The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-02-10
STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND
ASSESSMENTS


in their recent annual report, seems to in
dictate no deviation from the policy of the
last few years. Briefly. it is proposed 10
pave the cross streets as rapidly possi-
bic, which probably means as rapidly as
the north and south streets have been
paved. This announcement has doubtless
been heard with regret by most of the
property owners on these streets and with
something like CONSERVATION by those who,
living at street intersections, have already
been assessed for improving the north and
south streets. Most of the latter have al
ready paid for street and sewer improve
ments far more than they have got back
in benefits, and are not in good condition,
either of mind purse. to stand further
assessments, while many of the property
owners on side streets contemplate with
alarm the enforcement of policy which,
in not a few cases, amounts almost to a
confiscation Of property. 1t is doubtful if
a continuance of rapid street Improvement
is desirable or defensible. No other city
much street improving during the last five
years as this city has, and no other city
of its size has to-day as many miles of
well-paved streets and sidewalks. Since 1891
there have been constructed here thirty
one miles of asphalt pavement, costing 81
O57,S60; eighteen miles of brick pavement,
costing $S2o932; five miles of wooden pave
ment. costing s57s. i29; two miles of mac
adam. costing $S6.337; thirty-five miles of
gravel streets, costing $352, CPS; fifty miles
of cement sidewalks, costing S27459 twen-
ty-three miles of brick sidewalks, costing
s57,6S4 and ffty-five miles of sewers, cost
ing s1.0eS.1O9. The total cost of these i'm
here mentioned was $514S,56l This is
large sum for property owners to have
paid out in five years for street improve
ments, in addition to regular taxes. 1t
amounts to an average of about sl,OO0,0OO
year. The amount actually expended dur
ing the year 1896 was Ssl3057 These i'm
provements have imposed heavy burdens on
property owners and on property itself.
1t is very questionable if they have not
been pushed with unnecessary rapidity. In
dianapohs would have been called a pro-
gressive city If it had made in ten years the
street impro vements it has made in the last
five, and the Tightening Of the assessments
due to the extension of time would have
been a great relief to taxpayers. In some
cases the Improvements have cost more
than the property assessed is worth. 1t is
true We have got the improvements, and
they add materially to the beauty and at
Effectiveness Of the city, but these results
have not been obtained without severe
hardship on taxpayers and more or less
injury TO the city in the way of lessening
the demand for real estate. The Journal
is informed Of one case in which a gentle
man from the East who has a married
daughter living here, who came here in
tending to invest in a residence. He was
pleased with the city, but when he discov-
cred the rate at which street improvements
were being pushed, that the entire cost was
assessed against abutting property and that
property owners were also Liable for re-
pairs, he folded up his certified check and
went home. The Journal knows of another
case in which a wealthy property owner
y
to escape assessments from street and
sewer improvements, which he had already
paid to the amount of $4,000. In New
York. by the way, when street is once
improved it is maintained perpetually by
the city. The Journal has always been of
opinion that q fair proportion of the cost
of street and sewer improvements, which
are for the benefit of all the people, should
be paid out of the city fund, and that in the
case of sewers, at least, a portion of the
cost should be borne by the next genera
ton, which will reap their benefits fully as
mucn if not more than this one will Com
ing back to the point of rapid improve
ments, the Journal believes that the time
has come when tie Board of Public Works
should go slow in the matter. What is
done cannot be undone. The burdens of the
past have been imposed and cannot be es-
capped, but care should be taken not to
impose new ones unless it Is absolutely
taking of Unnecessary improvements is al
most as reDrehensible as the squandering
of public money. The effect on taxpayers
is equally as bad. The only difference is
that in one case their money is thrown
away and in the other they have to pay
for improvements which were not pressin.
and might just as we'll have been postponed
until better times. 1t is not necessary to
push the Improvement of the cross streets
rapidly that of the north and south
streets and the avenues has been pushed.
The city would not suffer if only half as
much money were expended for improve
ments during the next five years as was
spent during the last five, TAXPAYERS would
set better breathing spell and real estate
would begin TO move once more
D