The URL can be used to link to this page

88-1658 1 �� '�. i rr��1� �3� , .�.s_.t__. . . y .. I �11 Y \. �''vs-aEl A7l'�p":!f*"d: . r�i.qMisS:�-:=�" �M4.°°'.:1'�.x`„`..:�..�� '."��:n.iL��:$l.a5�/4'F„k��:'-�91i:.�r�.+`41!K.� ♦ � � � , . >. a ..,.. i .,.-. . �,: . .... . . . . � . . . . . ._ :.. .::,. r._ . . . . . .. �, ... . _ ., ,' , . . -•: . -:....�• .. <�, . .�s. �: // �� ! • � �� ciTV oF sr. Pau� COUNCIL FILE NO. y — FINAL ORDER /_�,/'�'� BY l�k'"�Gr� .�_..�.-��✓'� File No. 1$S2a Voting In the Matter of `V11ard .2 i�proviag Ir�iae /1�enna betweea Saxsit Avenae aad Plesaant �veane (inclnda�s upper Ir�iae A�enue betxeea Sussit aad Pleasaat aad lover Irving A�enae b�tweea �:ase� Street and Pleasaat Afeane) D� gr:diag and paving� constrnctins cnrb and gutter, uev catch hasins, nex dri�erays, a gre�� lantara style lighting s�rstea�, new retaining valls and doing all other Nort nccessary aad incidental to satd projtct. This project is to be kAONII as tae Irvina Avt�us Asea Street Pa�fng and Lighting Project. ,_ _ o vE,� � ► �i �� . r �I r �.��,�,�. under Preliminary Order �� approved ��°?`�� The Council of the City of Saint Paul has conducted a public hearing upon the above improvement, due notice thereof having been given as prescribed by the City Charter; and WHEREAS, The Council has heard all persons, objections and recommendations pertaining to said proposed improve- ment and has fully considered the same; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby order that the above-described improvement be made, and the proper City officers are hereby directed and authorized to proceed with the improvement; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That upon the completion of said improvement, the proper City officers shall calculate - all expenses incurred therein and shall report the same to the City Council in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Charter. �� o . ,3 �� COUNCIL PERSON Adopted by the Council: Date Yeasl?f�nd Nays COS�fts Certified Passed by Council Secretary LoYt$ tltt� In Favor By Sc�sib�l $pap�$ Against yilt� Mayor OI�aMY►TOR , . ' oME�nn+q� o��E cOM�.R�o �± �+� `�' " ` Pub l i c Works i o 8-11-88 V��c� �� 1�. Q 0� 00�� ; u�,ws►�nr ow�croA w►ren ion�erMm Pa u 1 S t. �� s�a�o�arr�o�c�oa �crnm a.�m Martin � � �,� Pub} i c works �292-62$0 0�: �,n.�� _2-�o�uau�1 Rese.=�rc3�--_ � b a ,on.or f 2� , = : fmprove IRV INE RVENU� �etween�Summi t i4ai�nue and Pl easant Avenue (i'nci udes .Upper i ruic�e �avenu� between Sur�imit Avenue and Pl�eas�nt arn� Lower trw.ine Avenue be�we�n Ramsey and Pleasant) by grading artd paYing, constructing curb-and gutter, new catch b,asins, new driveways, a new storm sewer �ystem, a lantern style light�ng system, new retai��irig ; watl's, storm and �sanitary ne�:c��af«�r�>> . , . . . e _ Puw�r+a� c�senv��a+ o�� a�e our ►ar r�au� . d��a�.1 � mHrc+o oor.�ssa�+ , �ezs sc►aa ea�no A sr� c�areA ca�aN ��ns�s �ooL�r•o:rooEO+� a�ro m carr�:c cc�strn�tr _ T_ _roA roa�wFO. _��ooeo* o�cxffirs� *o�,�otu: 81��POrtrs wrrCM cOt�+C�cae,IECnvE4 Safe� �d better nelghborhoods. � . �IU�a�rno�t,Er..�M�E�roetwrtr�w►n.w►w�.wran,wn.re.wn,�►: . . � Yhe project area is presently served by a combined s�r system. Quring periods of moderate to heavy rainfall , storm water and sanitary sewag� con�ine .#o flow. over a d�version stfucture and "ou"ttet .�o= the Mississippi R�ve�; TF�ere. Fiave be8n problems' in the pro�ect area with overland : ,,_ ��orm water fTow and itow f.ran.undergrcund spr.in�s. ,Ttie existing .o.iled roadway is in pi�or. . � condit�on. P�rtions of existing retaining watls 3n the .area are irt poor condition. � �YS�`MCIt�10Ni�«s.�r.�dur�r+o.s,prWreq; State and federal agencies require tF�at combined sewer o�rerflows to `tfie R-iyer be el imiriated. = Construction of separate storm and sanitary sewers wil} eliminate these overftaws. Grad#ng � ar�d.`p�ving and construction of concrete curb and-gutter wi l l el imin�te �overl��td flow and' " di��ect the storai water to the proposed storm se�rer. system. New retaining waTls.wil� replace w�l1s which are in poor condition. Lanterri style lighting wili impro�e lighting and safety� � of neighboc#�ood. Proposed underground drainag� sys��m will reduce ftaw frarr springs. . ` � p�.r;wo.�;.i�e-rs�w�: _. - , : . - ' Normal problems associated with construction such as noise, dust, tempora�y eliminatio�. of aecess, inconvenience and general disrupt.ion wilt be pr'e�ent. Area property owrters-wi(T incur ; _ _ storm sewer assessment of $.03/sq. ft. (residential) and;$.o75lsq. ft. {commgrcial): P�roperty - ownets abutting the street improvement will be "assessec� $�9.00/ft. for the st�eet imprave�ent - and.�$5:Ot1I�t: for the lantern sty�e light:ing. . _ w.�Enw►mES: _ � _ , . =vnos c�s _ - Do nothing. Combined sewer overflow :;wi1} c�nt:tnue. - � .. Con�truct gt:o►`m sewer only Storm water will not flow _ to catch b�sins tf:s�t�et . is not reconstructed. �nsrom�v��rrs: ConsZste�nt r�ith ci,ty's CSSP Program. �.Emu:+�s: , Not appl a�cabie:. _ , . � . � ,6�� . � ��-�� SUMMARYOFENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS Preliminary Report Prepared - August 15, 1988 PROJECT: Improve IRVINE AVENUE between Summit Avenue and Pleasant Avenue (includes upper Irvine Avenue between Summit and Pleasant and lower Irvine Avenue between Ramsey Street and Pleasant Avenue) (City Project No. 89-P-8028) by grading and paving, constructing curb and gutter, new catch basins, new driveways, a new storm sewer system (S-8027), a lantern style lighting system (V-8028), new retaining walls (B-1159), storm and sanitary sewer and water service connections, and doing all other work necessary and incidental to said project. INITIATING ACTION: This project was initiated by the Department of Public Works and approved by the Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) process. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Irvine Avenue is an oiled roadway with a combined sewer. The roadway is divided by a limestone slope wall. Upper Irvine Avenue, between Summit and Pleasant varies in height over lower Irvine Avenue from 12' to 32'. The limits of lower Irvine Avenue are Ramsey Street to Pleasant. The existing upper and lower roadway widths vary between 10' and 18'. The right-of-way is 66' wide. Both roadways presently carry two way � traffic. An existing crossover island located midway between Summit and Pleasant allows for access between upper and lower Irvine. Upper and lower Irvine also join at Pleasant Avenue. See Attachment#1 for locations. Parking is currently banned on the north side of upper Inrine between Pleasant and the crossover area. Traffic counts are low. There is some existing sidewalk at various locations. There are many existing trees located in the slope wall area and north and south of the existing roadway. From what can be determined from existing records, the limestone slope wall in the median area was constructed around 1887 and for the most part is in fairly good condition. The wall is in poor condition in the section from Western to 600' east. There is also an existing limestone wall located on the north side of upper Irvine from Pleasant to 200' west which is in poor condition. Irvine Avenue is a border of the Historic Hill Preservation District. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed Irvine Avenue improvements are part of the 1989 Combined Sewer Separation Program. Storm sewer will be constructed on upper and lower Irvine Avenue and outlet into an existing storm sewer stub located north of Pleasant Avenue (see Attachment#1). Storm sewer will also be constructed on the Western Avenue right of way . This sectaon wiA senre � + as an outlet for a portion of the Goodrich-Western watershed which is currentty scheduled to be completed in 1992. The existing oiled roadway will be removed and replaced with a bituminous surfaced roadway with concrete curb and gutter. The proposed widths of the upper and lower roadways vary between 14' and 20'. Underground subgrade drains will be installed to reduce the groundwater problems in the area. Ornamental lantern style lighting will be constructed on the inside edge of the upper and lower roadways. Retaining walls will be constructed in the median area from Westem to 600' east and on the north side of upper Irvine from Pleasant to 200' west See attachments for the proposed construction and typical sections. DESIGN ISSUES: An information meeting was held on April 28, 1988 with all of the abutting property owners being notified. At this meeting it was decided to form a design task force to discuss design issues. The Public Works Department has met with the design task force 4 times to data to discuss the project details and the following issues have been the major point of discussion: CONVERSION OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY FACILlTIES TO AN UNDERGROIJND SYSTEM There is an existing system of overhead utilities and utility poles ' located in the slope wall area between upper and lower Irvine. Northern States Power (NSP) Company, US West (formerly Northwestern Bell), and Continental Cablevision have facilities located on the poles. The residents want all of the overhead utilities converted to a underground system and all of the existing utility poles removed. NSP has given a rough estimate of$300,000 to convert their facilities to an underground system. Additional costs include the cost to the individual property owner to convert to an underground service (roughly $500 to $2,000+ for each service) and an additional monthly charge of $3.00 for underground service. NSP's position is that they will convert their facilities to underground if some other party pays the costs. US West is planning to place their mainline system underground at no cost to the City or the properry owners, but the services to the individual properties would still be overhead. Cost to the property owners for burial of overhead service would be roughly $500. � � � 1�� , Continental Cablevision has given a rough estimate of$100,000 to �f'�'-7'�� bury their facilities. Continental Cablevision is not willing to pay for any of the costs to bury their facilities. There would be additional costs to the property owner for burial of services similar to US West. Public Works position is that burial of the overhead facilities is not necessary. City policies and agreements with the utility companies state that the utility companies cannot be forced to pay the cost of utility relocation if it is not necessary. The residents want the utilities buried but don't want to pay any of the costs. An assessment per front foot just to bury the mainline facilities will be roughly $95 per front foot. The total estimated cost for complete utility burial to a property with 60' of front footage would be $5,700 for mainline utility burial plus roughly $1,500 for burial of services plus the monthly charge of$ 3.00 for NSP underground service. Public Works recommendation is that the overhead utilities remain in place. If the overhead facility is converted to an underground system, the abutting properties should be assessed for the entire cost of the conversion. ROADWAY WIDTH AND ON STREET PARKING: The City of St. Paul Fire Marshall has reviewed the project area and has stated that parking should be banned on both sides of upper and lower Irvine Avenue at all locations where the wid#h of the roadway is less than 20'. At locations where the width is 20', parking can be provided on one side of the roadway. This will guarantee adequate � access for all fire and emergency vehicles to the properties abutting Irvine Avenue. A portion of the residents feel parking should be allowed on all of Irvine. It is proposed to keep the existing two way traffic pattern on both upper and lower Irvine Avenue. The proposed roadway width is generally 16' but varies between 14' and 20' at some locations (see Attachment#3). Where feasible, the roadway was widened to 20 feet at locations where parking is necessary and the roadway could be widened for little additional expense. It was not possible to widen to 20' at all locations where parking may be necessary. To provide parking on all of Irvine, it would be necessary to reconstruct the median slope wall along the entire length of Irvine Avenue to provide enough width to construct 20' wide roadways on both upper and lower Irvine. The estimated cost to reconstruct the entire length of walls would be roughly $800,000 above the estimated $470,000 for the walls proposed to be reconstructed. Where a 14' wide roadway is proposed, restrictions caused by the location of the existing limestone slope wall, retaining walls on private property, and buildings located near the property line necessitate narrowing of the roadway to 14' wide. In areas where the proposed roadway is 14' and � 16' wide, a mountable curb will be constructed on one side of the roadway to provide additional width (boulevard area) to allow for passing of oncoming vehicles. Public Works recommendation is the roadway be constructed to the widths shown on Attachment#3 and parking be banned at all locations where the roadway width is less than 20 feet. BRICK GUTTERS The residents have proposed that brick gutters be constructed on upper and lower Inrine, similar to the treatment in the Irvine Park Heritage Preservation District. Public Works' position is that some type of brick gutter can be installed as part of the project if the abutting properties are assessed the full cost of the installation. One scheme which would involve inlay of brick in the gutter section of a standard concrete curb and gutter would add approximately$95,000 to the cost of the project. This works out to an assessment of$22.00 per front foot for the brick gutter installation. The residents want the brick gutters included in the project but do not want to pay any of the costs. For this reason Public Works is not including brick gutters in the proposed improvement. ' TURNAROUND AREA Immediately northwest of the crossover area, there is an existing dirt area located on private property (see Attachment#1) which is used for 180 degree turns. For example, a vehicle traveling easterly on upper Irvine swings into the turnaround area enabling the vehicle to turn through the crossover area and proceed westerly on lower Inrine. The residents want this turnaround included in the proposed improvement. The residents feel that the tumaround is necessary, especially in the winter, where snow on the roadway makes it difficult to gain ac:cess to lower Irvine from Ramsey or Pleasant. Public Works feels the turnaround is a convenience rather than a necessity. Inclusion of the turnaround in the project would necessitate acquisition of a portion of the private property abutting Irvine in the crossover area. The affected property owner is planning to develop the property and does not want to lose the portion of their property necessary (20' by 20') for a tumaround. The design of the proposed crossover will enable a vehicle to make the 180 degree turn, although it will be less convenient and may require putting larger cars into reverse to enable the 180 degree turn to be made. Public . . ro5�" , � � ��%�'� , Works recommendation �s the crossover area be constructed as proposed, with no additional right-of-way acquisition. GUARDRAIL On the inside edge of the existing upper irvine Avenue there is an existing double cabie guardrail. The residents want this guardraii reused or if another type of guardraii is installed, they warrt a type of guardrail that is more esthetic than the standard type of guardrail which is used throughout the city. Public Works is proposing to salvage and reuse the existing double cable guardrail as much as possible. At some locations where the difference in eleva�on between the upper and lower roadways necessitate a higher strength guardrail, we are proposing to install a standard steel plate beam guardrail with a self-weathering steel plate beam. The self-weathering plate beam has the same finish as the standard bent straw light standard. The plate beam guardrail � meets the necessary structural standards for guardrail, is fairly inexpensive, and spare parts for maintenance are kept in stock by the Bridge Maintenance Section. Installation of a non-standard, more esthetic guardrail would increase initial costs and maintenance costs. Use of a non-standard guardrail will also increase the potential liability to the City because the use of that type of guardrail is not standard practice. TREE REMOVALS AND PROPOSED LANDSCAPING All of the existing trees and brush will be removed in the area of the proposed retaining wall in the median area between Ramsey and 600' east. Extensive tree and brush removals will be necessary in the area of the retaining wall construction on the north side of the roadway near Pleasant. There will be some tree removals in the median area near the crossover, and some tree removals along the outside edges of the upper and Iower roadways along the length of the project. The residents are not opposed to the tree removals as long as they are replaced with other plantings. Public Works will work with the residents and the Parks and Recreation Division to come up with a landscaping plan for the area. The majority of the plantings wiil be installed in the areas where there have been tree removals. The extent and costs of any additional landscaping proposed by Public Works would be comparable to the work being done on other Combined Sewer Separation Projects. POSITIVE BENEFITS: Diversion of sanitary sewage from this area to the Mississippi River will be eliminated. The new bituminous surfacing and concrete�curb and gutter , will improve drainage and the riding surface. Maintenance costs will be reduced and the appearance of the street will be greatly improved. The underground subdrain will reduce the water problems caused by springs in the area. New retaining walls will replace deteriorated walls in the area. The new lantern style street lighting will improve the appearance and safety of the neighborhood. ADVERSE EFFECTS: Upper and lower Irvine will be closed to through traffic during construction but local and emergency vehicle access will be maintained at all times. Dust and noise in the area will be higher than normal. There will be substantial tree and brush removals in the area of the retaining wall construction. TIME SCHEDULE Construction is scheduled to begin around April 1, 1989 and be completed around October 1, 1989. COST ESTIMATE: P-8028 IRVINE AVENUE PAVING Construction $240,000 Engineering and Inspection 49.000 $289,000 ~ S-8027 IRVINE AVENUE STORM SEWER Construction $339,000 Engineering and Inspection 62.000 $401 ,000 B-1159 IRVINE AVENUE RETAINING WALLS Construction $400,000 Engineering and Inspection 70.000 $470,000 V-8028 IRVINE AVENUE LIGHTING Construction $ 60,000 Engineering and Inspection 11 .000 $ 71 ,000 PROJECTTOTAL $1 ,231 ,000 , . • C��i�'`" -�' /� ESTIMATED FINANCING: P-8028 IRVINE AVENUE PAVING Assessments $ 80,000 1989 CIB 199,000 SSSC 10.000 $289,000 S-8027 IRVINE AVENUE STORM SEWER Assessments $ 20,000 State & Federal Grants & Loans 225,000 SSSC 156.000 $401 ,000 B-1159 IRVINE AVENUE RETAINING WALLS 1989 CIB �470.000 $470,000 V-8028 IRVINE AVENUE LIGHTING Assessments $ 18,000 1989 C I B 53.000 $ 71 ,000 PROJECT TOTAL $1 ,231 ,000 Area property owners will incur storm sewer assessment of $.03 /sq. ft. (residential) and $.075/sq. ft. (commercial). Property owners abutting the street improvement will be assessed $19.00/ft. for the street improvement and $5.00 /ft. for the lantern style lighting. Sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water connections that are requested will be assessed at the actual cost. The estimated cost for a water service is $2,000.00, $1,500.00 for a sanitary service connection, and $1,000.00 for a storm sewer connection. SOURCE OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: For additional information, contact the Project Engineer Paul St. Martin, at 292-6280. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Department of Public Works feels that this is a necessary and worthwhile project, and the Engineering Recommendation is for approval of the project. . . N � . �J Q �� z � � � > MATCH EXISTING �� I AT SUMMIT ��,� � � I � �\ � � � i I �� I I . � � / � �� / � �-- 4��7'�� \�\�� / �`_ - - - -- SUMMIT_ _ _ _- - -� �\�\__---_- + - � � � � � =/-- --- �� __ �_ __.� - �`\ ___ ___, _ ---- � �� PROPOSED PROPOSED RETAINING \ STORM SEWER �� WALL CONSTRUCTION � � � � �.Rq� �\Ms�Y\\ . � �� \ � � � ��. � � - \�S�RF�� CROSS!) �T � MATCH EXISTING � �� AT RAMSEY �� _ � � - � . �� -- � � � � � � � � ' ' -�" � � --- -� �� '_ - ��------ --- -- - - -, � -- - - - - . . �� . . �\ �� ,� � � � � ` ,_�.�.,r �� O� v. 0 �0 _2�00 � o SCALE (FEET) f- c� ? . C� � , �l� � � r � � � a � Z � � Z 1 � � � I � � � . _ _ _ _� 1 ' � i VENUE �' - � � ' � i i — . � � � �� 1 `// t � I I /�� ` 1 ` 1 `�� .�.�� .�/' � �I �� . � �� JPME MANgHON TURNAROUND PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED RETAININ� WALL CONSTRUCTION UPPER IRVINE AVENUE - �— , ER LOWER IRVINE AVENUE � \ - �1 � ,��.-�� i - � �. � '��- �� END � � _�� ,.-��',-� � CONSTRUCTION -�� ---' E�J �� --- _._--AvEN� _- ----,-- --- 1-� PLEASANT — --- — INTERS TATE 35E IRViNE AVENUE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ATTACHMENT N0. ( '� • N O Z 3NI� Jlla3d0ad H1f10S � W W Wc � � 4 � ' U Fa- W ? Z Q o > > N � N � ° o � in W v, W 3 -' 3 0 0 � W if'f Q � P�'� �� Q � W W ��O � j � j \��0� W � � 3 Q ��G z Q � � ��'\� a � z � W D � H � o° 03Q W N � � �n Z a Z 0 Q � a W Z N � W Na `c !n � ° Q _ !� a p�„ � � w aW � � � w � � O o�. 3 � c�o W W � � > > 3Ni� 1�12i3d0ad HlaON / N � �J Q P� Z c� 2.� > ,��c' i I �� i i i � � � i / ► i ��\ / / I I i � � / � I � � / / . �_.- - 4��1j�.,` \�\\�� i/ ��__ - - - -_ SUMMiT_ _ _ _- -- l �� _ -- --" — / ✓ --- -'— � ��------ __----� �`\ �____ _--- � , . � .� �� ti� . . `� �� 16' ��'�� UPPE �4MSFy�� 14, �� \ 2�� 16' � \\�� S� 2�� 16' � T � �RFF�� LOW� � � � . � . � � ,,\,\ �..__ . � `� � � � ._ --- —� \�� j�—_ �------- -- �� 1\` �� \\\�\\\ � � ` � Q f ^� �O� � 0 �1010 �0 qpp 2 � � SCALE (FEET) � � ��s, � N , , ; ' Z � ; Z r , , i ' , , � __ _,, � - , , 4VENUE ��- i I - - � - - -- ' - i I 1-� � �� ` � � ,� � - , _ �� _ _i �_ �,- ` ` - - - --- -- -- -----�` ` �.- � N11..� JAME M ANS�pN R IRVINE 20' WIDTHS 14� �� --'�� 20' ,, R IRVfNE 16� �\i WtDTHS i � -�-- , , , _ ___-� . _.__ _-- __ �- -- -� _._=_-_ -�_ I '_' ��- _J � � i •----.--.----L, EASANT_--� A�EN�E_---�, --P�- --- -- �NTERSTATE 35E IRVfNE AVENUE PROPOSED WIDTHS ATTACHMENT N0, 3 ' a IMf TAliw�... �� COYDiTINIYM � . ' . 11![♦ O � V • i��Ii/� � / ,�r.. i � � (b � I b) :. '�(�'IuaaS � N q :i .F_�♦ - ,•°' , A/. NI• iVi. �*s. 4� to.a i.�f-�• •' �'r � W.:�dE — b ,so � a-— • _�' e L Al/i9EL -n~ A!/E. " ' ta )y� ' - -- i � ..�,uT�;a..._ �.n � is; 0 �sI NI � i�s. .�.t. iri �.�,n e ,en u� � i I � �0 .ZJ i� 9I/ �;i �„� Pp0 ��/ � � az� `� .�' ` n � eio � � b .�i c ��'� � 9 q N � "I /7f C172� ` �171� � � I� ��.�0 ! GI I LZ ..� IJ 17L � � � 7� � � �— ` w r a. _,� ; . r � _ n ,��ri .Y;�� I �. � I . �i») zi2 ��a) o , � � td 74 2 = ', ' /� t � � ,� � � �) .. Ual (n:l Z rr) T.o�--- ' ; ��"'�,+,lJt,r"�� _ � � ___ . ��_ l� y� � _. ` � o�t 4 � M\ O� /� (bJ. � .r.�r��r�i� , � .21" �19� j 14 • � �� IB�/.f �`� 3(s�^ • ` b \-¢�y ' 6• �� c • . p t�sw ,i';s J7.T ^ � ^ �,/ I ��I �' � �J � . � ��` .� �I: MoMf Jif[a•w:�, t LOMOOMIM/I/M MID.12S � l' �.� /� \ � � c.� ir.�.. : =cwssce woua� 20� � � 6 �/ �+ M , �'¢[bl.roo. ¢� '�1 = O �j�� J 1�1 A. �� o .� 4 ';��_�+(f0)t�t�� `� 97 7MfV41 O� /'T 7i /1�iZ. � '�'� N �r .�,. ..� r-- —�j a Y. .d _ t,_r ';, �WI �� ' /: i � � — � �7\ O � .' N w�� / � � / �7 �so �v • (��) 19 .� . —J.�ni ' » N r �,d � • � .�µ o� (!�� \ n ��,� .� �:..� v �l/T.OWNfR)MI�IN.I) Z ''�! �` � �"��`V` f .� p � �'� ,�P` �ot N IITN t�n /b � ��5�0 �� 01 �f0e1L ,�V. AV E�`° rw��r��OND . —��lOT: � �?� ` )�Z ij t�� 1' �� .S �� . �a� )t-iJ N sp sV/I /'fZ: �p �� - f. ':l L�o ,JO � . �r�,IT 5 �\ � � �� . V��=y1•�� 1,� �` z /3/� �4 ' 070 ��22� t � `�f N obo '!` 60• . r} � h\, J 1 1 � ' � � .? � r� ` // s » � � K 9 . A 5`. i%1 1 •,; 2 �-�� tI �� ? iio 11° o.��J � 0 6 `� L fOk �.3�s�+�''�4 5, ', � a,^;,'�, a � � j � 1 6 � \ 1 �9� �v.�U� r 38R ap"'�°� � S �y�4 ! (� ZO 8<23) b � o� � � 60• �,� t�;Sz�x?r'--" 6�s , 6�' �r _A___' � � '� � � y� k;o'- �-.tv'.. . • � . k ^ . Og2 �� . �� a� 0 1 ��, . -�� . .. ..�/-- , /� 91 9 •� 1,� �� (ir) \ 1� ��,�' �M s, \ MM� AYA MFNT l�� P�d /�C�� / �� S � CaS�`� �y�. o asNV � (:! t _"�;�� Q �z)`�i� �i°��y 0a �� s1 � L II \\ 1�' r' s o _ . (a?'� � i-�� ao-ia.�, . }.f `� e°��' I ,. � � � � /� 3 grt �� '. :�.+'�+'' ,:�°�° �1� .c7 *�.lt:. j31 69 l�l, � 19_ 21 22 { 'O :d• � `,'`,,.� � ��n � �� } • �.� � � c9 ,<<;.. �, �, ' �5 � �� :„ � tz-i •-) �:a) f as � �io " ''. .�.��'° 6�' �'�� Z s. ��a� � -�`• r. �rs K �� iy' \ �� 1� q. . � ' k� � ..i�� h� \ �� "�� ', � � L �,. ,• � \ � I `,�` AVE ,n �• \\ '' �, �e / / ry� \ lsy) \ � 1 ,�r,p �a I '� Y 1 s+g�i?� � � Q�3, (2a) 6 e� /,t��'` \ � ' 0� , ei t�i; �� o!� V��• ' " bC�� 0�., g� �b� ''� , �1 D�e rb 132 „ _ , . .c� �m. ti l5 � �?. � \ � rl �rs,o � .� ,` (x`) �r �' zs) 'oc, a hxv�.� C>°` \ � e � P i � ; , G•°�� 3 � ,�. , �e. � \ . �� ' `�;' p aQ) _.�' �+ r27 1-,1_ �j �►S"� E, 6 4,�("°`<M r w \y,�. \ \ �(/\� ��i 6 c � U 387 � ZO 21 22 h � � t�r 2Q R �,,�,�7f Qrv� �° �_ \ � \\, tt� ��` �(Pdr)� ��.��, 60�,< � Z2� �T y � 1�7 80 (�� V` V� Z 6y :� '�� (139� �gy M �,� , �, � , a ,,_ ,:. � b , � �', � �R� 6p �`/\ � �` �� (izc,) « oio 1 i� � \ iW • ° 69 0• �' f �:}` � G �+ .- . �� t �,Q � ,.z' �9 i � `� -'" ��" � . f1�(n�) '�e�� i x �o� P � �N � s , 6� �0'(s'�. � 63,q�+►re i� 3R ( '.s:.) �.i � Qs3) i1 , ..'?'�,�� . �• °�°. °t .- Z� � \ t�� . i\ 3). � �. � �P�:�� .u�ti"10 � 1�1 �<,/ � 5� ,,yi� .� r" W Z� � !!y�.p ��.� ,•6 s��c r � � �i ' e � f ef, /� �d... \ l �,,, b°A �:Y, ' � 9 \ °o-. �+� ... '�i0 �}' o� i � ,, ;:,03"��/ 1�' �'� �e,,a� � 65A� ,� ��.� ;'Sy �vl � �= r . :,+.� , , �t ' ' zs y ��S 3 � � � �v �:'' #f"` � � , `,9 , � � ,.a� � �'�� i ' c``a •3� ► ,. y ' a ��.. ,, j •� � 35 +• , � . (9 fn 7►se 1�>�j../ O.P y�.` O,y�.R� �� ZA : S.�•�� ` \ ' i�.i r .d � \l�� \ �,� 1� ,t ✓ E +,I'�' '� sS. 11' •. .- (5 1 I ,�� A., 0 �/! �o�a � �.�, o '2 s2" `�1 �., ,\�� 6 p •" . C \ 1\ " ?- �j� ,� , Z� _ , n" � N � 1 ,�� a .r ,� � � �- . AV G - �'' � •� 23 � : - ✓ . . 10 � i�� ' � o) >� 6' ,t�i W 6 ..�'' �{ ..+'`..� 6 � , � ° _ „' �,, 6 � o •"' � a „ Q y ` ° / -��--�; C4 1 2 �.Z(�� f V v ?�9 .1 /• S3. .►"�� . O' ,��`) � � � ;�� r f�°) , ^y� aj Z �-C r�, los: �.��`��•��• 6 � ', �'� 6��,� �;% Q3 0 ,,� i�.,,a »�I� i . L q ��( 1b4� O` .hsi+1''A��'".� i f$ l: IJfj y I�� ,yl� , /�1 �• �� .:l ' � . ` � \ � < _ 9 yJ�J 3 oQ+ �•�f��r.f;• �,.,� =.r� �f� � �1S � i�` e' q � 33 \ f: i i, ' i ` 0 � P,� P�S.�� ' �� ...jy.�� . 1�� r f�lj1 0 �� . �`.2:��/� 1 I P�' t � �� . � i � Y// �%, " �� ,� ��Q,@.P �� ' i� K. ` 4 inr, 3��' 6 � 57 B � q� � � y .. ^i i;q., � � - - � C 2 ( `'F�• �;.'/"'�i �� '' . �. . S '/ � L�� ! %/6Q% . � ll� lioa� �=� � ��3 Z'c ��i' _ /9 � aS'E ` d6�� e� �/ �.i �� '^ � I �,�r�s � ' 1, l. ,%� � ; // /� /.9 /� 1 9 .' / •i 1 215 �'o " �. � i �� " ��j / A ;IY. 'f.�) /f ,F .::s �t`� 1e�8! �" • / / ; `vH,,o'' ti�� •,�� I 8[ 8l j J 81 m� • :rrr .•f-J .�6 � � �'�� Z8 �- '//�y�. ,P`\',c:Sr, 1 I!L J 1 - ,,:" ..: �ll.;, � �� , t " i �? „ � ) : �� " ;� � •'� a�,a, ►2 •Irri � p• 0 '� ` a� / ��j �' " B6 4� �6��, "�'�� u� 11 r '�.�'�V��eo`f�� 9 .�p v3I p/�'�/O�l'u�l`� � . �OS) .f.'j � P y�� .110 � � l`�.f, /a�. � ouTtooK �T �. 6S� ,-+�.�� c� � i u� 9 d l 6!1 3 2 I\ (ro`) 3i4- (�o,� S`� � �2:/ � �� `pa - l.v� r� • ;, e _ � . �i �- � ze. s� (�o�) "�. � ca �`f i: /.f w«r %� e ,-z ,f � n. ' 6a .r-.ra � � �,tl .��• • —�"�°--� . � +�'" �=,lo- — — — -�.y— pc MuNtGY�L T�T't �O StRELT �� /T a/G Y 1C33� {�a3-..�� .�J _ _ — _ . —__ .�n ; � � Z �*�t • � I ' nG3� '- _ .. - — .. . ..._ :.(o2.Sx°(o\�145� daQth vG 1at: �� . ��s'O4T)=�� . L �- Z -i23 4s',c.95 i � - ----- _� _-- � !(iw-3�ix70�'o+35�50 � T�4S 1 1�,�_, . T�I.l.�z43�) . _.._ ._ � . . . . . _ . _ �... , . . . ... _ . . - � !00� ,. --- -- ► /� i' � so•K.9si �ts v.��, � , � � � C,.�„c 1:.ti.)=47.b) � .:. �� _?� _�. ---- -- . , �� "� ' �� `.��„d - • �� •� J ti � • 4 b � �. �� \ .��;: �Q. 1,�� ' y,� +�e � `,°� t �s3�1 P _ �� . �� C. �1 /� (�',� �' �� ep i y� i�Cii3 /• � � \ �ty/Q'h) .•� t� �? y � ��,,� ��!,Z�� i � ; �;� ' I�, 10 • � f� la�� /� `'a. ' 4g' � s� � / 3 0�• �� i �. � Y /7 C �p `�:, w�� ° �,�� / �Sl� � Q 1 \�� .� `r �w l�t, y' `\♦ ° � �,i,, / p�o Q• �'�'�� \•�,� � ! ,.�, 6�90 p ��,;�,q �'' � � �o � 6 , 1 �\?� �- ��,I �\ O O a �� / ' �j \ y• o $ o (�n). `an`.p // ! ' \�ej .%\\ �`\ ��\ �,.�) 9 c�) 6 5 I � � r � 0•� � / l•1 �.� 1 0 � �� •� , � \ e d ' � �,• � .�. b • � '��T. . .-.. �. �_ _�. "i _ � _ � ' L__ �\ �\ � I • y1 00• 'v�'� `'�, -Y `` �+c . if+X ` \ \` �. � yp p� ; �:, ti; � � 1 '. ,� . . . � u:- �p ° x`�o% �":r �� i /: 1� �\ � f� � '-� \_ �j b ., ` r� `�� f �+�/ 3L' . �.. °�� °• ba . �',°. ��,�z> � �� / 6�k� /�uy�� 6 p. � � ..'r'/ ''�� _ � �.�'��\� �` %/' ��Y'' 7 A'�� •Y�i',5`jb� L� .)�.. ' �'1 �'' e�o ^ „�ipr '/ �,..� \ 1• \'I� ��t'��± O �\. � ��\ i� L_' 14 �1� � ,,„��,�'..�, s�c. �� , ��> '--t:9s�� /,. .� 1 , , j ,(j��.� o• ,f., % ,,,;�:-,��o�- �L, �,�o -., _ �.,+°., ,� �, y PY ,� ��-'°%-.�5?- • I� ,�, `" 1�' _ � � g `. � . f �4, Z42�r"�o�°.," I � � o,�• y `� 30 . � .� � � � ��-��h�l+ ' �' ', � � � `� \� �o- '' w �') \ �' •' � �� ,� : r sl �S� ,;� � \ 3 ::� ' � . '•. '1 �` � ls � fj . 6 e' � .��' � :-' ''�• �Ci j, w ° � 5 , . - o� � � . ,� �° y (�:) � .� .V�' �� ' •,,�., qo'' °�5 b\ . � �,� ru��- � S ��• �� .; �y( � �'` 3':�'"�. s l� �� `'. \i�l e \ ',:�. 3 � , � � h 6 ��,� 1,�'1\j, �A4� M \/r`p rA � \ 0�.-''�i�'' . � p /•/ � ` .�7 ' U S� � - ,� � � a _,� ,,- � � = Sti .'�, �� „ �,� �.� � �� 8• . ,- � � � • . �� ...� ,. ,�.,... �Y J�.v� � � . `✓:. O M � �. �� . ! i� .ct� • _�i / � . � �1 �'• 6� (y \ � ^ 9 0 � , :;';,- �- j :�� 6 � f:! -`:�.•, . y .,, 6� � �\ e p• '.'' .z'y 5OO � _ .�r < .'��,�i�,`•> :�0\ ' 0' ti -u+ i t -�aY �� 6 +, 'dr�. ,� � � ` ;- �--, ��, ; � �f�, R•o t q • �,��f.'r.` 05 � �♦ `, i/ 0�,�9 �4.. � 0, \ryj �,/� j� � ,f � �... =p. .�►�` ,., 'l . \ ,,: 6 � , P' � c � ,.f�'K.. � �� o° �" ' ,.:�-' r ;� {' ?� a a` ,;.�! • . \ N�� . i ,y` � fjU �n ��a `! ' ,:;1 „ 1 ( � ,+,�, � .1 G � '✓ ,,s .�L'-\ ,yo' � `� � �• .`�. � ri�r' Q Q'� �`�4� �� ! �. .i� ., Y' � \ � ' e�"�' ' . �.•F "6'�' (�' �s p�� F. �"a � �+d�;�1^ � 6 H I�� , '�fj�.r � , .� � � �� b �, s r. � s i , '�.- y�k• � `,� �Q-J,3�;.�7�'` //'. \ �N`��.5 ; '�.,� '1 ,,, \ � �,�„ y � . ��R / 60 . .tiv �ti , �,r 9°� �',t� � f`a°; ` � �: , " ,. '.; ' T,, b '�', , l �k l0� q l se . ,,-* t-:c!�"- ,,,, � q �3 � ;�"'„ —. �s °�.;� ,,�� . �� '. � \„.: �,�5 �;: �i.•. ` �•` , �^. � %m?-��ti,,t.;,•' ' ' I { Q \/ 2 .a _-.b� '� �� .y•,' � ,. � �': I� �' �✓ � \.. /o.� -..�'� �+`�'��%`: � I .�d i L.� .! 1� , �%F�' � '�• �r, s +i`.-� '. Q.I . � r,��^ �� J T I A� k � s � ,�`;- y . 1. � `. ry' � � � 3�. -i�i��' � s' �,. •«�'�. � �,�•, / �� ,, �i 9 .�s , ,� . - � , �„�.-�� 3 �s.:o�, , s; , e� ,,, ,. co� ,\e� , 8 3,�' y j,b �\.�f�; ,, ��0.6 � k kkot^' `,+>, 6o fo��r , f`I . , � 3 � � e,,� ,�,�h \ !•��; 04 •.e� l :, � d0, -�\ ,= nol. P�'�(�^y 74.172 ' `��^ � ,�� O, Y /RV) '� : i,t - °;� p � �,� • � i.��.,�. 6 �� '� �� ,} •, � `e � /�". , : �,'F' "1°� , � �d'�� ' L• `1 0 � J + �,,,; � ,.;<, � o -o �; �. r 6°� •,�O ,, � �,x� � .,�� , �� o �� • �� o , b f .\�. , � , . ", 'l `, Z ..-' g =, ,,5;,• t' � \ . ;' , \� ',y.�;, u �'..`e �, ` I ,��., � � �� . ��.. ,�Y �� ,l S � . �� `. \:' '`�V,� ,3� �1�f. �� . , EA •�� .,� � .., �e �. 6 ,N P� .,: \:. �� b �. ��° �",' ' � �� '-' .� � . . '� s k � � � � y'��. � 8 ` . �`., \ f •' o T..,.. b.��r e '� -.i ��1• '.� •. �� . :..��v 6��)� 2�eAU�'' � s�� oci 6�� : `'� + \ . •. ,o ea•' � 1�� `•t 1f0 " 1 . \ W , �- � `METCiVLi� r_. s, .a �:. +`c �l�' _' J'.:. _ _ �` ,,''' .u... ,f � � . ,/1. L' ;� � bo' ,•' ��•'y°� i � . �t r(1\ �, I k u y' ',� j AND" y N Y � �� ,� � ti �O._.: � �'1 ��I : . ' � • � �, � z o '� ` �z . ` r6 ' .., �� e •.\� � ,� � /90 � a �a� G � '' I \\ , � .� ',� R . .c .r �A 6 �, ; • I . � as �, ' ��`� I ? 2.3 w!�.D_ 8 5 •�, . � � _ �� `� � � �'iB� {;:.� �o��,`�� 2 ',��z :/. N � bo: � ; _ ; = s � P,:� i7 �, � �.. o I ;I(�3) (�4J ��s) bs) � B 9 io �b ��. I ,y�� *'1v�t '' ��,,� �,:i � ; v � /0 � M��t �� 9. P� � •��'� Czz) (z3) Ct4� � ' /9 .•�L. ' �. L..� '.�._ -r"f-�-'-L-- 6O: •�. 67. a! O• ' ti �._� yr.:� ��.�� t � � 6 6s ri . y - - - -- - -- - ,A.--- - -a.r — - '. ' ST. - , • �� .,. � ... . --� . -�;.- � -- �-- _...� ... .. .. ...._,.__i _ � ..._ _._._-- � - • --^ �. _ .— ------ • -- - - - � ' . ` ' i � - � ° � �'-r _ 10ELl.Q �� SUMMIT RND RRMSEy O • , ' ' I RV l N E 1-4-1 l.L`,ST1�.E�,`�' pAV I N C,— AR@ Nti K►��pA�. 3rA'rE A�D SME.eT'3� 1RV�NE ANp P�.tHSO.NT /1Q.E NpT, ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL ��-��y� PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION City Planning Ward 4�2 RECEIVED District Planning Council 8, Dear Property Owner: � SEP 2 31988 File No. 18528 and 18529 CITY CLERK To decide on whether to improve IRVINE AVENUE between Summit Avenue P U R PO S E and Pleasant Avenue by grading and paving, constructing curb and gutter, driveway aprons, a new retaining wall, and a lantern-style lighting system. A�1D . Also, to install a new storm sewer to serve the area bounded LO C A TIO N by Kellogg Boulevard, Pleasant Avenue, Ramsey Street, and Summit Avenue. Thursday, October 13, 1988, at 9:00 A.M. H EA RIN G City Council Chambers, Third Floor City Hall - Court House ------------------------------------------------------------------- Please note that the Public Works Committee of the City Council will discuss this item and develop a recommendation to the full City Council. Please bring any unresolved concerns that you may have to this meeting on Wednesday, September 28, 1988, in - Court House at 9:00 A.M. If the Council approves this project, a portion of the costs will FIN A N CIN G be assessed against benefitted properties after ratification. The e�timatPd acsess�nen�:s f.or this proiect are as follows: IN F O R MA TIO N ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS for Grading and Paving $289,000 Lighting ' 71,000 Retaining Wall 470,000 for Storm Sewer 401,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST �1,231,000 ESTIMATED FINANCING: Assessments $ 118,000 1989 Capital Improvement Budget 722,000 Storm Sewer System Charge 166,000 Federal and State Grants and Loans 225,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED FINANCING $1,231,000 Street Paving Assessment: $19.00 per assessable foot The first 150 feet on the long side of residential corner lots will not be assessed provided that the short side has been assessed under the paving of oiled-streets program. Should you request a new storm sewer connection, sanitary sewer connection or water connection, it will be assessed at actual cost per connection. If you own vacant property which you plan to develop soon, we suggest that you request that we construct these connections at this time. Senior Citizens may defer their assessments until the property is sold. We will send further details at the time for the ratification of assessments or you may call 298-5125 for information. To insure an effective sewer separation program and to comply with state and federal mandates, all rainleaders (downspouts) must be disconnected from the sanitary sewer. Your building ' s rainleaders are connected if exterior downspouts connect to an underground pipe or if your roof drains through the interior of your building. Some apartments, commercial and industrial buildings will require a separate storm sewer connection and you should request a connection stub from the main sewer to the property at this time to avoid a substantially higher cost to have it installed later. For more information, call the Sewer Division at 292-6024 (residential property) or 292-6247 (commercial property) . Notice sent September 23 , 1988 , By the Valuation and Assessment Division Department of Finance and Management Services Saint Aanl _ Minncentn SS1A7 •�uzzsau au� ss �sp awES aq� uo •�•y 00�6 - 0£�8 �OZ3 TTEH ��?� 8TZ �oog uz ��aCozd szq� uo suoz�sanb a�nuzm �ssT �us zaMSU� o� alqsTtsns aq TTiM �3s�s ��z� �osiy (QQZ .zo a�ion) SNOI1S�flt� �TS*/-86Z :s�uamssassy 08Z9 -Z6Z �u�?��na�suo� •uoi�EU�.zo�ui zo3 SZTS-86Z TZE� �� no� ao �uamssass8 3o amz� au� �E sTzB�ap .zaq�an� puas Ztzri aM •pTos si f�zado.zd aq� Ti�un s�uamssassB azau� .za�ap �C�u suazi�z� .zo�uag �oo� aasnbs .zad SLO'$ �ZEi�.zaunuo� �oo� aaEnbs aad �p•$ :jEZ�uap�sag :�uamssassy aar�ag uuo�g 2o�z dT_�?E�sass8 _aci ��•;S :�ua�ussaasy 3ui�u�i; ��i�5� ��rr�,,�,},� ` -- __ ��,�;c��.., �';.`t� lr[�t#ea''°�irnp�a,�u� � Av�ie�e`becw�s�tt``�*e�e ,mc� � �'leasiarit A.veati�e(it�c4udea�per]�A" �'�ti��i and �wer-I�g>#l�eritie hetweet�-�� a��`'$ e .. . . S�d�B and Pa��ng. constructiag�� " -; drivewaYs,�Breea tante�stpTe�1� ` • �;•��i� � -. ell other work�tec�sary�at�d Ync��d��ev�►��;�� . �1��n�as the I�vfiae Avent�e}i9�-��t ip�;��1°!��f��!�#s g The Council af the City o!Saiut Pac��having i�eeeived�the � f '' u 'c��l��oF �� above improv�nt. an� having cortsidered sat'�`reP�:'Iiereby ' 1. That �he said rep6rt and �he same i§ hereb a' alternatives,and that the estimated c�t thereof is pp�� Assessments $98,0�: 1985�C`apital Improvement Bonds; �#299;ODQ �d�: ,: Sewer System Charge 310,Q00: Z• That a publfe hearing be.had on said improvemeat on the 13th Qetober�Y988 at 9:00 0' ' , in the Cou�ci�ChaYnb�ers�T�#"f�� a�► ou ouse ui di �3' ng itt the City of Saint�auI. 3. That`notice of said.publ�c hearing be given ta t#ie�r�ons an i�;t�e. mann�r pravided:by tlie Charter,'statirig°fhe�tim��aiit�pi�ee o��. 'the nature a#the improveinent and the total cost Lhereaf as�e�ti� ' File No. 16528 � � _ Adopted by the Council August 25,1988. ' AP}�roved August 25, 1988. . . 1 ' (�tezrrbeT 3-10, ig8$) . , ,- o�.�y,,�,�� ,. _ ,...,._,� . �-.',. .. .. :�'.''.M:. ". ..�:. � .. / � . '«�F�a"'�•�.i„�.'S.. � ��R� S ' `��rl^ ., . p�i+�airilNA$Y�RD�$ !` ,rzs.wr. � .� �Council File No.88-1411—'BY Roger J.-Gosanty- # - In the Matter of improving Irvine`Avenue between�Sumaiit Aveaue'and Pleasant Avenue(includes upper irvine•Aveaue betweea gua�sm;t aad pl�saut and lower Irvina Aveaue betw►e� ' inndfaj aad pa�iat. coas �► Street and P3MS�at Av�nue) by. : .._. . ��i:curb--aad;Ntter. n�w► ra�ch:basins, ae�v ��j'�°__"��+.�M�� in /�� . nsolv+�s: ��. a� :� ,-� ��4�t �.�"' 1• 1'hat t� �``� ' �' ��'g�� P:�•r� F "�,�•�� _� thte_ -� ia� �he�eby . �h tw < altern�tives,aaac��t th�estinse�, � �� B.00Q; 19�1Y�Capt�� {' x: . - � ��iwv �� itt�� s 3"`f;s ,:-�� '#`�,„z .a,S15 �p:s � ..� . , . � ,1�j�L �� r � � �r �`�e"ha�d� �' �;-° � �� = a � . �Y�-ft� � <, c �: 8. Thht 3 �said pub1i I� ' ,._ ,- ..�, 3_ ��r.� 3 r ��.�c'�; - . �,�e��, �u�` �_� � �`t�e'impt,a,►e�nt,��• , �:�5�, '.� File No. 18�� - .: � . : ,� � � � � . ; � p � �: -��4do�a�' �e C�ounc3l A�giist��, �� ',� f� j�«..� ,�� ¢�. z�,.�,,3�.�`�� , . �qd.��tr 1�r;' � . �� ,.,'F�� ^ ,.. , > - � �3� '� , . {yy.� �Y� ;_ . . .. . .. . _ ��'Y�. t .. ��4{��+J_•. §�.{.}1� 7... �S` . ... . '_ I " . .._ . �4p:.. . 7�� w � � #� . � 'r,. �" � i� �-, SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS Preliminary Report Prepared - August 15, 1988 Revised - September 20, 1988 Public Hearing - October 13,1988 PROJECT: Improve IRVINE AVENUE between Summit Avenue and Pleasant Avenue (includes upper Irvine Avenue between Summit and Pleasant and lower Irvine Avenue between Ramsey Street and Pleasant Avenue) (City Project No. 89-P-8028) by grading and paving, constructing curb and gutter, new catch basins, new driveways, a new storm sewer system (S-8027), a lantern style lighting system (V-8028), new retaining walls (B-1159), storm and sanitary sewer and water service connections, and doing all other work necessary and incidental to said project. INITIATING ACTION: This project was initiated by the Department of Public Works and approved by the Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) process as part of the Sewer Separation and Street Paving Program. The retaining wall project was approved as a separate project. EXISTING CONDITIONS: � Irvine Avenue is an oiled roadway with a combined sewer. There is some existing granite block located in the driveways on the north side of upper Irvine. The roadway is divided by a limestone slope wall. Upper Irvine Avenue, between Summit and Pleasant varies in height over lower Irvine Avenue from 12' to 32'. The limits of lower Irvine Avenue are Ramsey Street to Pleasant. The existing upper and lower roadway widths vary between 10' and 18'. The right-of-way is 66' wide. Both roadways presently carry two way traffic. An existing crossover island located midway between Summit and Pleasant allows for access between upper and lower Irvine. Upper and lower Irvine also join at Pleasant Avenue. See Attachment #1 for locations. Parking is currently banned on the north side of upper Irvine between Pleasant and the crossover area. Traffic counts are low. There is some existing sidewalk at various locations. There are many existing trees located in the slope wall area and north and south of the existing roadway. From what can be determined from existing records, the limestone slope wall in the median area was constructed around 1887 and for the most part is in fairly good condition. The wall is in poor condition in the section from Western to 600' east. A 90' long section of this wall washed out in 1978 and has been replaced with a timber wall. There is also an existing limestone wall located on the north side of upper Irvine from Pleasant to 200' west which is in poor condition. Irvine Avenue is a border of the Historic Hill Preservation District. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: --- The proposed Irvine Avenue improvements are part of the 1989 Combined Sewer and Street Paving (CSSP) Program. Storm sewer will be constructed on upper and lower Irvine Avenue and outlet into an existing storm sewer stub located north of Pleasant Avenue (see Attachment #1). Storm sewer will also be constructed on the Western Avenue right of way This section will serve as an outlet for a portion of the Goodrich-Western watershed which is currently scheduled to be completed in 1992. The existing oiled roadway will be removed and replaced with a bituminous surfaced roadway with concrete curb and gutter. The existing granite block will be made available to the abutting property owner for use in driveway aprons. The proposed widths of the upper and lower roadways vary between 14' and 20'. Underground subgrade drains will be installed to reduce the groundwater problems in the area. Ornamental lantern style lighting will be constructed on the inside edge of the upper and lower roadways. Keystone type retaining walls are proposed to be constructed in the median area from Western to 600' east, in the crossover area and on the north side of upper Irvine from Pleasant to 200' west. See attachments for the proposed construction and typical sections. The proposed improvement of Irvine has been reviewed by the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission and the approved Resolution is attached. On this type of project, the recommendations of the Heritage Preservation Commission are advisory only. DESIGN ISSUES: An information meeting was held on April 28, 1988 with all of the abutting property owners being notified. At this meeting it was decided to form a design task force to discuss design issues. The Public Works Department has met with the design task force 6 times to date to discuss the project details and the following issues have been the major point of discussion: CONVERSION OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY FACILITIES TO AN UNDERGROUND SYSTEM There is an existing system of overhead utilities and utility poles located in the slope wall area between upper and lower Inrine. Northern States Power (NSP) Company, US West (formerly Northwestern Bell), and Continental Cablevision have facilities located on the poles. The residents want all of the overhead utilities converted to a underground system and all of the existing utility poles removed. NSP has given a rough estimate of $300,000 to convert their facilities to an underground system. Additional costs include the cost to the individual property owner to convert to an underground service (roughly $500 to $2,000+ for each service) and an additional monthly charge of $3.00 for underground service. NSP's position is that they will convert their facilities to underground if some other party pays the costs. US West is planning to place their mainline system underground at no cost to the City or the property owners, but the services to the individual properties would still be overhead. Cost to the property owners for burial of overhead service would be roughly $500. Continental Cablevision has given a rough estimate of$100,000 to bury their facilities. Continental Cablevision is not willing to pay for any of the costs to bury their facilities. There would be additional costs to the property owner for burial of senrices similar to US West. Public Works position is that burial of the overhead facilities is not necessary. City policies and agreements with the utility companies state that the utility companies cannot be forced to pay the cost of utility relocation if it is not necessary. The residents want the utilities buried but don't want to pay any of the costs. An assessment per front foot just to bury the mainline facilities will be roughly $95 per front foot. The total estimated cost for complete utility burial to a property with 60' of front footage would be $5,700 for mainline utility burial plus roughly $1,500 for burial of services plus the monthly charge of $ 3.00 for NSP underground service. Public Works recommendation is that the overhead utilities remain in place. If the overhead facility is converted to an underground system, the abutting properties should be assessed for the entire cost of the conversion. The Heritage Preservation Commission has recommended that the utility facilities be converted to an underground system on the condition that the City, the utility companies and the abutting property owners find a mutually acceptable way to pay for the conversion. TYPE OF PROPOSED RETAINING WALL The Bridge Engineering Division has inspected the existing limestone walls along Irvine Avenue and is recommending that the median slope wall from Western to 600' east and the existing limestone wall on the north side of Irvine from Pleasant to 200' west be replaced in conjunction with the sewer and paving project. Replacement of the walls in the future would necessitate substantial removals of the roadway improvements being proposed. Public Works is proposing to replace the walls with a "Keystone" brand retaining wall system. This system consists of a wall constructed with precast concrete modules which are stacked and interlocked with fiberglass pins. A geogrid tieback system is also placed behind the wall. The face of the wall will have a fractured rock appearance with a gray color. The Keystone wall system is a vertical wall and cannot be constructed at a slope similar to the existing wall. The total estimated cost of the wall as proposed is $470,000. The residents have questioned the need to replace the walls as proposed. They feel the walls should be repaired or if necessary replaced with a new retaining wall which matches the original limestone wall in slope, composition design and appearance. They also feel the Keystone wall will not maintain the character of the street and will conflict with the existing sections of limestone wall which will remain in place. The Heritage Preservation Commission has recommended that the walls be replaced to the original slope, composition, design and appearance. They also have requested that State Historic Preservation Office review the wall and render a opinion on the wall's historic significance. We are expecting that the opinion will be received before the Public Works Committee Meeting on September 28, 1988. It is possible to construct a geogrid reinforced slope wall with a limestone facing. When completed, this wall would look very similar to the existing limestone wall. Due to the additional geogrid, excavation, and cost and quantity of limestone facing, this type of wall would cost approximately $240,000 more than the Keystone wall being proposed. If the entire amount of the additional cost were assessed to the abutting property owners, the front foot assessment would be $57.00 per front foot. Public Works feels the proposed Keystone wall is cost effective, aesthetic and practical for this project. The additional costs for a limestone wall in this case are not justified. TYPE OF FENCING ON RETAINING WALL If the Keystone retaining wall is constructed, a fence which will prevent a person from accidentally falling from the top of the wall wili be necessary (see Attachment #2 for location). Public Works is proposing to install a 42 inch high black vinyl coated chain link fence. on top of the Keystone wall. The estimated cost of the fence is $10,000. This fence will have a non-climbable chain with square posts, rails and caps. If the limestone slope wall is constructed, no fencing is necessary. The residents want a ornamental type railing installed if the Keystone retaining wall is constructed. This railing would be similar to the railings installed on Mississippi River Blvd. over the past few years. The estimated cost for the ornamental railing is $42,000. The assessment per front foot for the additional $32,000 cost for the ornamental railing would be approximately $7.50 per front foot. The Heritage Presenration Commission has recommended that the ornamental type railing be installed if the Keystone type wall is used. Public Works feels that the vinyl coated chin link fence is adequate for this project. Any additional costs for a ornamental railing should be assessed to the abutting properties. ROADWAY WIDTH AND ON STREET PARKING: The City of St. Paul Fire Marshall has reviewed the project area and has stated that parking should be banned on both sides of upper and lower Irvine Avenue at all locations where the width of the roadway is less than 20'. At locations where the width is 20', parking can be provided on one side of the roadway. This will guarantee adequate access for all fire and emergency vehicles to the properties abutting Irvine Avenue. A portion of the residents feel parking should be allowed on all of Irvine. It is proposed to keep the existing two way traffic pattern on both upper and lower Irvine•Avenue. The proposed roadway width is generally 16' but varies between 14' and 20' at some locations (see Attachment#3). Where feasible, the roadway was widened to 20 feet at locations where parking is necessary and the roadway could be widened for little additional expense. It was not possible to widen to 20' at all locations where parking may be necessary. To provide parking on all of Irvine, it would be necessary to reconstruct the median slope wall along the entire length of Irvine Avenue to provide enough width to construct 20' wide roadways on both upper and lower Irvine. The estimated cost to reconstruct the entire length of walls would be roughly $800,000 above the estimated $470,000 for the walls proposed to be reconstructed. Where a 14' wide roadway is proposed, restrictions caused by the Iocation of the existing limestone slope wall, retaining walls on private property, and buildings located near the property line necessitate narrowing of the roadway to 14' wide. In areas where the proposed roadway is 14' and 16' wide, a mountable curb will be constructed on one side of the roadway to provide additional width (boulevard area) to allow for passing of oncoming vehicles. There is enough width available to reconstruct Western Avenue between and Summit and upper Irvine to 20' wide. Because of the 9% vertical grade in this section, the higher amount of traffic, poor sight distances, and number of existing driveways, Public Works is proposing to ban parking on both sides of the roadway on Western between Summit and upper Irvine. Public Works recommendation is the roadway be constructed to the widths shown on Attachment #3 and parking be banned on Western between Summit and upper Irvine and at all other locations where the roadway width is less than 20 feet. BRICK GUTTERS The residents have proposed that some type of brick gutters be constructed on upper and lower Irvine, similar to the treatment in the Irvine Park Heritage Preservation District. Public Works' position is that some type of brick gutter can be installed as part of the project if the abutting properties are assessed the full cost of the installation. One scheme which would involve inlay of brick in the gutter section of a standard concrete curb and gutter would add approximately $95,000 to the cost of the project. This works out to an assessment of $22.50 per front foot for the brick gutter installation. The residents want the brick gutters included in the project but do not want to pay any of the costs. For this reason Public Works is not including brick gutters in the proposed improvement. TURNAROUND AREA Immediately northwest of the crossover area, there is an existing dirt area located on private property (see Attachment#1) which is used for 180 degree turns. For example, a vehicle traveling easterly on upper Irvine swings into the turnaround area enabling the vehicle to turn through the crossover area and proceed westerly on lower Irvine. The residents want this turnaround included in the proposed improvement. The residents feel that the turnaround is necessary, especially in the winter, where snow on the roadway makes it difficult to gain access to lower Irvine from Ramsey or Pleasant. Public Works feels the turnaround is a convenience rather than a necessity. inclusion of the turnaround in the project would necessitate acquisition of a portion of the private property abutting Irvine in the crossover area. The affected property owner is planning to develop the property and does not want to lose the portion of their property necessary (20' by 20') for a turnaround. The design of the proposed crossover will enable a vehicle to make the 180 degree turn, although it will be less convenient and may require putting larger cars into reverse to enable the 180 degree turn to be made. Public Works' recommendation is the crossover area be constructed as proposed, with no additional right-of-way acquisition. GUARDRAIL On the inside edge of the existing upper Irvine Avenue there is an existing double cable guardrail. The residents want this guardrail reused or if another type of guardrail is installed, they want a type of guardrail that is more esthetic than the standard type of guardrail which is used throughout the city. Public Works is proposing to salvage and reuse the existing double cable guardrail as much as possible. At some locations where the difference in elevation between the upper and lower roadways necessitate a higher strength guardrail, we are proposing to install a standard steel plate beam guardrail with a self-weathering steel plate beam. See Attachment #1 for locations. The self-weathering plate beam has the same finish as the standard bent straw light standard. The plate beam guardrail meets the necessary structural standards for guardrail, is fairly inexpensive, and spare parts for maintenance are kept in stock by the Bridge Maintenance Section. Installation of a non-standard, more esthetic guardrail would increase initial costs and maintenance costs. Use of a non-standard guardrail will also increase the potential liability to the City because the use of that type of guardrail is not standard practice. TREE REMOVALS AND PROPOSED LANDSCAPING All of the existing trees and brush will be removed in the area of the proposed retaining wall in the median area between Western and 600' east. Extensive tree and brush removals will be necessary in the area of the retaining wall construction on the north side of the roadway near Pleasant. There will be some tree removals in the median area near the crossover, and some tree removals along the outside edges of the upper and lower roadways along the length of the project. The residents are not opposed to the tree removals as long as they are replaced with other plantings. Public Works will work with the residents and the Parks and Recreation Division to come up with a landscaping plan for the area. The Parks and Recreation Division has reviewed the preliminary plans for the project and has determined that approximately $20,000 to $25,000 of planting will be necessary on this project. The majority of the plantings will be installed in the areas where there have been tree removals. There would some additional landscaping that would be comparable to the work being done on other Combined Sewer Separation Projects. The planting would be completed under a separate contract administered by the Parks and Recreation Division. After the street, sewer and retaining wall design plans are completed, Public Works and the Parks and Recreation Division will meet with the residents and determine a final landscaping plan. If the residents and the City do not agree on the details, extent or final cost of the landscaping, a separate Order on the landscaping plan will be sent to the City Council for approval. POSITIVE BENEFITS: Diversion of combined sewer overflow from this area to the Mississippi River will be eliminated. The new bituminous surfacing and concrete curb and gutter will improve drainage and the riding surface. Maintenance costs will be reduced and the appearance of the street will be greatly improved. The underground subdrain will reduce the water problems caused by springs in the area. New retaining walls will replace deteriorated walls in the area. The new lantern style street lighting will improve the appearance and safety of the neighborhood. ADVERSE EFFECTS: Upper and lower Irvine will be closed to through traffic during construction but local and emergency vehicle access will be maintained at all times. Dust and noise in the area will be higher than normal. There will be substantial tree and brush removals in the area of the retaining wall construction. TIME SCHEDULE Construction is scheduled to begin around April 1, 1989 and be completed around October 1 , 1989. COST ESTIMATE: P-8028 IRVINE AVENUE PAVING Construction $240,000 Engineering and Inspection 49.000 $289,000 S-8027 IRVINE AVENUE STORM SEWER Construction $339,000 Engineering and inspection 62.000 $401 ,000 B-1159 IRVINE AVENUE RETAINING WALLS Construction $400,000 Engineering and Inspection 70.000 $470,000 V-8028 IRVINE AVENUE LIGHTING Construction $ 60,000 Engineering and Inspection 11 .000 $ 71 ,000 PROJECT TOTAL $1 ,231 ,000 ESTIMATED FINANCING: P-8028 IRVINE AVENUE PAVING Assessments $ 80,000 1989 CIB 199,000 SSSC 10.000 $289,000 S-8027 IRVINE AVENUE STORM SEWER Assessments $ 20,000 State & Federal Grants & Loans 225,000 SSSC 156.000 $401 ,000 B-1159 IRVINE AVENUE RETAINING WALLS 1989 CIB $470.000 $470,000 V-8028 IRVINE AVENUE LIGHTING Assessments $ 18,000 1989 C I B 53.000 $ 71 ,000 PROJECT TOTAL $1 ,231 ,000 Area property owners will incur storm sewer assessment of $.03 /sq. ft. (residential) and $.075 /sq. ft. (commercial). Property owners abutting the street improvement will be assessed $19.00 /ft. for the street improvement and $5.00 /ft. for the lantern style lighting. ' Sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water connections that are requested will be assessed at the actual cost. The estimated cost for a water service is $2,000.00, $1,500.00 for a sanitary service connection, and $1 ,000.00 for a storm sewer connection. Estimated costs of additional items being requested by the residents is summarized below. Also shown is the assessment per front foot if the entire cost of the additional items if they were assessed to the abutting properties. There are no other funding sources available within the current program for the additional items. EST. COST ASSESSMENT OVERHEAD UTILITY BURIAL $400,000 $95.00 LIMESTONE WALL 240,000 57.00 BRICK GUTTERS 95,000 22.50 ORNAMENTAL RAILING 32.000 7.50 TOTAL $767,000 $182.00 SOURCE OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: For additional information, contact the Project Engineer Paul St. Martin, at 292-6280. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Department of Public Works feels that this is a necessary and worthwhile project, and the Engineering Recommendation is for approval of the project as proposed. Respectfully submitted, Donald E. Nygaard Director of Public Works � � N J Q . ,�`� z P c� � �� > MATCH EXISTING �� I AT SUMMIT ��v� I j � i � � / / � I � �� / / 1 I � � i � � � . �� / _, �_— q��\ \�\�� / ��_ - - - - - __ SUMMIT_ _ _ _- - . �� \��------- - - - ---- -- ��`` _ __ _ __ _ _-- � ��\ PROPOSED PROPOSED RETAINING ��\ � STORM SEWER WALL CONSTRUCTION � � � � � � � `R'qM�\ � SFy�� \ � PLATE BEAM � � �� GUARDRAIL \\��S'T�� CRO �\FF�\ MATCH EXISTING � �� AT RAMSEY �� , r___ �, , , � . �� ; � --- --� \�� j/-- �------ - - - - - - -, � -- -- . . . . . . . � . \��\\ �� =o� p 100 200 400 � � � � � � z SCALE (FEET) 0 �- � z - � � � � � � I Q � � z I � Z � I i � � I i � � I i I I i - - - - - - -� \ I � i AVENUE � ' _ i I -�' � • - - - - ----� � ' - _ � � I �- � �� _ _� _ _ _ _ _� � � � � - `- - ----� i� i _' _- - - - - - --- �_' -'_ - _ S � N1�� J PME M ANS1�N PROPOSED RETAINING TURNAROUND PROPOSED STORM SEWER WALL CONSTRUCTION / UPPER IRVINE AVENUE " LOWER IRVINE AVENUE \ SOVER PLATE BEAM � 6UARDRAIL � l � � ,/'� �� _- �� '�� '� END ,- �� " ' � CONSTRUCTION _�"" ,,,.�;,,, J � �� i /�� ------�-'-- _'_--p,VEN�E- ._ , _---,-'pLEASQNT � IN1ERS?A?E 35E `\ IRViNE AVENUE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ATTACHMENT NO. t N ' O Z 3N1� 1�1N3d02�d H1f10S Z w W W � � � � � U Q H Z w F- > Z a CV � N a' ..�.. � � � CO O � � J � J W i['� ¢ > �Q'��. �p W W c� w ��Q�c. � a o z �' > \��S.�O�`c. > � a� w �• in Q ,��1v 3 Q � �'��s a W QW o � WF- � °o 0 03Q w � w � tA Z W � � Z � W > Q � W � J � o ic (jj Z � — � � a- — � Q a � � � � OO,. Wc � — w ,.. � � (�jj � � 0 n. 3 � � � N W W � � > > 3N1� J.la3d0ad H1bON H � N �J Q P� Z � �� j ��' � I �� i I i � � / / I � ��\ / / I I � �� / // i ��_- - q��p, \�\��/ ��_ _ _ _ - - - _ gl1NIMIT_ _ _ _- -- �\ ��1_____�� - - - �-- ��__ --- --- \` -- — -- � � � ��\ � NO PARKING �� cy BOTH SIDES �� `� �� 16� � � .R,q,y�\ UPP � SFY�\ 14� � � 20� 16' � \\\�� \�� PARKING SOUTH SIDE 0' � s 16 � T � �RFFT�� LOIA � ` � `. � � � . --� � r- �. , , , � . , ; ; ___ _� `�� i�-" " � ------- -- -- - - -, � -- - - - . � . . � . �`� �� . � � �� o� � o �o �o __4,°1° � • 2 SCALE (FEET) 0 � � Z � . � � � � � � G I � Z � I Z � � I � � � � I � I -�I \ 1 � � AVENUE ' - _ � i I ,�� _ _ � _ _ _ � I J / ' '/ / � �� .� �� / / � ' _ -_/ �� . � � � � �� . �� S � N1`� JPME MPNSI�N PARKING NORTH SIDE =R IRVINE W1DT}iS 20� 14� / �� , \ 20' 16' � \I ER IRVINE WIDTHS � �� PARKING SOUTH SIDE - �/��-� ' �„- � � �, ,- �� _-""� __ _.,;, � � ' J �� '�, -- __ „I��i -�" _.__,p,VENUE, ANT_ �-� -------- - �y� PLEAS 1NTERSTA?E 35E • \ IRVINE AVENUE PROPOSED WIDTHS ATTACHMENT N0. 3 CITY OF SAlNT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION FILE NUMBER ss-i i DATE September 8, 1988 WHEREAS, the Saiat Paul Heritage Preservation Commission is authorized by Section 73.07 . (2) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code to review and make recommendations concerning all � city activity to change the nature or appearance of a heritage preservation site; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Department of Public Works is proposing to change Irvine Aveaue between Summit Avenue and Pleasant Avenue (includcs upper Irvine Avenue between Summit Avenue and Pleasant Avenue and lower Irvine Avenue between Ramsey Street and Pleasant Avenue), within and along the boundary of the Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District, by grading and paving, and by constructing curb and gutter, new catch basins, ncw driveways, a new storm sewer system, a lantern style lighting system, new retaining walls with chain link fencing, and storm and sanitary scwer and water service . connections; and WHEREAS, the Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District Guidelines for Design Review includes the following: 1. Section C. IX. Landscaping states that "cyclone fence should not be used" and calls for presezvation of "traditional street furniture of the area, such as early twentieth century lamp posts or granite curbs"; and 2. Section D. Restoration and Rehabilitation states, "All work should be of a character and quality that maintains the distinguishing features of the... environment," and goes on to call for repair rather than replacement whenever possible; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission, based upon evidence presented at their September 8, 1988, meeting, made the following findings of fact: 1. Irvine Avenue is currently an oiled roadway with a combined sewer and with an ' unknown amount of underlying and adjacent historic pavers, and the proposed bituminous surface roadway with concrete curb and gutter and new storm sewer system is consistent with the guidelines; 2. The existing limestone retaining walls along Irvine are distinguishing features of the environment and should be repaired rather than replaced; 3. The existing wood retaining wall between upper and lower Irvine just east of Western Avenue, which replaced the original limestone retaining wall after a washout, should be replaced with a new retaining wall which matches the original limestone wall in slope, composition, design, and appearance; 4. The proposed lantern style lighting system will match the early twentieth century lamp posts in the Hill District; (continued) ATTACHMENT N0, 4 . � ` Filc �Y$-I I Pagc Two 5. The existing double cable guard rail will be rcused as much as possible; the proposed self-weathering steel guard rail, to be used at some locations where the difference in elevation beiween the upper and lower roadways necessitates a higher strength guard rail, is consistent with the guidelines; and ' 6. Utility lines along Irvine, many of which have been added in the last few years and serve more than th� ad jacent property, are not consistent with the historic character and quality of the area and should be buried; ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Heritage Preservation Commission Finds the proposal to improve Irvine Avenue between Summit Avenue and Pleasant Avenue by grading and paving and by constructing curb and gutter, new catch basins, new driveways, a new storm sewer system, a lantern style lighting system, and storm and sanitary sewer and water service connections to be consistent with the unique aesthetics and character of the Historic Hill District and with the Hill District Guidelines for Design Review; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Heritage Preservation Commission recommends ' that the existing limestone retaining walls along Irvine be rcpaired rather than replaced, that any nccessary fencing associated with reiaining wall repair or reconstruction be historically appropriate and not chain link, and that the eaisting wood retaining wall between Upper and Lower Irvine just east of Western Avenue be replaced with a new retaining wall which matches the original limestone wall in slope, composition, design and appearance; and BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that the Hezitage Preservation Commission recommends that existing gzanite sewer blocking and existing ezposed historic paving materials in driveway conncctions be preserved and that any underlying historic paving materials discovered in the removal of the oiled roadway surface be handled in a manner consistent with the recommendation of HPC staff; and BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that the Heritage Preservation Commission recommends that utility lines along Irvine be buried on the condition that the utilities, city, and abutting property owners find a mutually acceptable way to pay for the conversion; and BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that the Heritage Preservaiion Commission's comments and recommendations on this matter be transmitted to the City Council and the Department of Public Works for their consideration. MOVED BY Angell SECONDED BY Tuna IN FAVOR 6 AGAINST 1 ABSTAIN 0