The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1902-04-15
OPINION is DIVIDED
WEST SEVENTH STREET PROP
ERTY OWNERS, DIFFER AS TO
PAVING MATERIAL
MANY ATTEND THE HEARING
influence of Former Republican
Board of Works Seems to BE
at Work to Have Sand
stone Selected.

west seventh street property owners
thfonged the offices of the board of pub
Tic works yesterday afternoon, the occas-
ion being hearing on the proposed paw
ing OF that thoroughfare. That the ma
Jorlty of the owners desired the work to
proceed there was little doubt, but on the
character Of the material to be used there
was decided division of opinion.
In the division as to a preference for
either asphalt or sandstone, the fine Ital-
ian hand of the old Republican board of
public works was more than apparent.
Frank Kirch and former Street Commits
sioner Schultz, lately connected with the
old board in official capacities, coming
forward and announcing that the major
ity of the property owners desired sand
stone. In confirmation of his statement
Kirch presented a numerously signed pc
tltion to the board, but his confidence was
EVIDENTLY misplaced, for when the indi-
Vldual property owners were asked as to
their preferences a large number Of the
sIgners repudiated their signatures and
announced themselves as favoring asphalt
Later Kirch, with the aid of consider
able argument, privately administered in
the hallway, brought a few around to
his way of thinking. but the burden Of
opinion was that sandstone was too cost
~ and noisy and the majority refused to
De convinced. The property holdings Of
both Kirch and Schultz along the district
to be paved are Insignificant
Leaders in the movement to have the
street paved with asphalt included the
Schmitz Brewing company and the Horejs
Baking company, both of which had a
large number of followers They were OPP
posed to sandstone because of its cost
and the noise it gave forth when teams
We're being driven over it.
Some few desired brick because it was
the cheapest, but they were decidedly IN
the minority. The prices per yard esu-
mated by City Engineer Rundlett ranged
all the way from $1.10 and $3.50 for sand
stone and asphalt, to So 40 for brick
According to the answers given yester-
day the greatest number of property own
ers favor sandstone but when property
frontage is taken into consideration,
asphalt has the best of the argument
Both of the paving combines have been
busy during the past week securing senti-
ment in favor of their particular kinds Of
material and the meeting yesterday show
ed it in marked degree. The board has
not yet heard from all the property own
ers, but it expects when the property
owners give the matter sober thought.
many Of them will come in and change
their preferences. 1t will probably result
in the use of the two materials, sandstone
for that part now given over to stores
and asphalt for the residence portion of
the street. The only thing the property
owners seem to have against sandstone is
its increased cost.
Members Of the former board of public
works, it is claimed are interesting them
selves in the paving Of the street, and
the presence of two eX-employes yester-
day at the meeting was credited to their
activity.
The board has taken the improvement
uEder consideration.