Brooklyn, and run thence northwesterly as a three-track elevated railroad over and along Fulton street to a point near Clermont avenue, where the connection will begin to descend, until at or near Cumberland street the line will become a subway. It is then to continue northwesterly as a four-track railroad in subway or tunnel under and along Fulton street to a point between South Elliott place and Fort Greene place, where the tracks will diverge, going underneath private property, if necessary, until a point at or near Ashland place and Rockwell place is reached, where a connection can conveniently be made with the Fourth Avenue subway.

The Commission on the same day sent a formal communication to the Board of Estimate, reporting upon the adoption of the route, while the Acting Chief Engineer of the Commission was instructed to proceed at once with the preparation of the contract drawings for the construction of the connection. The Chief of Rapid Transit was directed to prepare a form of consent of property owners to the construction of such a route, and other necessary instructions were given to various officials of the Commission. On April 11, 1917, the Commission directed the Chief Engineer to proceed with the preparation of plans for a threetrack subway, the three tracks either to be built immediately as far as Lafayette avenue or the connection so constructed that the third track could be added readily at some future time. A threetrack connection, the Chief Engineer estimated, would cost $1,900,000.

The Board of Estimate failed to act immediately on the application for approval of Route No. 65 and on June 6, 1917, a letter was addressed to the Board by Chairman Straus, in which he called attention to the importance of prompt action by that body with respect to the legalization of the route. He stated that experience had shown that such formal steps require from three to six months. He indicated that it was not necessary for the Board of Estimate to await the presentation of a formal agreement with the company before approving the route, pointing out numerous instances in the past where routes had been legalized in advance of contracts or of agreements in order to hasten and facilitate construction. The Chairman suggested that it might conceivably be possible that no agreement could be drawn which

would be alike satisfactory to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment and to the Commission, in which case the route would be useless. He therefore suggested that the Board give its approval, reserving the right, without prejudice, to take such further attitude as it might deem wise in respect of approval of any agreement which might be submitted to it. Concerning

the route he also indicated that as the various steps in legalization might require several months, it was quite possible that an agree ment could be perfected before the necessary consents of property owners had been obtained.

On June 15 the Board of Estimate and Apportionment approved the route and twelve days later Mayor Mitchel gave his approval. It was specifically pointed out in the communication received by the Commission on July 2 that the approval of the route did not, however, bind the Board of Estimate to the construction of the contemplated railroad within a limited time and that the approval was not to be construed as approval in advance of changes which might be made in Dual System Contract No. 4, the agreement between the City and the New York Municipal Railway Corporation for the operation of the new subway and the Brooklyn elevated lines. The Board of Estimate also requested the Commission to submit to it for its advice and consideration the proposed terms of the modification of Contract No. 4.

On October 18, 1917, the Commission filed a report showing that sufficient consents had been obtained to validate the route. In the meantime, on August 20, the Commission directed that a hearing be held on the proposed changes in Contract No. 4 involved in the agreement under contemplation between the City and the company and at the same time held a public hearing upon the changes which it was proposed should be made in the certificate which was granted to the company on March 19, 1913, in connection with Contract No. 4. This certificate provided for third-tracking and changes on elevated railroads. In the draft form, presented at the hearing, consideration was also given to certain other matters which had come up in connection with the discussion of the Ashland Place and Fulton Street issues, including the proposed new station on the Williamsburg plaza, the station at Lawrence street on the Montague Street Tunnel line and the relocation in Adams street of a portion of the Fulton

Street Elevated tracks. The hearing was held on September 17, 1917, with a large representation of those interested. Very general approval was given the Ashland Place connection plan and other items in the proposal, with some suggestions as to changes in detail and some partial objections to the whole plan. All of these suggestions were taken under consideration and the conferences continued throughout the fall, until on December 19, 1917, Commissioner Whitney and Chief of Rapid Transit Harkness presented a report, as a Special Committee of the Commission, relating in detail the progress which had been made in carrying forward the negotiations for settlement of the situation since their report of August 30, 1916.

This report contained the form of a suggested communication to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, pointing out the disposition proposed by the Commission in respect of the several matters involved. This communication was approved the same day and transmitted to the Board of Estimate and Apportionment by the Secretary of the Commission. With it were transmitted proposals for changes in the elevated certificate of the Brooklyn company and in Contract No. 4. Among the changes which the Commission recommended were the Ashland Place connection, the new station at Lawrence and Willoughby streets on the Montague Street Tunnel line (preliminary steps for the construction of which have already been taken), the transfer connection between the Myrtle Avenue Elevated railroad and the Myrtle Avenue station of the Fourth Avenue subway at Flatbush avenue extension, a new express station on the Brooklyn plaza of the Williamsburg bridge for the Broadway line and the continuing of the third-tracking of the Fulton Street line west to Clermont avenue, together with an extension of time of one year for such third-tracking. The Commission forwarded to the Board a certificate to cover the proposed relocation of the elevated tracks in Adams street, but did so without recommendation. The reasons for this attitude and for the Commission's position in respect of the several other matters involved are set forth in detail in the report of Commissioner Whitney and Mr. Harkness and in the communication to the Board of Estimate, which are here appended:

December 19, 1917.

Public Service Commission

for the First District

Under date of August 30th, 1916, the undersigned, as the committee to which had been referred the matter of suggested changes in the Dual System layout in the Borough of Brooklyn, and especially the unsatisfactory situation growing out of the third-tracking of the Fulton Street Elevated line and the lack of provision for the connection of that line with the subway system, submitted a report in which was outlined the changes and additions the committee deemed necessary. The conclusions of this report were submitted to a public hearing and were thereafter taken up with the railroad company and led to the correspondence of December, 1916, and January, 1917, which resulted in the Chairman's letter of January 8, 1917, in which it was stated in part:

"It would appear from your letter that the discussion of these matters by correspondence has now reached a point where any matters as to which there is not a complete understanding may be further discussed in connection with the preparation of the formal documents."

These matters were thereupon referred back and the preparation of studies and plans and the forms of agreements and certificates proceeded with. Their completion has been delayed by the difficulty of many of the problems presented and the adjustment of differences between the committee and the company. In this connection the committee takes pleasure in reporting the active and exceedingly helpful aid of Comptroller Prendergast in bringing these negotiations to a successful conclusion. The committee presents with this report complete forms of the documents to effectuate the arrangement negotiated with the company.

Before discussing the scope of these documents the committee wishes briefly to refer to several matters discussed in the earlier report which it has not been possible to include in this arrangement. These are the Crosstown line, the vesting in the City of the title to the existing company owned elevated railroads operated under Contract No. 4 and the Livingston Street subway.

The Crosstown Line: In the earlier report the committee stated with respect to the construction of the Crosstown line:

"There can be hardly any ground for difference of opinion as to the desirability of the prompt construction of the Crosstown line. There is probably no line that could now be built in the City of New York that would be of greater benefit to such a large population and area. At the present time, aside from the South Brooklyn lines, the rapid transit operation in Brooklyn is generally east and west. The Fulton Street, Broadway and Myrtle Avenue lines serve this traffic but there is no way to go north and south in the part of Brooklyn north of Fulton street except by trolley cars. The Williamsburg and Greenpoint districts of Brooklyn constitute one of the greatest manufacturing centers of this country but they are almost cut off from the central and southern districts of the borough. To go to Greenpoint from Borough Hall, for example, it is necessary to rely largely upon the so-called crosstown surface line that consumes such a length of time for the trip that in the case of a considerable part of the traveling public the trip is made only when it cannot be avoided. The long distance and the slow transit have therefore effectually operated to separate Greenpoint and Williamsburg from central and southern Brooklyn. This is unfortunate in many aspects. It tends to continue Brooklyn as a collection of villages and towns whereas both business and civic considerations require its complete unification and the development of the Brooklyn point of view as distinguished from the sectional points of view that have been largely responsible in the past for the failure of all parts of Brooklyn to unite on any one project.

Some advantages of the Crosstown line may be stated as follows:

"It will provide a north and south line extending with the Astoria and Corona and the Brighton Beach connections, from Astoria and Corona in Queens to Brighton Beach and Coney Island. It will be in fact as well as in name a Long Island Sound to Atlantic Ocean line.' This line will not only unite divided sections of Brooklyn as they should be united but will also join Brooklyn and Queens as they should be joined and not make the route from Brooklyn to Queens and vice versa via Manhattan with two crossings of the East River. Furthermore, it will tie in the east and west transit lines of Brooklyn. It will cross the Broadway, Myrtle Avenue, Lexington Avenue and Fulton Street lines, and by a system of transfer east and west will afford convenient access to all parts of the borough.

Summing it up it may fairly be stated that this line is indispensable to the proper development of Brooklyn and at least the southern portion of Queens."

With this full realization of the urgent need of the Crosstown line not only for the district it would immediately serve but also for the unification and correlation of the entire rapid transit system operated under Contract No. 4 the committee has been faced with the practical existing situation, namely, that however desirable the