The Street That Couldn’t Get Paved
Contractors forfeited $250 rather than grade Cherry Street at their bid, and the paper argued Seattle should wait until 1884 rather than rush a muddy, expensive job.
The contractors for the improvement of Cherry Street have thrown up the job, preferring to lose the forfeit of $250 to undertaking the work at the price named in their tender. The same contractors forfeited $250 on a previous award on the same street. It is undoubtedly the privilege of these men to take these contracts, and the city makes money on each surrender and forfeit. Still, each succeeding bid is higher than the bids preceding, and on the third or fourth letting the Cherry Street improvements will be begun at probably an inordinate price.
If advertised anew, the next contractor would be unable to begin before the first of October—entirely too late. He would be at it all winter and six months at least, during which the street would probably be impassable, without sidewalks and lights, and deep with mud. The work would be worth more to the contractor, and the people would have to pay more for it. Neither would it be done as well. The grade established has never yet been satisfactory and could perhaps be changed to advantage.
Considering all these things, it unquestionably seems best to let the improvement of Cherry Street go over to 1884. It can be taken up early in the spring, in February and March if need be, and pushed to completion before the Fourth of July. The city will thereby get better and cheaper work, the people will not be inconvenienced during the winter, and ill feeling will be averted. If any action by property owners is necessary to secure the postponement, the council may rest assured it will be forthcoming.
“The city will thereby get better and cheaper work, the people will not be inconvenienced during the winter, and ill feeling will be averted.”
Contractors walking away from a low bid and a city debating whether to re-let or wait for better weather could be lifted from a modern procurement hearing. The paper's complaint that rushed street work would leave residents with mud, no sidewalks and higher costs is an old Seattle argument dressed in 1883 clothes.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.