Arizona republican., 1909-07-19

except along the business streets where there are no street trees or sidewalk parks, every sidewalk is bordered by q ditch, frequently by two of them and in some instances perhaps three of them. In most cases these ditches are unsightly perhaps unhealthy, except during the Occa- sional days when they carry water. This is most often necessarily so and therefore. except in the occasional instance, it. is no arraignment of the owner of abutting property. But as suming that they are not unsightly, they are kept in order at great eX- pense. either by the property owner, the city street department, or both. The greatest expense comes from keeping the Bermuda grass cut out of the ditches. the unsightTiness comes chiefly from the grass and debris piled on the borders. and the un- healthfulness comes from the stag nant pools that form after a water run. the ditch meanwhile serving as a catch-al for everything from waste paper to dead cats. And unless the ditches are kept clean of Bermuda grass in a short time the irrigator can not get even the water he pays for.
 An average cross-section from the property line to the middle of the street presents a profile something like this: A flat area of six or eight feet, a grass grown or bare pile of dirt, a ditch for -irrigating the street trees, another dirt pile, the curb. and then the slope from the center of the street, misnamed q gutter, ranging from a foot to twenty feet wide, ac cording to how evenly the street is graded And where there are two or more ditches, entrance to a home from the street is like scaling the foothills of the Alps. By the plan in mind the profile would be flat from the prop erty line to the curb and from its base to the center of the street the roadway would be evenly graded. leaving the natural gutter to be used only to carry away the flood water. and perhaps the irrigation of street trees, as hereafter referred to.
 About half the ditches in the city are maintained from the irrigation of street trees, and the rest of them to carry water to the lots which have bought water from the city. The cost of caring for these ditches, directly and indirectly, as apprOXimated by the street department, is $14,000 an nually. The receipts for the sale of water for irrigation last year were about g, 500, this year it may total S3.OO0. so that in any event the irri- gation of the plant life in the city costs the municipality a net loss of $11,0OO, all of which comes out of the general tax levy.
 In the closely built portion of the city there is little room for trees except in front. and where they can do so most people would prefer to irrigate their lawns with a hose. On an average only one lot in several now takes, pays for and uses irriga- tion water. Either there is no room for plant life, or the tenants of the property do not cars to bother with it. That makes the revenue from water very small, while a whole block is disfigured to carry water to two or three lot owners. If the city would furnish an irrigation supply at a reasonable cost most of the lot owners would no douht prefer to bus
  the water from that source They would even pay more for it than they do for the ditch water, because of the heater appearance and the conve- nience of getting it just when they wanted it, which sometimes means a great deal of fruits and flowers. And those who have no growing plants need not buy nor would their prop erty frontage be marred in appear ance to accommodate their neighbors or the city which waters the street trees.
 There is no campaign against the street trees. There should be a hali a dozen of them where now there is but one, but they can be easily watered from the fire hydrants, by | turning the water down the gutters naturally constructed for flood waters