The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-12-02
u,ouuoil Committee Will Report
il Its Favor Monday Night.
- HOLDERS FAIL TO AGREE.
-. az Them wanted the City to
r.ar The Expense Of PAVING the
ssreet Intersections-Under These
cs.Sitions They Favored Maes-
a.--Committee Refused to Com
.,s.r This Proposition ut All.

,r.a,,on street will probably be planked
- r1vst avenue to Twenty-hfth avenue.
1 ssn - the informal decision yesterday
An =. street committee after It had listened
:. -. rroresentations Of the property own
y "a - the. street between Terry avenue
"a broadway. The property owners were
srssent At meeting held by the coinm,,'
- Yesterday afternoon at the city nan
- ~ yrss,,It Of the meeting was highly unsat-
! -. 49, ~ The members of the committee.
80 - oficials at the city hall who believe
s ~ a. time has come when Seattie's
...,e.nai streets should have permanent
= Ssveloped that despite the committees
. = and notice issued Of the meeting
y ~ committee and OF its purposes very
= - rronerty owners along Madison street
I -. nresent. A week ago the committee
~ long session with the property own
- Who we're then divided among Them
seIvss as to the best pavement TOT the
erect which Is. one Of the main arteries OF
trsvsi in the city. In order 70 ENABLE me a
r.ronerty owners to get together and de.
XXX sn1onr themselves what they .wanteo
srN what they believed was Tor the Desk
interests Of the city, the comm ny n,o o9-
csitiop until yesterday afternoon
When the committee met yesterday az
s.rnoou. there were seven properly own
present but all ., t Tersy ow avenue and
Hrnadway. There were no representatives
a. isnd owners west of Terry avenue or on
She long stretch between Broadway ana
tie power house Of the Madison street
w j Carkeek, in behalf of the commit
80 AZ property owners. reported that the
inf holders on the street between Terry
themseIves In favor OF macadam pave
mSnt provided, however. that the city
10uid pay out Of the general fund the ex-
nsrge 81 paving the street intersections
- ia consider this proposition. for the rea-
son. AZ stated by one member, that the
PROPOSITION was to improve the street at
rs expense of the property. owners who
Ssd i'I no power to expend its money that
His was the text Of the proposition sub
United by the property1eolders. The street
the premises until later day. A member
AZ tie committee said, however. that Il
would in an probability recommend to the
council that the street be planked on both
sides: Job that VIII cost approximately
A member Of the committee said: "rt
was the sense Of the committee as well an
Of several members Of the city council that
ter than planking, which Is only make
shift and which becomes in time an
abominafion However, the charter limits
the power Of the council in the matter and
IN the absence Of the signatures Of a ma
scsity Of the property owners in favor Of
: better pavement, the only thing the city
can do % to plank the street.
Clearly the city has no power to pay
ct ~ the general revenues the expense OF
paving the intersections Of the street. A
man who owns q corner lot Is benefited
By the fact that two streets pass his prop
efty. That Is what makes his properly
wxat Inn Ia Hon ind ~ oh ts1A
therefore be expected to pay the cost Of
improving both streets, just as he paid the
original expense for the grading of both
streets past his property. The position
ers made II out Of the question for the conn
mittee to recommend anything but plank
ing, which Is but temporary paving and
for the most part unsatisfactory"