Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-10-01
NINTH EAST STREET FOLKS

proposition Is before the property
owners on Ninth East street to macad-
amize that thoroughfare from South
Temple street south to the city limits.
II IL TO cost the property owners be-
tween South Temple and Fourth South
streets, after the city has paid its part
OF The expense. four and quarter dol
lars for each linear front foot There
are to be two strips of that kind OF
paving. each twentyfour feet wide and
nine inches thick, with a twenty-four-
foot park the sides OF the street to be
guttered and curbcd with cement. From
Fourth South to Tenth South streets
the same kind Of guttering and curb
ing, and macadam forty-two feet wide
and nine inches thick, TO cost the prop
erty-owners. after the eity's part II
paid. two and half dollars for each
linear front foot From Tenth South to
Eleventh south streets. guttering, curb
ing, and understanding forty-two feet
wide and nine inches thick. property
owners to pay three dollars per linear
front foot, and the same work from
Eleventh South street TO city limits but
the macadam 10 be twenty-one feet
wide and nine inches thick, to cost the
property owners three dollars per linear
front foot
This is all advertised in Il paper that
many Of the people along that street
never see. or read II they happen to see
II. so we state. the matter In plain terms
as they appear in Il notice recently
served on some OF the property-owners
direct. The residents on the street
south from Fourth South street state
that nine.inch macadam would be
useless for the purpose designed Be-
cause OF the softness of the subsoll. and
that much thicker stratum OF maca-
dam would be necessary And many
Others along the line declare their IN
ability TO pay the amounts demanded,
in view OF the higher rate of general
taxation this year, and of sewerage and
other improvements which are very ex-
pensive. Some Of the people, however,
would doubtless like to have the street
macadamized. particularly those who
use that thoroughfare for automobiles.
buggles, and other vehicles.
For general information we viii
state that protests against this pro-
feet, to be Of any await, must be made
in writing ami sent TO the city Recorder
on or before next Monday, Oct. s. This
looks like crowding things unreason-
ably, as the notice just received by
people on that street Is dated April
H. 1906. Why was the notice with
held from the property-owners nearly
six months from the time when the
city Council ordered the Improvement
There is but one week in which pro-
testers or DIRECTORS are given an OPP
pormnity to arrange for presentation
81 their side of the question, And, we
are informed. there are some who have
not, to date, received any intimation
concerning this proposed levy.
We leave those who are financially
concerned In this matter to choose their
own course IN relation TO Il. The only
censure we otter is. that Il looks like
taking snap judgment on the property
owners along Ninth East street, num-
Der OF whom are not in the city. to de-
lay these notices until almost 'the elev-
cnth hour" They ought TO have
been sent months ago to give the people
the opportunity which the law contem-
plates to express their wishes pro or
con.
We suggest To the members of the
GUY Council who do not wish To be ar
bltrary, that before action Is definitely
taken on this proposition, an extension
OF time he given and care taken that
every person TO be financially affected
by It shall be duly notified and he able
to object IL he or she shall 80 desire.
improvements on our streets are all
right in and Of themselves, but those
who have TO pay for them should be in
formed and given the liberty to object
which the law allows