Courier Democrat. (Langdon, N.D.) 1891-1920, 1907-08-15
THE DISPUTED STRIP.
Need Of Definite Street Rights on the
Part Of a Town.

Part Of a Town.
That altogether too narrow strip be-
tween curb and the sidewalk along
our streets is the cause of much dis
sension and acrimonious discussion,
Us the Los Angeles Times. In a
majority of our American cities and
towns no adequate provision is made
for intelligent government or care of
this almost neutral territory, and Los
Angeles is no exception to the rule.
At present the parkways are neither
fish nor flesh" The city or town has
some small rights in the matter if it
be sifted thoroughly, yet the owner of
the abutting property has less. Even
attorneys admit that they do not pre-
cisely understand the property rights
of this mysterious strip. Certain we
are Of one fact, that until one party to
the controversy is given all the rights
vested in both and then some more
added the best possible results will
never be attained.
In various parts Of our city improve
ment associations are strenuously seek
ing to beautify whole neighborhoods
by the uniform planting Of the park
ways with street trees, and, while all
are doing much good, many streets
are left in an unsatisfactory condition
because of the few who will not bow
to the wishes of the majority or bury
their personal preferences for the
benefit Of the community in particular
and the public in general. One will
another oaks, the next %dracenas, and
the last one, at the end Of the street,
will have nothing, and usually gets it,
with a bonus for good behavior in
the good wishes % of his neighbors.
All these points, considered Jointly,
lead us to ask, "For what and for
whose purpose is this strip left in the
economic or esthetic disposition of our
street areas?" Is it for the exclusive
or even partial use Ito the exclusion of
others) Of the adjoining property own
er or is it for the benefit of the pub
lie? If it Is private property it should
have been left on the inside Of the
walk and included in the yard, as is
the case in some cities and towns. In
common practice it lies in the street.
absolutely for the public's use, safety
and convenience. 1t is nothing but Il
more or less broad dividing line be-
tween that part Of the street used by
vehicles and that reserved for pedes-
TRANS only. That being granted, how
cho1l tho r,,I1fo ,,oo ~ to Tho ~.oo%oc%
good for all the people? Being public
property, or, which is essentially the
same. for the use and enjoyment Of
the public. why is not private interest
entirely eliminated by statute so that
municipalities are removed from the
necessity of pickering owe the matter
in framing ordinances? Experience in
various cities and towns east Of the
Rockies has proved that best results
are obtainable only by complete elimi-
nation Of individual interests. The
writer firmly believes, after a careful
study of the question for many years,
involving a review Of the laws and Or
dinances Of various states and munich
palities, that the city or town should
have absolute, undivided sway over
parkways, as it has over all other
parts of the streets. We should have
a city or town forestry department
growing the young trees, planting, wa
tering, pruning and protecting them SO
far as is necessary or considered wise.
If this were done the people, having to
pay for street tree planting and care
through their annual tax, would be
more than willing to have their front
age made ornate at no additional cost.
Under such q scheme it would take but
a few years to make Los Angeles a
truly City Beautiful.