The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-03-17

wear and tear of the wagons is daily
injuring the condition of the concrete
base and wearing it away This con-
crete base. if preserved, viii materially
reduce the cost of renewing the pave
ment
Asphalt pavement could probably be
replaced on the OLD concrete base at a
cost of about S1.50 to $1.60 per square
yard.
One course of brick might be substi-
tuted at cost of about rs cents a
square yard.
Bitulithic pavement, which is now the
favorite with the paving experts, would
cost from $1.6O to $1.75 per square yard.
It is impossible to say just what this
amount assessed to each lot would de-
pend on the value of the lot. Corner
lots would have to pay more than lots
in the middle of the block.
1t can be stated, however, that there
would be 81 square yards to be paved
in the front Of each lot, and if all the
lots were assessed the same, the cost
per lot would be as follows:
Brick resurfa cling, $72.75.
Asphalt resurfa cling. $145.5O to $155.
Bitulithic resurfacing, $155 to $170.
This could be paid in ten annual in
stallments if desired by the property
owner
VIII Start q Big Fight.
There is certain to be a lot of kick
ing on any movement to repave Kansas
avenue. Some of the heavy property
owners say they will make a hard fight
against it. They say that it is the
duty of the city to continue TO repair
the old asphalt pavement, even to the
extent of resurfacing the street, if nee
this resurfacing should be borne
by the city at large, and not
taxed against the abutting pro-
perty They say that they have paid
that they should be required to pay for
the same work again.
It was the influence of these large
property owners. brought to bear upon
ty, that blocked the passage of the bill
authorizing the city council to order
wornout pavement replaced. Belts
was persuaded to stand in the way of
the passage of the bill, and if there is
anybody to be held responsible for the
defeat of the bill, it seems that Belts
is the man.
Some of these property owners who
object seriously to having the street
repaved at the expense of the abut-
compromise to the city. They are
willing that the city should put $4,000
into the purchase of a municipal
asphalt plant, and buy the necessary
heaters. equipment and material for
operation. They claim that this plan
has been tried in other cities, with the
result that the expense of repairing
asphalt pavement has been reduced to
It is very doubtful, however, wheth-
er such a municipal plant could be
operated within the next two years, as
the city has a contract with the Bar
Der Asphalt company to make all re-
pairs for a period of five years This
contract Will not be out for two years
Not only that. but the Barber COM
pany claims that their contract is
such that the city cannot resurface
the streets with asphalt or anything
nIce n force.
CITY Attorney Spencer, however,
thinks that the contract is not broad
enough to cover resurfacing- This is
a doubtful point.
1t IS claimed by the people who
fought the repaving bill when it was
before the legislature that the bill was
being pushed by the Barber Asphalt
company. with the expectation that
the council would order the street re-
paved. and that under the existing
contract, the Barber company would
get the work at the contract price,
S1.62 a square yard.