The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-05-22
SPR|NKL|NG IS COSTLY
The Merchants Association Fig.
ureS Declared to Be Er.
TOneouS.
Expert George w. Elder of the Board
of Supervisors Draws Some
Comparisons.

The protest. filed with the Board of Su-
pervisors by several hundred citizens who
oppose the plan of the Merchants Asso-
citation 10 have the business streets of the
City sprinkled at the public expense has
aroused the Stree: Committee of the board
to investigate the matter to ascertain If it
would be of public benefit and If the
figures submitted by the association are
correct.
George w. Elder, the expert of the com
mittee, has been at work on the matter
for several days past, and he submitted
his report at yester days meeting. In the
main il was as follows:
Their estimated cost of sprinkling Market
street from Second TO Seventh streets by pub
lie contract is $2S 80 per week. In order to
exemplify this particular item of supposed
cost of this sprinkling 10 be done by public
contract, l have examined into the cost of
sprinkling Van Ness avenue at the present
time, which the City is paying for at the fol-
lowing prices, to wit:
Cost OF sprinkling Van Ness avenue, $40 per
week.
The ground covered daily by the water carts
at present includes the macadam blocks which
yet remain unpaved, where the watering is
done much for the preservation of the pave
ment as for allaying the dust
The lineal feet covered daily and the
amount of water used are as follows:
cubic feet of water at IA cents per 100 feet,
amounting TO, per day, 81 80. One double
team per day, 81 20. Total for one day, 81.
Total for one week, S49.
This is what the City is paying at the present
time for sprinkling Van Ness avenue, and il
seems to be a fair average paid for street
sprinking.
1t seems only fai- to compare this rate pro-
port:onally, 10 Market street, although 1 am
reliably informed that it would require more
water for the same on Market street.
owing the different ClaS9
However, wish TO make a fair com parison of
the two streets, in order that he committee
may compare the cost fairy and impartially.
Market street, from Second to Seventh, owing
to broad crossings and inter sections, is 400
lineal feet. In order TO cover this amount of
ground, being nearly double the amount OF
ground 10 be covered on Van Ness avenue, it
would require two carts instead of one, and
there would be more wear and tear on a cart
used on Market street than on Van Ness ave.
nue.. Therefore, at the least calculation, the
carts would cost IS per day each, or 80 per
day for two carts. The amount of water used
would amount to So 90, or total cost OF one
day S15 90; total cost for one week 300 90
Thus, your committee can readily see that
there must be some mistake in the estimate
submitted to your honorable committee by the
Merchants Association as 10 the cost OF prink-
ling Market street These estimates / have
made from reliable information, and only
submit them for information as to what might
be the future cost, should the City assume to
sprinkle these streets by public contract
Sprinkling Market street at the same cost as
is now paid for Van Ness avenue would be
almost four times as much the estimate of
the Merchants Association, their estimate
being S2S 80 per week; the cost would be at
the price now paid by the City for sprinkling
$50 20 per week more than the estimate sub
mitted to you by the Merchants Association
Thus, it would follow that the taxation for
street sprdnking s.c would s1oo BE- instead Of
IL cents per year, and on $1,000 valuation,
instead OF So, it would be $12.