Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1879-06-29
THIRD STREET.
The Property Owners Hold a seance Rela
tive to the Grade,

sEat Two 70 Cne Grade,
meeting of the council committee on
streets was held yesterday afternoon for the
purpose of considering the petition of DR..
Daniel Day and others regarding the chang
ing of the grade of the sidewalk on Third,
between Wabashaw and Minnesota streets.
The petitioners claimed that the damage
to the property owners, by lowering the
sidewalks in the above named streets, would
exceed $1OO,O0O and instead of changing
the sidewalks, they requested that the street
be filled up to the original grade.
DR.. Day and Mr.. Shurmeier appeared in
the interests of the petitioners, and letter
was read from T. s. McManus & Co. in
which it was stated that the interests Of the
firm would materially suffer by lowering the
sidewalk, and in case such action was taken
they would be compelled to move from the
street.
The following explanatory communication
was received from City Engineer Sewall
OFFICE OF CRY ENGINEER, AND
ENGINEER OF BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS.
- ST.. PAUL, June 81, 1879.
MR. John Dowlan, Chairman Committee ON
Streets:
DEAR :s1R: The petitioners. don't under
stand the grades or what the city proposes
to do to the sidewalks.
Scarcely any building on the entire street
corresponds to the old grade of 1857, they being
generally too high. In 1872 the grade was
changed from Wabashaw to Jackson, and madea
little lower. The greatest alteration was at
point 80 feet below Cedar street, y here it was
lowered two feet In 1877 the grade was again
higher than the grads Of 1875.
At Wabashaw street it is in. HIGHER.
l2O #. east of Wabashaw street it is 2 #.
higher. s! 80
At west side of Cedar street it is 6 in. higher
At east side Of Cedar street it is in. higher.
~ feet east OF Cedar street it is Z in. lower.
At west side of Minnesota street Il Is in.
higher. .flt
At east side of Minnesota street it is II in.
higher. ~
At west side of Robert street it 6 in. higher.
At east side of Robert street it is 81. inches
The city proposes to put sidewalks to this
grade Of 1877, and to raise the pavement when
it requires removal.
The effect on the petitioners sidewalks is Is
follows: a ,sfs8 III
David Day requires lowering SIX inches at
one end and twelve at the other the grade
VIM. Lindeke and Gotzian requires raising
from to 8 inches. Caroline Schurmeier and
J. b. Schurmeier. in block "A, requires lower
ing from to 8 inches. Davidson & Allis,
lowering inches at one end and at the other.
and 10 inches at an intermediate high point.
McQuillan estate to be lowered IL inches at
one end and at the other AS. Cowley and
Mr.. McManus to be lowered about 6 inches.
Samuel Mayall, no alteration nearly right.
May q. Moore, nearly right. d. T. Watson,
don't know where he is. Caroline Schurmeier.
in block "a, 10 be lowered about 4 inches.
O. Geib, nearly right; J.. NJ. Warner, to be
lowered OF 9 inches; G. Hewitt, to be lowered
or inches; D. w. IngersolL, to be lowered
inches at one and 10 at the other; estate of
J. G. Mack, raised an inch 1T one end and
lowered inches at the other; German Ameri-
can bank. to be lowered 4 or inches; 81.
right, no change. The grade agrees about as
we'll with the property - any grade could. The
language of some IF the citizens is offensive
both to the council and all the city engineers.
Such expressions as 'muggtn-headed stupid
Coming ~ssa both Of s sf1
council and engineer have done all that can
fairly be asked to accommodate. the grades to
the property are not only provoking, but excite
desire not to pay attention to their wishes.
| The real difficulty is, that buildings have been
erected for twenty years without regard to the
grades, or to the conformity with each other,
50 that it ia difficult to make grades that will
fit them. The profile (which please return)
shows the present grade and the grade of 1867,
| which the petitioners imagine they want to
| have restored. Respectfully, Fc5tz
J. 8. sEwELL, City Engineer.
1t was explained by City Attorney Murray
that the property owners were under an en-
tire misrepresentation, insomuch as they did
not apprec,ate or ind ,rstand the fact that
the grade Of 1877 restored the sidewalks to
q higher point than the grade Of 1857, about
which there was snch cry for restoration.
In proof of this the statements of actual
fact in Engineer Sewelfs letter were cited,
after which the committee inspected the
profile of the various grades. The gentle
mon present seemed convinced by Mr.. Sew
ellis statements, and on motion the report
was referred to the council? with the ap-
proval Of the committee. After an informal
discussion the meeting adjourned.
Carpenters and Builders, Attention!