The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-07-01
CITY ENGINEER
TELLS HIS SIDE
Declares Wall Repudiated Brigham
Street Paving Plan He Agreed To.
SENDS LETTER TO COUNCIL
ASKS TO BE ABSOLVED FROM RE-
SPONSIBILIS'Y.

The trouble between City Engineer
George w. Ritter and Colonel E. A.
Wall. chairman of the board of public
works, over the grading and paving of
Brigham street was officially brought to
the attention of the city council last
night in communication from the for
mer, wherein he gave his version of the
controversy. 1t was referred TO the en-
cheering committee on motion of Coun-
Gilman Black
The communication from City Engi-
neer Ritter follows.
June %. 1870 the Honorable Presi-
dent and Members of the City Council,
Salt Lake City, Utah--Gentlemen- Some
serious differences having arisen between
the enSlneering department and the board
OF pubic works with reference to the
paving on South Temple street, an order
has been issued by the mayor requir-
ing the work of the engineering depart
ment TO be modified TO suit the ideas
Of Colonel Wall. because of the bond
furnished by the latter to protect the
city against the claims of AUDITING prop
The mayors order has placed the en-
glneering department in a more anoma-
ious position than ever before, and l
nave accepted 1t under protest: and Tor
the reasons given in my letters of ac-
acknowledgement, copies Of which are here
10 attached. l have refused to share in
the responsibility for the changes made
by Colonel Wall This refusal TO share
the responsibility will be understood bet
ter when the time comes to consider the
contractors bill for extras
Declares Wall Repudiated.
When I assumed the duties of the city
engineers office, / found a general plan
for the South Temple street pavement.
signed by Mr.. Snow, my predecessor,
and also by Colonel Wall as chairman of
the board of public works In April,
after all the detail drawings and cal
culations had been made. and the con-
tractor had resumed work Colonel Wall
reDudiated the plan bearing his sigma
nd T-eafrU sod to ror0 cd rlrf1
der it. Because OF the personal respon-
sibility that he had assumed toward the
solicitations and finally agreed upon a
new plan. even though it meant chang
ing everything from one end of the
street to the other.
Under this new plan, it was agreed
that between Second East and c streets
the south side should have the maximum
deDth Of fill permitted by the city cOun-
ell. 1t was also agreed that the pave
slope of 4 per cent. except that the
street car tracks We're to be level from
rail to rail and the slope from the out
side of one track TO the outside of the
other was to be concentrated in the space
between the tracks. After following this
Wall suddenly decided. without notice to
this department, to repudiate the plan
and gave peremptOry orders to the con-
tractor TO remove such cUrbing had
been set on the south side Of the street
south side higher all the way along. The
effect of this will be to make the depth
of fill on the south side between Second
East and 9 streets in excess of the limit
fixed by the city council. Among other
changes on the north side of the street,
the curbing once set around the corners
of II and [ streets was torn up and re-
set without regard to the official grades
established by the city engineer and the
city council. Other differences have arts
en- on the question of drainage, etc, which
I believe are matters for the engineer
ing department to decide by itself
Asks to be AbsoIved
l refrain at this time from discussing
the wise or unWiSe expenditure of money
in making these changes, the legal eff
feet on the indemnity bond, or the ere
alton of a possible loophOle through
which abutting property owners may re-
sist the collection of the special paving
/ to plain question of public ethics. a
council itself If the city council is
willing in this instance to permit its or
dinances and instructions to be brushed
aside, il should at least absOlve the en-
gineer who has insisted all along that
these ordinances and instructions were
made to be observed.
In submitting this matter to your hon.
OrabIe body. i wish to make il plain
that personal animOSity and high feeling
is not an element It is simply a queS-
tion of which is the eXpedient thing to
do as against which is the right thing
TO do. Respectfully submitted.
GEORGE W. RITTER.
City Engineer.