
    Locust Street. Myer’s Appeal.
    
      Streets — Extension of — Offset.
    Where a street laid out by commissioners under the local act of May 24, 1873, P. L. of 1874, page 379, makes an offset of eighty-seven feet at another street before starting on its extension, and the commissioners’ plan shows that the new portion beyond the offset, and the old portion, make, but for the offset, a continuous street in the same general direction from the central part of the town to the outer portion, viewers may be appointed under said act to assess damages and benefits for the opening of the street beyond the offset. In such a case, the extension sought to be opened is part of the street laid out by the commissioners.
    Argued Oct. 31, 1892.
    Appeal, No. 116, Oct. T., 1892, by G. F. Myer et al., property owners, from order of O. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1891, No. 125, confirming report of viewers to open street.
    Before Paxson, C. J., Sterrett, Green, Williams, McCollum, Mitchell and Heydrick, JJ.
    Petition for the appointment of viewers to open street.
    To the report of the viewers G. F. Meyer et al., property owners, filed, inter alia, the following exceptions:
    “ 1. The council of the borough of McKeesport had no power to appoint the viewers in this case, said street not being the widening or opening, nor is it the extension of any street laid out by the commissioners under the act of May 24, 1873, under which act the viewers were appointed in this case.”
    
      “ 2. The court of common pleas does not have jurisdiction,” etc.
    The court below filed the following opinion by Ewing, P. J.:
    “ It is conceded by exceptants’ counsel that, if this proceeding be in fact for an extension or widening of Locust street as laid out by the commissioners appointed under the act of May 24, 1873, P. L. of 1874, page 379, and as confirmed by the court of quarter sessions, then the councils of McKeesport had power to pass the ordinance in question, and to appoint the viewers as was done in this case; and the case is properly in this court. By the action of the commissioners and the court of quarter sessions Locust street was located and confirmed from the Monongahela river to Shaw avenue; and then by proceedings antedating this proceeding, it was extended from Shaw avenue to Ninth avenue, and now, as the growth of population and increase of residences requires, the councils, on petition, undertake to extend the street from Ninth avenue to Eleventh avenue. From the latter avenue, the street has been laid out and opened by property holders for a further distance of two thousand feet to a width of fifty feet.
    “ The exceptants base their exception to the proceeding on the ground that this is not an extension or widening of Locust street, for the reason that at Ninth avenue there is an offset, and the evidence shows that where Locust street strikes Ninth avenue it is intended to run along that avenue 107 feet from centre to centre, or about 87 feet clean before starting on the extension. The plan and evidence show that the new portion in connection with the old, and that portion opened by property holders, make — except the offset — a continuous street in the same general direction from the central part of the town to the outer portions.
    “We are of the opinion that it is an extension of the Locust street laid out by the commissioners and confirmed by the court. It is, in fact, substantially the street as laid out by the commissioners eighteen years ago — the outer end of which the court thought then to be premature. It has been no uncommon thing in towns and cities built on irregular and in part hilly ground, to lay out and open a leading street with offsets to suit the configuration of the ground or to avoid large expense for damages. Public roads crossing other public roads may run along the old road for a reasonable distance ”
    
      January 3, 1893 :
    Exceptions overruled, whereupon exceptants appealed.
    
      Errors assigned were, inter alia, (1, 2) in overruling the exceptions, quoting them.
    
      E. P. Douglass, for appellants.
    
      W. B. Rodgers, R. O. Rankin with him, for appellee.
   Pee Curiam,

We think the learned president of the court below was right in holding that this proceeding was in fact an extension or widening of Locust street as laid out by the commissioners, appointed under the act of 24th of May, 1873, P. L. of 1874, page 379, and as confirmed by the court of quarter sessions. If we are right in this then it is conceded the councils of McKeesport had power to pass the ordinance in question, and to appoint the viewers as was done in this case.

The contention, that it was not an extension of Locust street for the reason that at Ninth avenue there is a slight offset, is not tenable. The plan shows that the new portion, in connection with the old, makes, but for the set-off, a continuous street in the same general direction from the central part of the town to the outer portion. Were we to add anything further, it would be substantially but a repetition of what the learned judge below has said in his opinion.

Judgment affirmed.  