Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1900-06-28
Alexandria, Va, June 10, 1900.
Innnra kIa tho n;fy Douno;l - A.

andria:
Gentlemen:--I respectfully return, without
my approval, bill passed by your honorable
body June II, 1900, appropristing one hun.
dred dollars for the repairing OF Csmeros
street. The status of the case to which the
appropriation under consi Iteration belongs
deserves more than a passing notice, bring
| ing as il does into view q series of fragment
| airy, disconnected and almost ncomprohens
| Bile municipal acts for the furhersuce NJ
needed Improvements. Yearly two year
have elapsed since the fret appropriation al
| one hundred and fifty dollars was made and
| that appropriation born Of Council aotedst.
| ing your present honorable b Jdy was not util.
lied until the very worst period of last winte
when the vicinity OF Cameron and Columbus
| streets became the scene of 9 grotesque psrod
upon street repairing. Street and sutter
contiguous to the premises of one of YOU
citizens were tom up and the cobble-stones
and bricks were al owed to remain an oh.
struction to his home for months. The south
side Of Cameron street during the time was
impossible to vehicles Then cobbIe stones
! and brick were replaced IS nearly Is possible
from where they were taken, all of these
things being done In the midst Of winter and
today, as the result, -ot OF improvement. but
OF an uncalled for outrage. The gutter afore.
mentioned has been in great measure ruiz.
ed, and the replaced cobbe-.tones have left
the street worse than Ii was one year ago
The question might be here perth emily ask
ed why your executive did not interfere
where the infIingements upon the right OF n
citizen were so apparent. The answer is tha.
your Mayor holds that no man occupying al
Off 20 through the favor of our people car
conscientiously and lawfully connect his mi.
vste interests with his public station. and A.
the injured citizen In this case was the Mayo
of your city. he contented himself only with
advising against prosecuting the work at 81
inOppoItune season. II he had been eiti-
z,n holding no public Office he would have
gone into court and had the work eDOined.
There was probably fifteen or twenty do.
lars expended in exploiting this annoying.
though otherwise lsughsble fss, 20, aud if
there WAS one gratifying incident TO relieve
the genera, though temporary destruc ion of
a neghborbo0d's comfort, IL could only have
been enjoyed by q much discussed ssnd-team
whose do not know which was unques-
tionsbly one of the undisturbed benefcalies
o! the city's appropriation After this IN.
necessary waste OF "a part OF the fist sppro,
priation we fiud ourselves presenting the
committee with an additional one hundred
and twenty-five dollars; as per act of Council
March 27, 1900. Nothing. however, Was
done with the money, and on June II, 1900,
another 500 was asked for. Now It
should strike US that municipal generosity is
justified In asking reason for these repeated
demands. There is nothing to excuse q fail
uIe to furnish carefully prepared estimates
and definitely formed plans. But instead of
these absolutely indispensable business ad-
juncts we find the following communication
OF the City Engineer to the street committee
June 8, 1900, comp etely ignored no
provision has been made for the relaying OF
cutters on this squsre. A failure of the gut
ter is not only detriment to health, but to
the life Of any pavement. At no me can
gutter be repaired without doing serious dam.
age to the street, In the face of this the
committee asks an appropriation without the
slightest reference to that which the engineer
looks upon as q condition precedent to the
permsnency of the pavement. That is 10 say,
il a pavement is to be laid "a per sppropris-
ton for that specific purpose it would hsye ~
be disarrsnged or partially destroyed in the
sfter-sdjustment Of gutter and curb. Aside
fiom this We cannot divest ourselves of the
idea that spssmodic, confusing ami indefinite
should have no place in the
arena OF well-conceived enterprise. Very
GEO. L. SIMPSON, Mayor
To the Honorable City Council:
Gentlemen--1 respectfully return herewith
without my approval bill passed by City
Council, June 18th, 1900 appropristing one
hundred dollars for repsying Duke street. Il
appears that an appropriation was previously
made Of three hundred and fifty dollars, and
that the one hundred now asked for would
mske the total four hundred aud fifty. The
engineers estimate for repsving from cub
line of Columbus to curb line OF Alfred street
is four hundred and thirty-four dollars and
seventy-two cents, and this estimate has moth
ing TO do with CUTTERS and resetting curb.
For reasons mentioned in my disapprovsl OF
Cameron street appropriation | cannot per.
ceive wherein the appropriation can be praC-
tically effective without first having cutters
and curbine sdjusted, and if said sppropTia-
ton be predicsted upon the expectation q
having confusing driblets added to il, such an.
ticipation should be emphstieslly discouuten-
snced as being inconsistent with business
methods.
If we propose to improve Duke street let US
proceed with the understanding that when
the repaving is completed it is not TO be torn
up so as TO enable us to lay gutter or reset
4 curb, both Of which concomtsnts Of the
street need attention right now. Your City
Engineer recommends quote from his con-
municstion TO the Committee on Streets Jun
IL, 1900: II would also suggest that h9
City Engineer be authorized TO employ an
Inspector continuously on this class of wOlS
when it is being done" If such a snperhn'
,us official were needed it would pTobsbly be
e.. b.
IN appointment itself, but the unquestouei
lselessness Of an extra street inspector d.
counts argument upon this subject II It we've
We might be justified in employing a mlcio
copist to discover the gravel, but not an IN
pector to passI upon the work. COntrsca
or paving Duke and Cameron streets average
Zoe. per square yard, 42c for Cameron an
SSc. for Duke. ], of course, do not know
Why there shcnld be difference Of 4c per
quare yard. as the bids were made by one
nan. do know from official records tbs
10Th bids are above the prices formerly PAD
cameron street between Lee and Fair
tretts, q most troublesome piece OF woF'
huge boulders 10 be removed and bTokh
cots of venerable trees and scores Of oibf
difficulties which comparatively moctia
treets do not encounter, were the imp o.
nents to cheapness, yet that street tOdsy ~
ords splendid example Of durability -"
Inisb, and all at q cost Of 33c. per squhr'
ard. Then we have Pitt street from en-
ron TO Queen street paved at less than 3"~'
er square yard. (See city report 1897, p'R'S
Is and 65.) You will understand gentl' me-
hat some Of the gravel and sand charge 70
his street work was used under the Ie'''s
urb and this fact will bling the cot
trett below 33c. per square yard. 5 ,te
treet from Duke to Wolfe street ctst -9S
err qusre yard complete. The cost Ct ea.n
mare. including an intersection, being i'si
ban four hundred and seventy doi.an'
or square, although each square is ore nuh,
red and six feet longer ana contains near!
We hundred more square yards than DuAS
rect, the estimate for which is four hOnii.u
nd thirty.four dollars and seventy-two len's
il bout Intersection. Prince street fiom ="
BIT. Assph Is fair square of cobble'pSI n n1'
use now nearly three years, cost o3ly Zoc.