The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-12-06
THAT SIDEWALK.
THE HERALD,
Salt Lake City, Utah

1t seems most difficult for the prop
erty-owners on the north side of South
Temple Street to get what they want,
assuming that they want what they ask
fora paved sidewalk. They have petit
toned the City Council two or three
time1,!and two or three times the Coun-
Gil has granted the petition. But the
walk remains as it was, except as to a
block or so, where the owners grew
weary of waiting on the slow motion Of
the City Fathers, and did the work
themselves. Some time ago the prop
erty-owners sent in a petition for
the improvement, asking for the laying
of cement. The petition was granted,
the estimates of cost made, and the
matter was left open under the ordin-
ance for protests. On Tuesday evening
these latter we're to be presented, and f
they were less than a majority of the
whole property assessed, the improve
ment was to be regarded as having
been ordered. The protests were
insignificant, comprising in all only
four comparatively small property
holders, and aggregating only
a trifing percentage of the whole.
Those interested seem to be praoti-
cally unanimous in favor of the pro-
posed Improvement. But the Council
again steps in and at first kills the pro-
ject outright; afterwards it partially
resurrects the scheme, but lays it aside
for four weeks. No explanation is
given, unless il can be regarded as in
that line that some members suggested
that some other material than cement
be used. One thought stone would be
better, another was in favor of shale
and q third thought brick was the best
material.
It will occur to disinterested people
that the Council is acting very
strangely in this business. The people
who are to get the benefit of this i'm
proYement and who are to pay for it,
none of the expense falling upon the
public, have made their decision, their |
choice failing on cement. THE HERALD
regrets the selection, for the reasons
which were partially set out in the
Council meeting on Tuesday evening.
Stone is preferable in very nearly every
respect. 1t will last ten times as
long as cement, and when prop
erly laid is as even and smooth
for walk as the cement; the first cost
is very little if any more than for
cement, while the expense for main
tanning the tagging walk is trifing as
compared with the cost of keeping the
cement in repair. Furthermore, if
stone were used the money would all be
retained in the country, while for c.
ment the cash would be sent out for all
save the cost of laying.
But because The HERALD prefers
flags to cement, furnishes no reason for
saying that the people whe are to pay
for it shall not have cement if they like
that better than they do flags or brick.
Nor is it plain where the right of the
Council to object in g case of this kind
comes in. A member of the Council
may think he knows better than the
individual what the latter wants, but
that fact doesn't give the councillor
the right to force the Individual to &C
cept his ideas.
The plain truth is, there has been
too much trifing over the sidewalk i'm
provement referred to, and people are
getting the impression that the City
Council is standing in the way of the
improvement without any good ex-
cuse.