been made to show that the City is surrendering to the 
 railroad company waterfront property of great value. The fact is that 
 aJthough the City is selling to the railroad company certain waterfront 
 parcels it is simultaneously securing from the railroad company other 
 waterfront properties far greater in extent and value than it is selling. 
 It is unnecessary in view of the complete analysis contained in the report 
 of April 22nd to do more than comment upon the exchanges in the two 
 most important sections where waterfront exchanges are involved. 
 
 Between 59th street and 72nd street it is true that the Committee 
 proposes that the City shall sell to the railroad company the pier in the 
 
line of West 59th street. This pier is sixty feet in width and is located 
 at a point where the City of New York owns no adjacent bulkhead rights 
 It IS now leased to the New York Central Eailroad Company and forms 
 practically an integral part of its terminal plant. It is a pier of which 
 it is possible to use but one side and it could not be profitably leased to 
 any tenant other than the New York Central Railroad. The City at the 
 same time is compelling the New York Central Company as part of the 
 general land adjustment to cede to it two entire blocks of land under 
 water directly south of 72nd street, including 400 linear feet of water- 
 front far 'better located for general city purposes than the sixty feet 
 sold at 59th street and adaptable for uses which will greatly relieve the 
 entire Riverside Drive section by the removal of refuse disposal and coal 
 plants. The net result is a gain hy the City of 340 feet of additional 
 waterfront in this section instead of a loss of waterfront as it has been 
 made to appear. Details of the negotiation may be summarized as 
 follows : 
 
 The City sells 42,000 square feet of land under water at 
 
 $4.00 per square foot 1168.000 . 00 
 
 The City purchases 254,430 square feet of land under water 
 of precisely the same character, but better located for 
 city purposes and not covered by a pier structure, at 
 $1.00 per square foot 254,430.00 
 
 The 340 additional feet of waterfront therefore result in a 
 net cost to the City of $86,430.00. 
 
 In addition the railroad company pays for the pier and shed struc- 
 ture at 59th street the sum of $250,000.00, which is the cost less deprecia- 
 tion. The pier was built in 1901 at a cost of $256,394.88. The allowance 
 for depreciation on pier shed for fifteen years is therefore $6,394.88. 
 
 In the Manhattanville section it has been contended that the City 
 is surrendering valuable waterfront property. The facts in this section 
 are that the City acquires approximately 1,400 feet of additional water- 
 front which it does not now own. (Sheet 27.) 
 
 The City gives up the fee to none of its waterfront but provides for 
 a strip approximately 1,500 feet long, making a new marginal way upon 
 which permanent rights and easements are to be granted to the New York 
 Central. In the opinion of the Committee this is absolutely essential for 
 the proper development of the Harlem section. The fee of this waterfront 
 has been retained and the New York Central has been compelled to deed 
 
to the City the fee of whatever land under water it owns outshore for 
 the express purpose of making it impossible for the railroad company to 
 construct piers and float bridges in this section and thus produce the 
 type of commercial development which certain objectors at the public 
 hearings have claimed would result from the adoption of the settlement 
 as proposed. 
 
 These two examples are sufftcient to dispose of the contention that 
 the City is alienating valuable portions of its waterfront. 
 
 In connection with the City's waterfront holdings and control it 
 was contended by the United Eeal Estate Owners' Association, through 
 its president, that the City should provide for a commercial marginal way 
 along the entire waterfront south of Spuyten Duyvil Creek. The state- 
 ment was made that eventually the Borough of Manhattan would be given 
 over entirely to business and manufacturing and that therefore Eiverside 
 Park and Drive should be considered as temporary improvements which 
 would probably be ultimately abandoned. A previous administration 
 of the Dock Department in connection with a study of this matter made 
 a somewhat similar suggestion for a commercial marginal way varying 
 in width from 100 to 150 feet. This suggestion was bitterly opposed by 
 citizens and civic organizations in all parts of the City, who naturally 
 did not agree to the commercialization of the Eiverside Park section of 
 the City. It was charged at that time that the railroad company was 
 desirous of securing the commercialization of the Eiverside Park water- 
 front. One of the reasons which guided the present Committee in com- 
 pelling the railroad company to move further to the east was to remove 
 all possibility of railroad access to the Eiverside Park waterfront. 
 
 The Committee sees no reason for changing its recommendation. 
 In fact, as stated in the report of April 22, 1916, the Committee thinks 
 that a reduction of the present commercial use in the Eiverside section at 
 79th street and 96th street would be desirable and the Dock Commis- 
 sioner is preparing recommendations to the Commissioners of the Sinking 
 Fund to this effect, that being the official board charged with approving 
 plans for waterfront development. 
 
 Certain questions have been raised with reference to the taxes which 
 the railroad company would have to pay under the proposed settlement 
 and the statement has been made that its adoption would mean that the 
 company would be relieved of a large amount of taxes. It is hardly neces- 
 sary to repeat the statement contained in the report of April 22d that the 
 
company is securing real estate and real estate rights valued at $6 109 - 
 899.00 in excess of those which it has at the present time. This amount 
 will of course be included for purposes of taxation and will represent a 
 largely increased annual payment to the City of New York. 
 
 It has been claimed that the sale to the company of easements in 
 cross streets will relieve the City from its special franchise tax. Whether 
 this is technically -correct or not it is undoubtedly true that the value 
 of the rights of crossing is precisely the same whether they be considered 
 in the nature of a special franchise or a permanent easement for railroad 
 purposes and the tax will accrue to the benefit of the City of New York 
 in either event. 
 
 Apart from these general questions a number of specific objections 
 to details of the Committee's plan have been raised. 
 
 The Crossing- of the Harlem Ship Canal. 
 
 Objection has been made that the Board of Estimate cannot close 
 a contract including a provision for the crossing of the Harlem Ship 
 Canal by bridge because the matter is subject to congressional action 
 and federal control. The objectors apparently, however, have overlooked 
 an act of Congress, Chapter 907, Session 1, 1890, which provides for the 
 raising of bridges crossing the Harlem Eiver. This act among other 
 things provides that : 
 
 " The said bridges shall leave a clear space between the under- 
 sides thereof and the high water of spring tides of twenty-four 
 feet, and shall be provided with draw spans and draws of a width 
 and length to be determined by the Secretary of War and shall 
 in all respects comply with this law and conform to the require- 
 ments of the Secretary of War * * *." 
 
 It was under the provisions of this law that certain of the bridges 
 across the Harlem Eiver have already been raised. The congressional act 
 apparently specifically contemplates the type of settlement now proposed 
 with the New York Central Railroad Company in connection with the 
 bridge across Spuyten Duyvil Creek. Of course any contract with the 
 railroad company is subject to the superior power of the federal govern- 
 ment and the bridge structure must be approved by the Secretary of 
 War. This is a matter which the Committee has always known and 
 which is so obvious that it seemed unnecessary to point out in the April 
 
10 
 
 22nd report. So far as the policy of permitting the railroad to cross 
 the Ship Canal by 'bridge is concerned, objections of two kinds have 
 been made. 
 
 Certain objectors oppose any type of bridge, irrespective of its loca- 
 tion, and request the Board to adopt a plan for the placing of all tracks 
 in tunnels under the Canal. This point was considered by the Committee 
 before presenting its original report and the conclusion reached that an 
 added expenditure estimated at approximately twelve million dollars 
 was not justified to secure the relatively slight additional advantage of 
 avoiding one more high-level bridge across this waterway. 
 
 The second group of objectors contend that if a crossing by bridge 
 is to be permitted the structure should be located considerably further 
 east than is proposed under the Committee's plan. It is contended that 
 tidal and other conditions at the entrance to the Canal are such that a 
 bridge with two 100-ft. channels as proposed by the Committee and 
 located upon the line recommended would create a barrier which would 
 greatly lessen the usefulness of the entire Harlem River waterway. 
 
 In reply to these criticisms the Committee desires to re-emphasiz€? 
 the statement made in its report of April 22nd that the governing factor 
 in determining the exact location of this bridge is the necessity of secur- 
 ing a proper operating connection between the northern end of the bridge 
 and the tracks of the Spuyten Duyvil & Port Morris division in order 
 to enable the large and important freight traffic of both the Harlem and 
 Putnam divisions to pass over the west side tracks to reach Manhattan 
 freight terminals. 
 
 In view of the opposition referred to, the Committee has recon- 
 sidered and re-examined conditions at the entrance to the Harlem Ship 
 Canal and the effect upon them of a bridge located as proposed. The 
 objectors are in error in assuming that conditions of tide and current are 
 different at this particular point from those found at other points along 
 the Canal. After the straightening of the bend at the Johnson Iron 
 Works and the removal of the slight projection of land on the southerly 
 side of the Canal which now extends beyond the bulkhead line as recently 
 established by the Secretary of War, there will be no greater difficulty 
 in passing under the proposed new bridge than under any of the nine 
 other Harlem Eiver bridges of a similar type. 
 
11 
 
 Section Between the Harlem Ship Canal and Dvck- 
 
 man Street. 
 
 It has been urged that the railroad tunnel through Inwood Hill be 
 located considerably further east than proposed in the Committee's plan 
 in order to avoid the destruction of certain trees claimed to be of great 
 value. 
 
 Prior to the submission of the report of April 22d the Committee 
 made the most careful study of various routes through Inwood Hill and 
 selected the one recommended as being that which was the best which 
 could be adopted. 
 
 To drive the tunnel sufficiently far east to avoid entirely cut and 
 cover work would cost, upon the estimate of the Committee's engineers, 
 approximately two million dollars in addition to the cost upon the line 
 proposed. 
 
 The destruction of trees by construction upon the line proposed by 
 the Committee has been greatly exaggerated. A careful investigation 
 shows that most of the trees along the new right of way are chestnut trees 
 which are rapidly dying due to the bark disease which is attacking prac- 
 tically all of the trees of this kind in this section of the country. A care- 
 ful examination and count disclosed that not more than nine trees of any 
 real value would be injured by the construction of the railroad tunnel. 
 It cannot be seriously contended that two million dollars should be ex- 
 pended to save nine trees. 
 
 Objection has further been made to the plans because of the pro- 
 posal to permit the construction of a duct line in the present right of 
 way allowing it to remain there after the removal of the railroad to 
 its new location. The proposed ducts will be completely buried, nothing 
 appearing on the surface except the necessary manhole covers. 
 
 The reason for recommending the location of these duct lines on the 
 present right of way is the necessity of equipping the entire line electric- 
 ally in advance of the completion of the Inwood Hill tunnel. There were 
 two alternatives : either to provide for a temporary line along the old 
 right of way during the construction period, requiring a shifting to 
 the new right of way when completed, or else to permit the building of a 
 permanent duct line on the present right of way, connecting it with the 
 new tunnel upon completion. It appeared to the Committee to be unneces- 
 sary to impose a double consitruction cost upon the railroad and it there- 
 fore adopted the solution presented in the plans already filed. 
 
12 
 
 The Committee recommends that the right be reserved to compel 
 the railroad company to remove these ducts if at any time they interfere 
 with city improvements. 
 
 Section Bet-ween Dyckman Street and the Southerly 
 Boundary of Fort Washln^on Park. 
 
 The Board was requested by a number of citizens who appeared 
 before it to reserve the right to cover all tracks in this section. The 
 report as presented on April 22nd provided for the covering of the rock 
 cut through the park and pointed out that the topography of the remain- 
 ing sections was such that covering appeared to "be unnecessary. The 
 Committee, however, has negotiated further with the railroad company 
 and has secured its consent to the inclusion in the contract of a pro- 
 vision permitting the City of New York at any time in the future to 
 cover these tracks and any other main line surface tracks. 
 
 The Manhattanvllle Yard. 
 
 It is contended that the City should reserve the right to cover all of 
 the yard tracks. 
 
 There are diflElculties which make the adoption of this suggestion 
 practically impossible. The Chief Engineer of the Dock Department 
 advises your Committee that the character of river bottom outshore of 
 the section which it is now proposed to roof is such that it would be 
 impossible to provide foundations for a roof except at enormous expense. 
 
 He states that the experience of the Department in the construction 
 of piers north of 129th street has been that a large amount of sinking 
 has taken place due to the insecure character of the soft silt forming 
 the river bottom. This sinking is not serious in the case of piers, but 
 would completely destroy a steel and concrete roof such as would be 
 built as support for a park surface. 
 
 The engineering advisors of the Committee report that the supports 
 for a roof would reduce the yard area by ten per cent, and would make it 
 very difficult to operate with any degree of efficiency. 
 
 The Crossing* of Manhattan Valley. 
 
 It has been urged that the railroad line across Manhattan valley be 
 carried under the existing viaduct. This matter was very thoroughly 
 
13 
 
 considered by the Committee prior to the making of its report of April 
 22nd and is fully covered in that report. No argument which has been 
 presented has convinced the Committee that it should change its opinion. 
 
 Tbe Siactleth Street Yard. 
 
 Objection has been made to the failure of the Committee to reserve 
 the right of The City to carry all streets across the 60th street yard to 
 a city -owned marginal street along its westerly edge. The section between 
 59th street and 70th street is now owned in large part by the New York 
 Central Railroad Company. The added facilities do not require any 
 more general access than now suggested through the viaduct at 70th street. 
 
 Section Between Fifty-ninth Street and Thirtietbi 
 
 Street. 
 
 It has been suggested in connection with the trackage between 59th 
 street and 30th street that The City may at some time require tracks to 
 the east of the New York Central Company's structure and for this reason 
 The City should reserve the right to compel the railroad company to ex- 
 change one or more of its tracks for similar accommodation further to the 
 west. In this connection the Committee desires to point out that if 
 trackage to the east of the railroad company's structure is needed there is 
 room to secure it under the present plan. 
 
 Certain legal points were raised at the public hearings and these 
 have been covered in a supplementary opinion of the Corporation Coun- 
 sel, which is annexed. 
 
 '■) 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 COMMITTEE ON PORT AND TERMINAL FACILITIES. 
 
 William A. Pbendebgast, 
 
 Comptroller ( Chairman ) , 
 
 Lewis H. Pounds^ 
 
 President of the Borough of Brooklyn, 
 
 R. A. C. Smith^ 
 
 Commissioner of Docks. 
 
 Richard C. Harbison, 
 Secretary. 
 
14 
 
 New York, May 12, 1916. 
 
 Hon. William A. Prendbrgast, 
 
 Comptroller, and Chairman of the Committee on Port and Terminal 
 facilities : 
 
 Sir — I am in receipt of a communication from Deputy Dock Com- 
 missioner Harrison, Secretary of the Committee, requesting to be advised 
 upon the legal questions raised by J. Bleecker Miller, representing cer- 
 tain civic associations during the hearings before the Board of Estimate 
 and Apportionment upon the report of the Committee relative to the 
 adoption of plans for the elimination of the tracks of the New York Cen- 
 tral Eailroad Company from surface operation on the west side between 
 St. John's Park and Spuyten Duyvil Creek. 
 
 In the first place, general statements were made as to the unconsti- 
 tutionality of Chapter 777 of the Laws of 1911, under and pursuant to the 
 provisions of which the Committee is acting. 
 
 Similar statements were made at the public hearing held on May 
 22nd, 1913, which were referred to the Corporation Counsel for considera- 
 tion. 
 
 Under date of June 24th, 1913, the Corporation Counsel advised the 
 Board of Estimate and Apportionment that the provisions of the act re- 
 ferred to in no way violated the prohibitions of the Constitution re- 
 lating to legislation affecting railroads and that the Board of Estimate 
 and Apportionment had the power to make and enter into an agreement 
 based upon plans and profiles filed. 
 
 The minutes of the hearings have not been furnished this office and, 
 therefore, the following statement of the points raised is based upon the 
 recollection and memorandum of the Assistant Corporation Counsel pres- 
 ent at the hearing. 
 
 The legal objections may be stated as follows : 
 
 1. That the decision of the Court of Appeals, in 202 N. Y., had rela- 
 tion to the portion of the Railroad Company's right of way and to the 
 operation of its trains below 59th Street and decided nothing as to the 
 railroad rights north of that street ; 
 
 2. That The City of New York had certain rights in and to the lands 
 within the lines of 12th Avenue prior to the granting of the franchise to 
 
15 
 
 the Railroad Company by the Legislature by reason of the original laying 
 out of 12th Avenue on the Commissioner's Map of 1807 ; 
 
 3, That certain ordinances granting other or additional rights to 
 the Railroad Companies were limited and expressly provided to expire 
 with the corporate existence to which they had reference, viz : in the year 
 1896; 
 
 4. That there were in certain deeds to the Railroad Company 
 clauses different from those quoted and commented upon in the former 
 opinion of the Corporation Counsel and therefore not considered by him 
 and that such clauses distinctly provided for a reverter to the heirs and 
 descendants of the original grantors. 
 
 As to the first group : 
 
 The franchise granted to the Railroad Company by the Legislature 
 extended from New York City to Albany and the consent of the Common 
 Council of the City covered the right of way from St. John's Park to 
 Spuyten Duyvil Creek, the northern limit of the City at the time the or- 
 dinance was passed. 
 
 It was this franchise and this consent which were under considera 
 tion by the Courts in the action brought by the New York Central & Hud- 
 son River R. R. Company to restrain the City from tearing up its tracks 
 in Eleventh Avenue, and the Court of Appeals in that case held that such 
 franchise in its entirety was not limited by the corporate existence of the 
 Hudson River Railroad Company, but that the right to exerci&e such fran- 
 chise became vested in the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad 
 Company by the consolidation and merger under the act of 1869, and that 
 the consent of the City was unlimited as to time. 
 
 Such decision applied to the Railroad Company's rights north of 
 59th Street as well as to those south of that street. 
 
 As to the second group : 
 
 12th Avenue was laid out, as far as it lay within original upland, by 
 the Street Commissioner's Map of 1807. The lines of said avenue in so far 
 as they ran over original upland were shown upon the Randel Map. 
 
 The lines of the avenue were not, however, shown over lands under 
 
 By Chapter 182, Laws 1837, 13th Avenue was laid out as the exterior 
 street from Hammond Street, subsequently West 11th Street, to 135th 
 Street, and 12th Avenue was extended from its northerly terminus at 
 about 34th Street to 135th Street. 
 
16 
 
 The laying out or mapping of a street in no way affects the title and 
 no title is acquired by such laying out or mapping. 
 
 No proceeding to acquire title to the lands within the lines of 12th 
 Avenue as laid out by the act north of 59th Street was begun until the 
 year 1869, twenty-three years after the franchise was granted to the Hud- 
 son Eiver E. R. Company, and until some fifteen years after the railroad 
 was actually constructed and title to upland within the right of way 
 acquired by the railroad under the deeds referred to in the former opin- 
 ion. Previous to the confirmation of the report of the Commissioners in 
 the proceeding to open 12th Avenue in the year 1869, no title to any up- 
 land and rights therein within the lines of 12th Avenue as laid out were 
 vested in the City by reason of the mapping and laying out of said 
 avenue. 
 
 The failure of the railroad to collect the award for the land taken in 
 no way affects the title acquired by the City in this proceeding as the 
 laws then in force provided that upon the confirmation of the report title 
 vested in the City, and the report was declared to be final and conclusive 
 both as to the City and as to the land owner. 
 
 As to the third group: 
 
 Any and all ordinances, granting to the Railroad Company addi- 
 tional rights or affecting its operation, were all before the Court in the 
 action brought by the Railroad Company to restrain the removal of its 
 tracks and were therefore under consideration by the Court of Appeals 
 on the appeal to that Court. 
 
 The Court of Appeals having decided that the franchise granted was 
 merged into the new corporation, the rights and privileges granted by 
 these ordinances became vested in the new corporation during its cor- 
 porate existence. 
 
 As to the fourth group : 
 
 Mr. Miller was requested and specifically agreed, on two days of thi 
 hearings, to furnish reference to the deeds containing such clauses and 
 copies of the clauses in question. 
 
 Up to date he has not furnished either a reference to the deeds or 
 copies of the clauses, and I can, therefore, give no opinion thereon. As 
 a matter of fact, the report of the title examiners shows that no deeds to 
 the Railroad Company, other than the deed covering the station at Dyck- 
 man Street, contained clauses substantially different from those quoted 
 and commented upon in my former opinion. 
 
17 
 
 Only one other legal question remains to be disposed of, yiz: the 
 claim of the New York and New Jersey Bridge Company. 
 
 This Company was incorporated under the laws of New Jersey in 
 1868 and under the laws of New York in 1890. The act of the State of 
 New York authorizing the incorporation of this Company in §7, provided, 
 among other things; 
 
 "§ 7. * * * ; but nothing in this act contained shall 
 authorize said Bridge Company to lay down railroad tracks; but 
 said corporation may, * * ♦ enter upon such real estate 
 
 * * * except any public park, or surf ace of any street or avenue 
 in said city. * * *." 
 
 The Company also obtained additional rights by Act of Congress in 
 1894. The Commissioners appointed by the Act selected a location for a 
 bridge at 59th and 60th Streets, which location was approved by the 
 Sinking Fund Commission in 1896. A further application was made 
 for the approval of approaches to the bridge, one for passenger purposes 
 extending to a proposed union station at Broadway and 50th Street, and 
 the other for freight purposes extending to the Battery. The Corpora- 
 tion Counsel rendered an opinion in 1905 to the effect that these were not 
 approaches proper, but would constitute elevated railroads and that the 
 Sinking Fund Commission had no power to approve them for that pur- 
 pose. The petition was then referred to a select committee consisting of 
 the Chamberlain, the President of the Board of Aldermen, and the Dock 
 Commissioner. That Committee has never reported and the matter has 
 remained in that situation since the Committee was appointed in 1910. 
 
 The company is still in existence and its franchises have never ex- 
 pired. The completion of railroad tracks across the bridge was limited 
 by the Act of Congress to expire ten years after the approval of the plans 
 by the Secretary of War. The plans have never been approved, and so 
 far as appears from the minutes of the Sinking Fund Commission, have 
 never been submitted. The project has apparently been abandoned as 
 is evidenced by the fact that in 1906 the Legislature of this State passed 
 an act for the appointment of a commission to confer with a similar com- 
 mission from New Jersey for the erection of a bridge by the joint action 
 of the States. 
 
18 
 
 The west side improvement project will have no effect upon such a 
 bridge if ever built and the bridge will have no effect upon the west side 
 improvement plans. 
 
 Eespectfully yours, 
 
 LAMAR HARDY, 
 
 Corporation Counsel. 
 
 M. B. Brown Pkintihg & Binding Co., 37-41 Chambers Street, N. Y.