Ashtabula telegraph. (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1874-1880, 1879-07-11
Council Proceedings.

we're present except Councilman Seymour.
Minutes of previous meeting were read and
approved.
The prayer of petition for an addition
al police force, was granted by the appoint
ment of C. L. SeOville, for the term Of one
year.
The Mayor appointed Crawford Large as
HarbOr master; on notice disappointment
was referred TO the Harbor and Wharves
committee, together with the matter Of
salary.
The bond of Wm. Rennick as policeman,
with a. W. Call and NJ. Newberry as sure
ties, was presented and approved.
The following report of special COM
mi;tee on Station street sewer was read and
laid on the table:
We, the undersigned to whom Was re-
ferred the petition of lot owners on Station
street for a Sewer, respectfully report as
follows:
1st. We believe that main sewer
should be constructed on said street as
prayed for in said petition, as soon as the
same can be done.
End. We find that a special assessment
for said sewer cannot exceed 25 per cent.
of the value Of the abutting lots as they
are assessed for taxation on the general
tax Duplicate, and not more than 1-15 of
the value of abuttiug lots as shown on said
tax Duplicate in any one year, and also
that assessment shall not exceed 50 per
foot front
A resolution stating the determination
Of the Council to proceed with the pro-
posed harbOr improvement, and that the
claims fled for damage arising therefrom
should De judicially inquired into, passed
its second reading.
Messrs. Haskell, Seymour and Manning
were appointed a special committee to
visit parties owning land affected by the
proposed harbor improvement, and ascer-
tain from them what agreement could be
made in regard to damages from said I'M
provement, and on what terms the lands
affected could be purchased, and report at
next meeting. -
An ordinance for the payment of claim
for the month of June was passed and
resolution for repairs of sidewalks Was
adopted, and is-published elsewhere.
The following motion by Mr.. Haskell
was made and carried:
Move you that an ordinanee-be drawn
by the Solicitor, as per law-to cover all
lands lying and bounded as follows, into
Sewer District to be known as Sewer Dis
trict No. /: on the east by Lake ST.; on |
the south by Prospect St.; on the west by |
the branch Of the L. S. & NJ. S. r. R.,
known as the A. ]. & F. R. R.; on the |
north by the L. S. & NJ. S. r. R., to Lake |
Street.
After an informal discussion on the pro-
posed Harbor improvement matter, the
Council adjourned to Monday evening Ju-
ly 9TH.
The Council met pursuant to adjourn
ment last Monday evening; all members
were present except Councilman Hitchcock.
Minutes of previous meeting were read,
corrected and approved.
MIR. Israel made a motion that the Solici-
tor be instructed to prepare an ordinance
reducing the salary of Harbor Master from
$75 to $50 per annum. The motion was
seconded by Mr.. Haskell and carried.
The special committee appointed at the
last previous meeting to visit parties own
ing land affected by the proposed harbOr
improvement and ascertain what agree
ment could be made in regard to damages
from said improvement, and on what terms
the land could be purchased, submitted
the following report which was accepted
and the committee discharged.
TO the Honorable MasOr and Council of
AshtG6Wlg Borough:
Your Committee on Harbor matters as
to damages in the contemplated improve
ment at Ashtabula Harbor would respect
fully report, that we have visited the Har-
Dor and find that the property OF Tombes
& Bro, Fassett & Dodge and Hubbard &
Co. is nearly now all under water and in an
unavailable condition to do business on at
all, and to make same available as it is now,
without the improvement, would require
a considerable amount Of expense in the
way Of dredging and building of docks,
and we consider that as with the improve
ment the city would be to- the expense of
dredging, the same should be considered
in making up the damage on said property.
Mr.. VIM. Humphreys lot we find has a
dock on, built on the channel bank, no
piles, and an average depth of water OF
about 8 feet, which to make available for
large class of vessels would require dredg-
ing. Mr.. Halls lot we find on it the rem
nants of a dock-but nothing available for
business as it now Is-alSo built on the
channel bank. No piles.
We have visited the owners of the prop
erty and find that they are all not willing
to change the pnce on their land but to
leave the same as claim put it, to witt
Tombes & Bro, 500; Fassett & Dodge,
81, 900, or the same amount of land in the
rear;;"W Humphrey, $2,500; h. Hub
bard & Co.-through their trustees-$700;
II. d. Hall, $4,000. FasSett & Dodge say
they will sell all of their dock property for
81, 900.
Tombes & Bro. claim for the portion of !,
theirs taken per front foot on the river
amounts to $16.16 per foot, or at the rate
OF $23, 10000 per acre for the amount tax
en-. We find the amount on the tax dupli-
cate for $50 valuation for all the property.
Fassett & Dodge claim for the portion of
their land taken per front foot on the river
amounts to $16.16 per foot, or at the rate :
Of $14, ,26S.S .S5 per acre for the amount tax i
en-. We find the same on tax duplicate for !
So valuation.
WIN. humphreys claim Tor the portion
Of his land taken per front foot on the
water amounts to $41. 66 per foot, or at the
rate of $35, 700 per acre for the amount TAX +
en-. Wefind the same on the tax duplicate
for valuation is $5 for all the land.
Hubbard & Co. claim for the portion !
taken per front foot on the river we find
is $3.50 per foot, or at the rate of 81, ,259
per acre for the amount taken. We find
the same on the tax duplicate for $40 for
all the land.
d. h. Halls claim for the portion taken
per front foot on river, we find, is $13.33
per foot, or at the rate of $12, 500 per acre.
We find the same on the tax duplicate for
S645-$60O for new building and $45 for
all the land.
Mr.. O'Neils claim, after meeting him, I
we are satisfied will amount to'nothing. 7
As to claim for consequential damages,
Mr. Fassett said if his property should
cave off or 10 feet after the improvement
he would not consider it Just claim to
bring against the Corporation, as he would
consider it his duty to protect his own
property.
Messrs. Hall and Humphrey we did not
say anything to as TO consequential damages {
as we understand by the law from the Sol