OCR Text |
Show COMMUNICATIONS j ; WHAT is WRONG WITH OGDEN ? In the Standard-Kxaminer of April 18th there was published a communication communi-cation from the Street Car company to the City commission, asking permission permis-sion to tear up the street car tracks In the tWO blocks above Harrison avo-; avo-; nue on Twenty-fifth street. If eater-day, eater-day, the manager of tho Street Rail-I Rail-I way company appeared before the . ommlssion to emphasize the Impovei I Ished condition of the Utah Rapid I Transit company and reiterated the I intention of his company to abandon ! its strvice in the district referred to if the abutting property owners per- sisted in their demands that the I street railway pave between the tracks. The disagreement over the question at Issue seems ' to lie between the street railway company and the abn'.-I abn'.-I tlnif property owners In the two blocks I on Twenty-fifth between Harrison and i Polk avenues. And one would Imagine irom the stand taken by both of the I parties mentioned that they were the i only ones affected. The purpose of this communication is to correct any such erroneous Impression Then are many others, property owners. . - payers and residents, in the diM.. jafiected, who arc directly concerned Tn this matter and who are prepared to resist any decision or action that would permit the abandonment of 'he I street car service where It has been so long maintained. In commenting on the Situation 'he statement was puoluilied in We s m-! m-! dard-Examiner yesterday that the Olilj possible solution was contained In - ia-gestion ia-gestion of Commissioner liadson thai II property owners In the two bio. ks 1 on Twenty-fifth street be allowed to 1 decide by vote whether they would 'accept a substitute for paving betv.Vn 'the tracks or have th tracks torn ip .md abandoned. Does anyone ot'-' terlng or accepting such a solution imagine for a moment that the property prop-erty owners, several hundred in nOm-l nOm-l oer. who live or own property In thai j district, outside of the two blocks mentioned, men-tioned, are going to sit idle and allow a small minority lo selfishly decide a question which means Irreparable loss and Injury to them? There are several solutions to ihls question. If the street railway company com-pany is financially able to pave. it should be compelled to do so. If li is not. then that fact should be nc-Itepted, nc-Itepted, and s ubstituie allowed be-1 be-1 tween the tracks If this latter expedient ex-pedient If accepted, the scity ma retain re-tain Jurisdiction and compel the railway rail-way com pan) to pave ir Rut. in any eent. no decision should br made which WOUld entull the abandonment Of che service And whatever decision la made, the Utah Rapid Transit oom-panj oom-panj must not be permitted to take j.uiv such action as threatened. in the district served by the street cars operating above Harrison avanhe on Twenly-fitth Itreel there Is represented repre-sented In homes already built, homes under construction, or planned to be built ;md in building sites owned by taxpayers, an investment of several I hundred thousand dollars. What right has a small number of properly owners own-ers In a very limited area and representing repre-senting but a small traction of the ln-I ln-I vestment affected, to presume to decide de-cide a matter of vital concern to so many others.' To allow the street railway company to tear up its tracks on Twenty-fifth street above Harrison avenue would constitute an unparul-leled unparul-leled Injustice to hundreds of hme builders and property owners and a flagrant disregard of their Interests by thie-e responsible for such action. A great majority of these property owners arc people of limited means, many ot them purchasing their property prop-erty by the payment of small installments. install-ments. To discontinue the street car service will mean a total loss of their investment to many of these people. Is there anyone proposing to decide this matter. Whether street railway ! rrfenager, city commissioner, or Twen- t -fifth street property owner, who. after a considers! Ion of all phases of th? question. , will publicly declare ! himself in favor of such destruction j of property values by advocating a decision de-cision to teal Up the street cajc tracks'.' Aside from the question of injury I and injustice 10 hundreds of individual property owners there is a broader j aspect from which the matter must I bo viewed in reaehlnit any conclusion, j There is Involved a question of vital I Interest to the whole community. Whj j -o mm h was'e of breath in boosting I ' 'Kden so much indulgence in idle 'talk about Ogden going forward. If wc are to be confronted with a proposal to destroy what progress It has made and to curtail what little advantages WO posses? igden is a splendid ills vsiih Immense natural advantages. A potential industrial giant sound asleep. But while we admit that wc are neglectful of our community ad-. ad-. images and seemingly loath to make i he effort that real progress demand.' i yet. why should we advertise t m-I m-I fact that we are starting to ko back-, back-, wards? What we need Is development, not i retrogression New street ar extensions exten-sions instead of restrictions. And yet. .me of our Twenty-fifth atreel real-(dents, real-(dents, some of them community lead- - md i have said, i .- the street railway company tear up Its tracks and abandon its service. I nothing ele matters, just so we have 1 our way." |