Minutes 08/26/1924 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

August 26, 1924 ~O. 2- East Side of Webster Ave.. North and South of Harrell St. 34,00Osc. ft. assessed value- $1,450.00 No. 3- West side of Armstrong St. south of Spratley assessed value- $ 600;O0 Approximately 19,800 sq. ft.' No. 4- South side of Race St. west of 0hest~ut St. Approximately 12,600 ft. Assessed value- 4oo.'oo There is in additi°na large and u~defined area of marsh land situated south of Sale St., and between the Shea Tract and West Park View, the assessed value of which is probably only a few thousand dollars. If these five a~eas could be pro~red, they would furnish the Oity with ~w~s for m~ny years to come mud would be gradually converted into veluable laud which ~o~Id either be used as~pe~ks or disposed of at greatly enhanced prices. It seems to me particularly desirable to get the t~nd adjacent to the High School. ~t is probable that the total cost of the items above given would not exceed $25,000.00." On motion, the comm~uication was referred to the Finance Oommittee. yth. ~tn accordance with the directions of the Oity 0ounoil~ I have carefully re-considered ~he c~uestiom of what portion of the cost of sidewalks, if-any, should be borne' by the 0ity, i~ ~h~f~u~ and have come to the conclusion that on account of the small re~ining amouut of bond~ which may be issued for this purpose a~d also on account of the fact that sidewalks, ~.aFticularly ~u residential ~istricts, are peculiarly for the benefit of abutting owners, the mty should sn~ounce thepolmcy of declLuing in the future to bear any part of the cost of the first ~nstruction of sidewalks. In this connection, I think it is well about the average annual cost per foot to the 0ity an improved street: to invite the attention of the 0ouncil to of the various items which go to make up 0urbs and gutters- ~ cents Sewers - 21 cents Sidev~ks - 13 cents Paving - 25 cents Total - 66 cents In other words, a vacant lot, with the above mentioned improvements in front of it, should pay a tax of at least 66 cents per foot and of course in addition a reasonable amount ~o cover appreciation in value and the proper share of fire protectiOm, police protection, sanitation ~ud general overhe~. These lest items of course are difficult to fig~e, but as- suming one hundred miles of street, we would have abou~ one million feet of frontage-which would give an averse ~or the last named items'per foot per ~ea~ of about 25 cents. This would m~ke the average front foot tax about 91 cents for an improved street. Fo~ a thirty foot lot, the total tax would therefore be $2?.30. As a~tter of fact,many vacant lots on improved streets ame getting by with a t~x of about $10.O0, which is manifestly too low. I am of the opLnion that these facts should be set before the Board of AsSessors during 1925 and abutting property should certainly be assessed ~ffictently tO co,er the carrying charges of public improvements in front of that property and a~reasonable share of the other expenses of the government." On motion of N~. White, the communication was referred t~ the 0ity Atto~mey for an ordi- ~ce to cover ~th. "From time to time, the pavmng repam gang can be employed on construction work and St has occurred to me that if the Oouncil would approve the curbing and parking, of the central portion of Effingham St. north of High St.~ this work could be g~adually done without extra appropriation. This approval is recommended." On motion, the recommendation was referred to ~he Finance ~ommittee. ~th. "it is recommended that Police Officer J. B. Overton be placed on the retired list at a~sal~y~of$?8.?5. Mm. 0re,ton .h?s h~d a'total of twentyrqne years of service in the em- ploy of the 0ity and fi~-~i~hms retmred pay on a~basis~of 2~ of his present pay and each year of service, would give the amount above indicated." On motion, the recommendation was referred to the Finance ~Oormmittee. ~gth. a! am inclosing herewith an ordinance?e-amending ~ud re-ordaining Section 26 of the Jitney Ordinance. in orSgin~llyamending thas S~ction, for some~reason, the power previous- ly given the Transportation Superviso~ to suspend was omitted~ It is essential that he should h~ve this power as summary action is oaten neces- sary, on the spot. therefore earnestly urge the immediate passage of the ~mended ordinance." A~n G=~inauoe Re-amending and Re-ordaining Section 26 of the Jitney ~dinance. On motion of Nm. Stewart (R.E.B.), the ordinance was placed on its first readi~. l!th. "In accordance with myunderstanding of the wishes of certain membersof the Council, while still~believi~g that the ~termir~ ~nd operation of jitneys should not be chahged for the