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


The Property Owners Hold seance Rela-
tive to the Grade,
A 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 100000, 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 q letter
was read from T. s. McManus &, Co. in
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 folio wing explanatory communication
was received from City Engineer Sewall
OFFICE OF CRY ENGINEER, AND
ENGINEER OF BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS.
ST.. PAUL, June q, 1879.
NIB. John Dowlan, Chairman Committee on
Streets:
DEAR SIR: The petitioners don't under
stand the grades or what the city proposes
Scarcely any boiAding on the entire street
| corresponds to the old grade of 1857 they being
generally too high. In 1872 the grade was
changed from Wabashsw to Jackson, and madea
little lower. The greatest alteration was at
point 30 feet below Cedar street, where it was
lowered two feet. In 1877 the grade again
changed and raised, in most places to level
| higher than the grads of 1875.
At Wabashaw street it is 4 in. higher.
12O #. east of Wabashaw street it is 2 #.
| higher.
At west side of Cedar street it is 6 in. higher.
| At east side of Cedar street it ia in. HIGHER.
80 feet east of Cedar street it is in. lower.
At west side of Minnesota street it is in.
higher.
! At east side of Minnesota street it is IL in.
| higher.
At west side of Robert street it lis in. higher.
At east side of Robert street it is six inches
| higher. Jackson street old grade probably.
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 "A
follows:
David Day requires lowering six inches at
one end and twelve at the other; the grade
conforms to the other sidewalks of the block.
VIM. Lindeke and Gotzian requires raising
from to 8 inches. Caroline Schurmeier and
| J. II. Schurmeier, in block a. requires lower
ing from to inches. Davidson d Allis,
lowering inches at one end and at the other,
| and 10 inches at an intermediate high point
| McQulllan estate to be lowered IL inches at
one end and at the other. A. s. Cowley and
Mr.. McManus to be lowered about inches.
| Samuel Mayall, no alteration nearly right
May G.. Moore, nearly right. ID. T. Watson,
don't know where he is. Caroline Schurmeier,
in block "a, TO be lowered about inches.
| Q. Geib nearly right; j. NJ. Warner, to be
lowered 8 or inches; G Hewitt, to be lowered
6 or inches; D. W. Ingersoll, to be lowered
9 inches at one and 10 at the other; estate of
J. G. Mack, raised an inch at one end and
lowered inches at the other; German Ameri-
Thompson, nearly right; T. L. Grace, sidewalk
right NO change. The grade agrees about as
we'll with the property as any grade could. The
language of some Of the citizens is offensive
both to the council and all the city engineers.
Such expressions as "muggin-headed stupid.
ity." vicious incompetency of local
officials" coming when both CITY
council and engineer have done all that can
fairly be asked to accommodate tho grades "a
the property are not only provoking but excite
desire not to pay attention to their wishes,
The real difficulty is, that buildings have beer
erected for twenty years without regard to the
grades, or to the conformity with each other
80 that it ia difficult to make grades that viii
fit them. The profile (which please return
shows the present grade and the grade of 1857
which the petitioners imagine they want t
have restored. Respectfully,
! J. 8. SEwEL1., City Engineer.
It was explained by City Attorney Murray
that the property owners were under an en-
tire misrepresentation, insomuch as they did
not appreciate or uud orstaud the fact that
the grade of 1877 restored the sidewalks tx
! 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 Sewsll's letter were cited
after which the COMMITTEES inspected the
profile of the various grades. The gentle
men present seemed convinced by MI. Sew
) ellis statements, and on motion the repor
was referred to the council with the an
proval of the committee. After an informa
:: discussion the meeting adjourned.