The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-07-17
Fillmore Street Residents Take
Paving Controversy to Court.
Temporary Restraining Order
Granted by Judge Hazen.
SET FOR SEPTEMBER.
Question Will Be Finally Set
tied in Fall.
Shall Paving Be on "Bias" or
Not.

The decision of the city council in en-
dorsing the report of the streets and
walks committee on the paving of Fill
more street south of Fifteenth, which
was against the petition of the majority
of the property holders. will not be ac-
cepted by the petitioners. Today they
filed in the district court an applica-
ton for an injunction against the city
and the contractors to prevent the
carrying out of the plans for paving the
block on a bias. The city of Topeka,
]. H. Maxwell, the grading contractor,
and Ramsey & Ramsey, paving con-
tractors, are the defendants.
Judge Hazen heard the argument and
granted temporary restraining order
until the September term of court. The
suit was brought in the name of Mrs.
Ray McCHntock. C. N. Bacon. Annie 5.
Cradle, J. E. James, S. Fogwell, B. +.
Abmeyer, A. A. Hayes, H. NJ. Ives.
L. S. Cav, w D Storrs and George
Fair, who own S27 out of the l, 464 feet
of property front affected by the paw
ing.
In the application for injunction the
affiants state that in December they
presented a petition to the city council
for a pavement on this block all of them
except the owner of 81 feet front, with
paving would be done in accordance
with the provisions of ordinance $40 and
the universal custom of laying the pave
ment in the center of the street; that
the council acted, granted the petition
and passed resolutions to the effect that
it was to the advantage of the city to
have this part of the street paved; that
plans and specifications were drawn up
and the contracts for paving let for the
paving of the street in the center, as
4
after the contracts were let, and levied
accordingly. That on July 6, after all
this had occurred, on the petition Of the
owner of the 81 feet, and over the petit
ton of all other property owners, the
council by resolution directed that the
paving be laid so that the center would
be feet west of the center of the street
at the north end of the street and come
to the center on the south end, making
the pavement on a bias.
The atlantis therefore petition that the
city and contractors be enjolned from
laying the pavement otherwise than IN
the center of the street. As grounds for
the petition they claim that the council
has no power or right to change tbs
pavement from the center of the street
against the wishes of a majority of the
property holders, the universal custom
and the provisions of ordinance No. 80,
which provides for the paving of streets
from the center. Further. that the coun-
ell had no right or power to change the
pavement after the contracts had been
let.
The owner of the 81 feet front men
toned in the application is Albert 7.
Reid, who objects to the plans made by
the rest of the property owners, and
who won his point when the matter
came before the council July g. Mr. NJ.
A. Low. on the opposite side of the
street, also objects to the designs of the
petitioners having originally put his
name on the paving petition under the
impression that the street would be
paved according to the report of the
streets and walks committee.