The Canal That Would Raise Salmon Bay—and Fill Its Marshes

Daniel Jones, the right-of-way agent for the joint committee on right-of-way for the government canal, has been endeavoring to obtain an estimate of the cost of right-of-way and the release to the government of all damages to property arising by reason of the submerged lands. He reports that he has met with fair progress, although many of the lot holders along the proposed route are scattered over the country and it has required some time to reach them. Nearly all the individual lot holders living outside of the state have evinced a disposition to be generous and give up their holdings for a reasonable consideration.

Mr. Jones has recently taken up the question of damages to submerged property along the right-of-way through the raising of the level of Salmon bay to that of Lake Union, and he has been confronted by two questions, namely: What assurance will the property holders be given that their land will be filled in with excavated material; and, if the right-of-way cuts off the exits of adjoining property, of what value will the property then be to the holders?

Mr. Jones has had consultations with Eugene Rickseeker, the engineer for the government who will be in local charge of the work of building the canal, and was soon in a position to assure the property holders that wasted earth will be applied to the filling in of submerged lands and that a portion of the canal right-of-way will be set aside for street and railway purposes. Mr. Rickseeker was seen yesterday concerning these matters and he said:

'There seems to be some discussion at this time regarding the question of damages to property by reason of the water of Salmon bay being raised to and maintained on a level with the water of Lake Union. With the exception of a few mills at Ballard there are really no damages. By far the largest part of the land to be submerged is either marshy during half the year or rendered so by a rising tide.

'It is probably not generally known that it is the intention of the engineers to distribute the earth obtained from the canal prism only on this submerged land, raising it to such an elevation above the water level of the canal as to provide proper drainage thereof. Sufficient material will be obtained from the prism to fill all submerged land on both sides of the canal from Fremont to the state harbor lines. From this point towards the mouth of Salmon bay the submerged land will be filled in, commencing at the point most remote from the canal and improving towards the harbor lines until the excavated earth is exhausted. It is estimated that this improved land will extend almost to the present high tide line in the vicinity of the head of Salmon bay. As to the question of damages to lot owners where the canal right-of-way corresponds with the front line of their lots and includes the entire street, they have no case, for it is not the purpose of the government to lock up its right-of-way and keep the public off. It is provided a strip of land between 60 and 70 feet wide on each side of the canal, extending from Lake Union to Salmon bay, and a narrower strip from Lake Union to Lake Washington, all lying within the 300 feet wide right-of-way asked for, can be utilized by the public for sidewalk, road, street and railway purposes, although owned and controlled by the government.

'Incidentally it might be said that with the canal this land will be ultimately too valuable for ordinary business purposes and will likely be cut up into slips and basins where railways and commerce meet, as has been done at intervals along the Manchester canal.'