The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-01-22
WARREN-SCHARF COMPANY MAY
NOT GET IT'S SUMMIT AVENUE
PAVING MONEY.
RESIDENTS ARE DIRECTORS.
THEY SAY THAT THE PAVEMENT
HAS CRACKED AND is
ROTTEN
OF the Contract, Which Promised to
Keep the Street Ten Years
Good AS New.

| Inc estimate Tor the payment Of ST.
500 to the Warren charf Asphalt com
pany was before the board Of public
| works yesterday. A number Of the
property owners on Summit avenue
were also present and the proposition
met with a decided objection. When
! the contract was made and the pave
ment laid in 1886, a provision was in
! Guided in the contract which provided
! that fifteen per cent of the contract
! price should be held back by the city
as a reserve. This, amounting to about
! $4,000, was to be paid the contractors
| at the end Of twenty years, one-half
at the end of the first ten, and the bal
ance at the end Of twenty years 1t
was further agreed that during the first
| ten years the company was 20 keep
the pavement in repair without cost to
! the city or property owners. The sec
! ond ten years the company was to re-
! ceive 9 cents per square yard for keep
! ing the pavement in good condition and
repair.
! One clause of the contract provided
! that at the end of the first ten years
! the pavement should be turned over to
| the city in as good condition and or
! der as it was when completed and
! accepted, ordinary wear and tear Of
travel thereon, alone excepted"
This was the point made by the proper
ty owners yesterday, and they contend
! ed that under the contract before the
! half of the reserve was paid, the pave
ment should be put in a condition I'M
der the clause above quoted J. H
! Il
| dead and that by reason Of cracks in
! the other half the entire asphaltum
! cushion should be relaid. If the COM
! pany would not do this, then the $15,-
! 600 reserve should be forfeited.
! Col. R. M. Newport sided with Mr..
! Weed and said the vitality of the pave
! ment was gone. The company had
made a good profit, and by their con-
tract had agreed to turn the pavement
over to the city at the end of ten years
! in as good a condition as when it was
accepted by the city. 1t was not now
in as good condition, and for this reason
| the estimate before the board should
| not be allowed. According to the con-
| tract the board of public works were
! to be the sole judges of the condition
|
| the ten years, and he wanted the board
! to hold to the letter of the contract
Mr. Quinby said the intention of the
| beard, or ait least, his idea, was that
the company should get their half Of
| the reserve and then in the next ten
years the pavement, if it was not in
good condition, should be placed in
! good repair. Mr.. Weed said there was
nothing in the contract which would
make it incumbent on the contractors
| to do aus MIR. Quinby suggested in the
| second term of ten years. The pave
ment was now, he said, half rotten,
and should be relaid. J. A. Wheelock
thought there should be something more
than a superficial opinion as to the con-
! dition Of the pavement.
He did not believe the pavement was
! rotten and argued that the cracks were
/ owing to the extreme cold weather.
| The other property owners said 1t made
no difference as to what effect the
! climate had on the pavement, the con-
tract expressly stated that wear and
! tear of the travel thereon was alone
! excepted, and if the extreme cold or
! hot weather had hurt the pavement it
was the fault of the contractors in not
making some such provision. A. H.
| Lindeke said one of the reasons why
| the pavement was selected at the time
! company as embodied in the contract
that at the end of ten years it Was
| to be as good as when completed. w.
| s. Bend called the attention of the
! board to the fact that if they certi-
| fled at the present time that the pave
ment was in as good condition as when
| completed it would establish a prece-
! dent, and the contractors would take
| advantage of the same during the next
! ten years. ]. H. Robbins, representing
! the Warren-Scharf Asphalt company,
said the color of the pavement was
not the same as when laid. All asphalt
pavement, he said, was susceptible to
extreme heat and cold. The cracks, he
/ said, were caused by the travel ON the
pavement in extremely cold weather
! If the present condition of the pave
ment, as contended by the property
| owners, was due to the cracks, this
was caused by the travel thereon in
| cold weather. The point raised that
! the pavement should be in the same
| condition as when completed ten years
ago, he said, would not hold if the
matter was taken to the courts. The
| company wanted to do the right thing
| but it did not expect the city would
| require the entire street to be reSur-
faced. The contract had been accept
| ed by the company at S25, 900 less than
| the price paid in other cities at the
given good work, and the street was
kept in repair during the past ten
years. 1t was not justice, he contend
ed, to have the entire surface Of the
asphalt relaid owing to a few cracks
| in the pavement. The cracking could
not be prevented in this climate, as
other pavements laid in the last year
or so would prove. The property own
| ers would not listen to this and de-
manded that the letter of the contract
! be lived up to. In order that the con-
! tract could be submitted to attorneys
| SO as to get an opinion as to the con-
| struction of the same, the meeting was
! adjourned until next Wednesday at 2
o'clock. 1t was brought out during the
talk that it would cost about $45, 900
| also made that under the final order
| for the pavement it was possible that
| the nine cents per square yard, to be
paid during the next ten years, might
not be taken from the general fund. as
anticipated, and that the $1,000 per
year paid to the contractors might
have to be raised by assessing the
! property owners ON the street This
information seemed to make the prop
| erty owners all the more anxious to
have the surface of the street relaid
and placed in the condition mentioned
In the contract.
MAI. PRICE ELEVATED.
A. Ant <gfr tod LIn