Public Service Commission, Second District [Vol. 15] In the Matter of the Application for Revocation of Certificate Heretofore Issued to the FRONTIER ELECTRIC RAILWAY COMPANY that Public Convenience and a Necessity Required the Construction of its Railroad Case No. 5915 (Public Service Commission, Second District, March 19, 1918) Application for revocation of a certificate of convenience and necessity granted to the Frontier Electric Railway Company by the Board of Railroad Commissioners, on the ground of laches. The Erie Railroad Company on February 6, 1917, filed a petition asking the Commission to revoke the certificate of convenience and necessity granted to the Frontier Electric Railway Company by the old Board of Railroad Commissioners on the 14th day of November, 1906. Answer was duly made to the petition by the electric railway company and the matter was several times adjourned. On May 21, 1917, the New York Central Railroad asked to be heard in favor of revoking the certificate theretofore issued to the Frontier Electric Railway Company and was permitted to become a party. Upon the testimony adduced, held that the times within which the Frontier Electric Railway Company was required by law to begin construction of its road and to complete the same had several times been extended by statute and that said periods of time had not expired and that the certificate of 1906 was properly and lawfully granted. The applications of the petitioning railroads for the revocation of the certificate were denied and the case ordered closed on the books of the Commission. BY THE COMMISSION.- The Erie Railroad Company having heretofore and on the 6th day of February, 1917, filed its petition asking this Commission, pursuant to section 10 of the Railroad Law, to revoke the certificate of convenience and necessity granted to the Frontier Electric Railway Company by the Board of Railroad Commissioners on the 14th day of November, 1906. under section 59 of the Railroad Law as then in force, and the Frontier Electric Railway Company having at a later date made answer to the petition of the Erie Railroad Company and the STATE DEPT. REPT.- Vol. 15 29 [Vol. 15] Public Service Commission, Second District application having come on to be heard by this Commission on the 15th day of March, 1917, at the city of Buffalo, N. Y., at which time the Erie Railroad Company appeared by Messrs. II. A. Taylor and S. F. Carr, its attorneys; the Frontier Electric Railway Company by Messrs. Cohn and Baumhofer, its attorneys; the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company by Louis L. Babcock, Esq., its attorney; the Pennsylvania Railroad Company by Frank Rumsey, Esq., its attorney, and by J. G. Rodgers, Esq., its superintendent; Bertron, Griscom & Company by E. G. Connette, Esq.; the city of Tonawanda by Seward H. Millener, Esq., city attorney; the city of Niagara Falls by H. A. Constantine, Esq., deputy corporation counsel; the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas by Dow Vroman, Esq.; the Board of Trade of Niagara Falls by George M. Tuttle, Esq.; the city of North Tonawanda by James B. Lindsey, Esq., city attorney; the village of LaSalle by Fred Brooks, Esq., its president, and the city of Buffalo, N. Y., by J. J. Hurley, Esq., assistant corporation counsel; and the case having been adjourned from time to time and evidence both in favor of and against the prayer of the petition having been presented and during a portion of said hearings the State Department of Highways having been represented by F. A. Hermans, Esq., bridge engineer, and The New York Central Railroad Company having thereafter and on the 21st day of May, 1917, filed a petition asking that it might be heard on the question of revoking the certificate theretofore issued to the Frontier Electric Railway Company, and the Frontier Electric Railway Company having joined issue by filing a petition on the 21st day of May, 1917, asking that the New York Central Railroad Company be not heard on the ground of laches on the part of the latter named company, and the objection. of the Frontier Electric Railway Company having been overruled and said company having thereafter filed its answer, verified the 2d day of June, 1917, and a hearing having been had upon the petition of the New York Central Railroad Company and the answer thereto in the city of Albany on the 6th day of June, 1917, at which time the New York Central Railroad Company Public Service Commission, Second District [Vol. 15] was represented by Maurice C. Spratt, Esq., its attorney, and D. B. Fleming, Esq., superintendent; the Frontier Electric Railway Company by Messrs. Cohn and Bogue; the Pennsylvania Railroad Company by Messrs. Rumsey and Adams; the Eric Railroad Company by H. A. Taylor, Esq.; the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company by Douglas Swift, Esq.; the Chamber of Commerce of Tonawanda by Dow Vroman, Esq., and the State Department of Highways by Joseph Donnelly, assistant engineer; and after evidence had been taken the hearing having been adjourned until June 18, 1917, at which time further evidence was received, and it appearing that the times within which the Frontier Electric Railway Company was required by law to begin construction of its road and to complete the same had several times been extended by statute and that said periods of time had not and have not at the time of the granting of this order expired and it further appearing that the certificate of convenience and necessity granted to the Frontier Electric Railway Company by the Board of Railroad Commissioners on the 14th day of November, 1906, was properly and lawfully granted, it is Ordered, That the applications of the Erie Railroad Company and of the New York Central Railroad Company to revoke the certificate of convenience and necessity granted to the Frontier Electric Railway Company by the Board of Railroad Commissioners on the 14th day of November, 1906, be and the same and each of them is hereby denied and this case is hereby closed on the books of the Commission. [Vol. 15] Public Service Commission, Second District In the Matter of the Alteration of Highway Grade Crossings of the INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY at Payne Avenue, Linwood Avenue, Fredericka Street, East Felton Street, Jackson Avenue, Stenzel Street, Ward Road, and Any and All Other Alleged Streets or Roads Between Payne Avenue and Witmer Road, in the City of North Tonawanda Case No. 6330 (Public Service Commission, Second District, March 19, 1918) Grade crossings of the International Railway at certain streets or roads in the city of North Tonawanda. After examination of the maps and profiles filed, and upon hearing the testimony adduced, the Commission finally determined that the grade crossings of all existing streets north of Wheatfield street to the Witmer road, but not including the latter, in the city of North Tonawanda, shall be changed from grade. The specific manner in which these crossings are to be made is shown in the order in detail. BY THE COMMISSION. In the order of this Commission duly made and entered on the 13th day of January, 1916, in the matter of the petition of the International Railway Company as to the manner in which a double track extension of its electric railroad between the cities of Buffalo and Niagara Falls shall cross certain streets and highways, etc., it is, among other things, determined that in the city of North Tonawanda said International railway shall cross at grade the following streets: Payne avenue, Linwood avenue, Fredericka street, East Felton street, Jackson avenue, Stenzel street, Ward road, Witmer road, and any other alleged streets north of Wheatfield street to the city line, including Sixteenth street, Seventeenth street, Eighteenth street, and Nineteenth street. It is further determined (paragraph "c" of said order of January 13, 1916) "That if at any time after the date of this order proceedings shall be instituted in the manner provided by law for the change or alteration of Public Service Commission, Second District [Vol. 15] any of the crossings made at grade by the petitioner herein or its successors, then and in that event the petitioner and its successors shall be bound by the provisions of the laws of the State of New York relative to the change or alteration of grade crossings, and shall pay the same proportion of the cost of the work as would be paid by a steam surface railroad under like conditions, and shall not claim in any such proceedings any exemption from the obligations which it or they may be required to assume under the provisions of this order; nor shall any claim be made by the petitioner or its successors in any of the proceedings contemplated in this paragraph that it or they are exempt from the provisions of this order relative to grade crossings because of the fact that it is a street surface railroad, it being the intent hereof that proceedings to alter or change any of the crossings referred to may be made in accordance with the statutes relating to the altering or changing of similar crossings involving a steam surface railroad, and that the petitioner and its successors shall be bound by such proceedings in all respects." By virtue of the foregoing provision of the order last above mentioned, the Commission, on January 22, 1918, ordered that the International Railway Company, the city of North Tonawanda, and all persons interested show cause why it (the Commission) should not proceed to alter all and each of said grade crossings between Wheatfield street and Witmer road, including the crossings heretofore mentioned at Payne avenue, Linwood avenue, Fredericka street, East Felton street, Jackson street, Stenzel street, Ward road, and any and all other streets and alleged streets in the city of North Tonawanda. Upon this order a hearing was held in the city of Buffalo on February 7, 1918, Messrs. E. G. Connette, Morris Cohn, jr., H. C. Riexinger, and M. M. Oille appearing for the International Railway Company; James P. Lindsay and C. L. Oelkers for the city of North Tonawanda; E. P. Lovejoy, F. C. Butler, A. M. Everhart, and B. A. Lewis for the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas; and several interested property owners either by counsel or in person; at which time due proof of publication of |