The Paducah evening sun. [volume] (Paducah, Ky.) 1906-1929, 1909-12-07
CITY TO RELlVYB
PROPERTY OWNERS
WILL PAY FOR CULvERT ON
FOUNTAIN AVENUE.
North Side Granite CURLING Contract
Stands, SO Far As Coun-
ell Is Concerned.
COMPLIMENT TO MIR. KIRKLAND

4 ho ttty wiz NC ethf~''NN
to pay for the concrete culvert on
the Fountain avenue. extension. Last
night the board OF councilmen heed
ed the pleading of property owners
and agreed that cost of the culvert
should come out of the public funds.
When the original ordinance, provid-
ling for the extension, was enacted II
provided that the city should bear
the expense of the culvert over the
creek, about s1,700. When the ordi-
nance reached Mayor Smith he sug-
gested that, perhaps, the property
owners. in consideration of the bene-
mt of the street, would be willing to
bear the burden. The ordinance
went back for revision, and it was
thought some sort of understanding
was reached, when the ordinance was
passed. providing that property own
ers should pay for the culvert. Last
might, however, the councilmen voted
to assume the expense. the property
owners asserting that the expense
would amount to more than abutting
property is worth.
The Granite CURLING.
Carrying a motion to repeal the
present ordinance. providing for the
use OF granite curbing in the side
walk improvements on both sides Of
North Twelfth street from Trimble
street TO Salem avenue. and then
voting down a motion to have the or
dinance committee bring in another
ordinance, substituting either lime
stone or concrete material for the
|curbing, the board of councilmen last
night wound up in receiving and NJ
ing protest from 32 property own
|ers against the use of granite curb
ing on that street, leaving the ordl-
nance exactly where 1t was before
any action was attempted. The mat
ter dropped suddenly and other busi-
ness was taken up.
Councilman Hannin in the early
part of the meeting made a motion
that the board reconsider its action
in ordering granite curbing used, and
read the petition, Bgned by the
property owners, against the mate
rial. Then he read a communication
from the board OF public works, rec
|ommending the amending OF the or
'dinance, leaving the curb material n
Question 70 be decided upon by the
board OF public works and the city
engineer. City Engineer l.. A. Wash
ington was asked to make a state
ment, and said II makes no differ
|ence to him what material Is used,
but he would recommend granite be-
cause II would prove cheaper In the
long run and more satisfactory to
the property owners than either lime
some or concrete, the cost being a
small difference. He said In some
instances in the use of granite on a
|six-foot running sidewalk the cost
was as low as s1.74 2-3. while in
Others II advanced as far as s1.S4.
Basing his statement on contracts
previously let fo- concrete curbing,
he said on ohio street the cost of
concrete curbing was $1.69 per run
ming foot, making difference OF
few cents between the cost OF gram
lite and concrete. Limestone would
average approximately the same as
concrete.
President Foreman called for
statements from the petitioners, but
none were present at the meeting.
Then Councilman Hannin moved to
repeal the ordinance. Councilmeu
Budde and Mayer opposing II and the
rest OF the board voting for 1t. This.
however. did not affect the ordi-
nance, but merely voiced the sen..-
ments OF the members Of the board
I'm allowing the property owners to
pay for whatever material they de-
sired. Then a motion was made that
the ordinance committee bring in an
ordinance, repeating the present or
dinance, but City Solicitor James
Campbell, Jr., advised that the mo-
ton be made to amend the ordinance
by substituting concrete or lime
stone in the place OF granite. A con-
fusion in the board was evident and
n unanimOug vote resulted when the