Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-05-28
THE COST OF PAVING
PRACTICE IN LEADING CITIES OF
THE COUNTRY.
Generally the Expense is Borne by the
Auditing Property-Proposed
Change Here.

Some time ago Senator Mcmillan sent
out letters of inquiry to the officials Of
leading cities of the United States asking
how street paving is paid for in these vari-
Gus places. This was done because of
discussion which had arisen in the Dis
trict committee in regard to a possible
change in the manner of paying for street
| improvements. Now this expense is borne
by the District and the general govern
ment on the half-and-half plan. The ques-
ton as to the advisability of having part
or all of this expense assessed directly
against the abutting property has been sug
gested. 1t is said that under the present
system of paving streets such improve
ment must necessarily be a matter of IA
vcritism &c considerable extent but that
if the abutting property were charged with
the whole or part of such expense the de-
mands for improvement of that kind would
be placed on practically the same basis as
are the demands for the paving of alleys,
the renewal of sidewalks, etc, in which
cases either petitions of majority of prop
erty owners, sanitary reasons or some pub
lie necessity must be urged in order to OBJ
tain the Improvement.
Those who advocate a change of system
of the kind say that the demands for
street improvements by method of having
the abuttinS property assessed for a part
or the whole of the cost would be limited
it directly, and in that way all elements of
favoritism would be eliminated.
Summary of Replies.
a summary of replies showing how such
improvements are paid for in various cities
of the country follows:
Baltimore-First paving is done by as
sessment on AUDITING property owners, the
cross streets being paved by the city.
Boston-First paving is done by the city,
and the estates benefited are assessed to the
extent of such benefit
Buffalo-First paving is borne entirely by
owners of abutting property.
Charleston-First paving Is borne by the
city.
Chicago-Au pavements of streets are put
down at the expense of property owners by
a special assessment levied for that pur-
pose.
Cincinnati-The cost of improvement. ex-
cepting per cent, and the cost of intersec-
| tions is assessed against the abutting prop
erty.
Cleveland-the paving Is put down at the
expense of abutting property. excepting
| one-fiftieth of the entire cost Of paving and
the cost of street intersections, which are
borne by the city.
Detroit-The original paving Of the streets
is done at the expense Of the property own
ers on the street.
Indiana polis-The cost Of the original
paving of streets is borne entirely by the
property holders.
Minneapolis.-The total cost of all paving,
curb and sidewalk is borne by the property
abutting, except the street intersections.
New OrleanS.-ErOperty owners pay from
one-fourth to one-third of the cost of pave
ment; the city pays for street intersections
and the remainder of the cost of paving.
Omaha.-Property owners pay the cost of
paving. excepting intersections of streets
and for paving frontage property not taxa
BILE.
Pittsburg.-The cost of original grading.
paving curbing is assessed against the
abutting property.
Richmond.-Street pavement from curb to
curb is paid for by the city in full, as is
also the curbing.
ST. Paul.-The cost of all street grading
and paving is assessed directly on the prop
erty benefted-usually the abutting prop
erty
st. Louis-One-fourth of the cost Is
| charged against the abutting property per
| front foot and the remaining three-fourths
! against the property in the district defined
| by city ordinance in each particular case.
Making a Change in Chicago.
I'm Chicago" says Secretary May of the
| board of local improvement of that city,
1.-The special assessment law provides that
the assessment shall be levied upon the
property and the public In such proportion
as the commissioner spreading the roll shall
consider the public and the property own
ers benefited For a number of years, until
! financial condition OF the city. no public
| benefits were assessed against the city.
For the past year, however we have
been assessing for the Improvement Of busi-
ness streets a slight portion of the cost Of
! the Improvement against the public. There
| is no fixed rule as to the amount to be as
| sessed, but the law provides that In any
| assessment for any public Improvement,
| whether streets, sewers, sidewalks or other
| matters, for which an assessment is levied,
| the commissioner spreading the roll may
| assess the public such amount as he
! thinks the public will be benefited, and the
| assessment roll spread by him is re-
| viewable by the court at the time of the
| application for the contlrma ton of the as
| sessment.
| In Cincinnati when a street that has
/ been improved is paved with granite. as
! phalt or brick, one-half the cost is paid by
! the city and one-half by the abutting prop
| erty. There are few cases, however,
! where the city bore two-thirds, and one
| third was assessed against the abutting
property.
| In New Orleans a street is originally
paved either by petition of majority, by
| foot frontage, of the property owners or
| by a twO-thirds vote order of the city
| council. Paved streets are repaved either
| by petition by a majority of foot frontage
| of property owners or by a two-thirds vote
order of the city council. In either instance
! the entire cost Of the pavement between
street intersections is borne by the proper
! ty owners. unless the city desires to con-
! tribute; the city is obliged by law to pay
| the cost of paving the street intersections,
| but may or may not as 1t elects, share in
the cost of the pavement between the street
| intersections.
| According to the practice at st. Paul,
| Mimi, occasionally the cost of the improve
ment is assessed on adjoining streets when,
in the opinion of the board of public works,
| Il has really benefited a larger district than
| the street itself. Repaving is also assessed
on the property frontage Occasionally, in
! the case of street intersections where they
| cut in at bad angle, an appropriation from
| the general fund Is made to assist in the
| paving Of these intersections AS a rule all
| local assessments are assessed on the prop
| erty benehted. In the case of sewers how
| ever. property is assessed at a uniform as
| sessment of not to exceed $3.50 per running
| foot, and the balance is either paid out of
| the sewer fund raised by general assess
| ment or by the issue of bonds.