Polk County observer. (Monmouth, Polk County, Or.) 1888-1927, 1913-04-18
PROPERTY OWNERS FA-
VOR HARD SURFACE
CONTINUED from page ID

CONTINUED from page ID
charge for grading in the first prop
osition is only two cents per square
yard and for the latter it Is 10 cents.
Total Cost Figured.
For the benefit of the property
owners City Engineer Herbert j.
Flagg has figured the cost per front
foot on Main street, on Court ana
Mill streets and on Oak street, for
each proposition, in order that they
may thoroughly understand just what
the expense of the proposed improve
ment will be. The figures are as fol-
lows:
Proposition No. l. $1.44 for square
yard. On Main street per front foot,
$4.48; per go foot front, $26o.o0. On
Mill and Court streets, per front foot,
$3.50; per 60 foot front, S2oo. On
Oak street, per front foot, $4.Oo; per
go foot front. $244.60.
Proposition No. ,. $ll3 per square
yard. On Main street per front foot,
1851; per 60 foot 'front.' $2lO.6O. On
Mill and Court streets, per front tooD, /
1877; per 90 foot front, 1926. On
Oak street, per front foot, $500; per
60 foot front, $l92.
"The total cost per square yard,
continues Engineer Flagg 5 report I
/" as used for computing the front .
foot rate is for the pavement com
plete, including all necessary grad
ing to put the street in shape In read .
mess to lay the pavement The cost .
of concrete curbs, however, wherever I
they are required is not merged IN .
that rate. Under the terms of their
bid, the Clark -Henery Construction
company will lay straight concrete
curb at 80 cents per lineal foot. and
curb and extension at 10 cents per
lineal foot. The total cost of the i'm
provement under proposition No. l,
will be $32,056.68, and under propO-
sition No. 2. it will be $25,17610." "
To Interview Owners.
A committee consisting of Council
man H. L. Fenton, Councilman-elect
W. L. Barber and City Engineer
Flagg was appointed at the meeting
to make a thorough canvass of the
owners and learn their
wishes as to the use Of the two prop
and report at a special meet
ing of the council which will be held
on Friday night at which time 1t Is
hoped to come to a definite decision
as to which pavement shall be used.
The general sentiment among those
whom The Observer has heard eX-
press an opinion appears to favor
No. l at $1.44 per yard.
Men who are familiar with pavements
and the cost in other cities, declare
that this is the best bid that any city
in the valley has ever received, and
considerably lower than the most Of
them. City Engineer Flagg, an I'M
Questioned authority on such matters
declares that this is the best bid, for
.hat particular method of pavement
hat has ever come under his obser-
ration. T.,
Cheaper Methods Rejected.
1t did not take many minutes for
he councilmen to decide that the city
lid not want any of the very cheap
1lans proposed by the bidders, which
included what is known as "oil ma ;
adam" and similar proposals. 1t
vas felt that if it is possible to Sc
.ure a pavement, with a four-inch
concrete base and a two inch wear =,
ng surface, making a six-inch pave ,
nent on top of the old macadam base
It $1.44 the yard, it would be the :
oest investment the city could make. y,
And it seems to be the universal opin- :
on that the proposal by the Clark -,
Ienery company is the best that the :
ity will ever receive, and probably !
would not be submitted again by any
ther company.
All Favor Paving.
1.-THE allegation in last week 5
temizer to the effect that all idea of 9
ard surface paving would have to !
e abandoned on account Of the sue y
ess of the Taxpayers ticket. at the l.
pcent election. has been etfectually !
isproved by the action of the newly y
lected councilmen in attending Tues !,
ay night 5 meeting," said one of the !;
ewly elected members yesterday. =
There was no call for that Slur up :,
n us. for | believe that every one =
in favor of progress. Our plat :,
1rm, published before the election. -
lOwed exactly where we stood on "
nat matter. as well as all others, and -
V it We were committed to the plan =
n the permanent improvement of .
lr streets. We are all in favor of :,
and we must all work !,
,gether for the good of Dallas. Had Il
ny set of candidates openly announe- .,
I that they were not in favor of the
avement. do not believe that they =
,uld have secured 100 votes. The
aople of Dallas are in favor of pro-