215072FINAL ORDER
COUNCIL FILE N0.
250'72 .,
File No. 15943 A
In the Matter of grading and surfacing. truth bittadnous material the alley in
Cruiekshank's Garden Tots and BeaurlineIs grid Addition from Germain St. East to
the East line of Lot 4., Beau line's F,nd Addition � FINAL ORDER
tmcl' Pyle No. 21;
J o 7 ;2
SUMMARY QF ENGINEERING RBCOMMENDATIONS
,.� • VM10 .
GRADE, SURFACE AND SLOPES Alley in Cruickshank °s Garden Lots and Beaurline °s
2nd Addition from Germain Street East to the East Line of Lot 49 Beaurline °s
2nd Addition (See Location on Attached Map)
.On May 7, 1963 this alley was brought to the attention of the City
--
ouncil on the basis of a petition signed by three property owners. Prior
to this time, a petition of remonstrance had been presented to the Council
and the alley was laid over to have the petition checked.
It might be well to review the history of this alleys This alley is
platted from Germain Street to Kennard Street and lies between Ross and
Bush Avenue. The great differential from Ross Avenue to Bush Avenue at
extreme point is approximately 25 feet. This of course makes the grading
of the entire alley not only dificult, but very impractical. As the
petitioners are owners of three lots on Bush Avenue and located approximately
130 feet east of Germain Street to 280 feet east of Germain Street, it was
thought advisable at the time to grade this alley to a dead -end and then
only to a width of 10 feet, which in our opinion would be sufficient for the
access required. It was also the thinking of this office that the 10 feet
should not be centered in the center of the 16 foot right -of -way but placed
entirely on the south side of the platted alley in order to reduce the extreme
slope damage on the north side.
At that time the petition of remonstrance was checked, and was found
to be insufficient from the standpoint of signers and frontage signed for.
On the date of that hearing, May 7, 19639 the Council laid this order over
to May 28, 1963 and referred it back to this office for further study. On
May 28, 1963 another hearing was held on the subject alley., On that date
another petition was presented to the Council signed by six signers who
requested that the subject alley be graded to a width of 16 feet. The Council
acting at the request of the property owners referred the problem back to the
Public Works Department for the preparation of new orders for a 16 foot alley
and directed the Finance Department to send no new notices to the property
owners when this matter again comes up before the Council for consideration.
This is the matter that is before the Council this morning. The Public
Works Department, acting at the instructions of the City Council, has prepared
the necessary slope Arlan and new construction plans for the construction of
the 16 foot alley. The Finance Department informs us that there will be
considerable property damage on the north side because of the slopes,
amounting to $2,830.00 which will have to be assessed back to the property
owners. This makes the total cost of the alley $10.28 per front foot, which
in the opinion of this office is extremely high and probably could be
classified as excessive for this type of project.
It is also called to the attention of the Council that when this office
recoawnded a 10 foot alley, the cost was $2.74 per front foot, and the
further study revealed that if the property owners would be satisfied
with a 14 foot alley, the estimate would be approximatiely $3.88 per front
foot. We consider this strictly a local matter and should be left to the
discretion of the property owners. We also recognize that a 16 foot alley is
much more desirable than either a 14 foot or 10 foot alley. We do feel,
howaver, that this alley would act as little more than a common public
driveway for access of the few individuals and, in the opinion of this
office, should be kept as narrow as possible for access of these few
people. We further feel that it should be left to the discretion of the
property owners as to Aich width they want and what price they wish to
pay. The engineering recommendation would be for passage of the order
providing the property owners still desire an alley and come to an agreement
as to which width they want and are willing to pay for.
Respectfully submitted,
Eugene V. Avery
Chief Engineer
• 4 {
To The Honorable, The Council,
City of St. Paul, Minn.
•
0
1
St. Paul, Minn . --- _ May- .17-------------- - - - - -- -19--6 --
Gentlemen:
We, the undersigned property owners, hereby petition your Honorable Body to cause
the following improvement to be made:
,Surfacing -..and grading public -al ley between-Ross .arYd-1Bush,Avenue-; l6-•ft. width,
•-----••------------------------------------------ - - - - -- • -----------------------------------------------•---------------------------------- . - - - -- • -- - - - - --
- -------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- • -------- - - - - -- St. Ave.
from ___ Germai...................................................... St. Ave, to ..... j4!!!!!!!!�__East 1 ine of Lots 4 and g,
Beaurline's 2nd Addition
------------------------------------------------------------ St. Ave.
NAME
LOT
BLOCK
ADDITION
�
/L /
LA
IS
I'1 i t V
.
U
Imo—
I
wlGOlv
e
�1
W
1
wy
'A
m
tiF
-HqZELWOoD
>
>
GE RM A i i-4
I
u��
- - - -7 5.
FL AN D P-Av ST
WHITE A
(fi
rri
Z
ti
A-
In N
0
r Uo
0
0
4
.A
A '0
r,
m0.4>r --
? DERMA /1Y ST.
4� =(n
O 4 -
•° o a -
y �
Q
^ n z
n
f4 1,1'e _ J
tc,o
J
bx
46_9
/0.9
-r 3.6
V y
o,o
1 m' .O.L
N \� \�
♦ ' . �- \
m ^�
O 0.0 2d)-o 1
—� A9.9 N
0.2 1_y
o•f
6.0
o
tb ' ,
� 6. 7
c �
`C W rri .
C13
2
i
C ;-- Co
Opo
i Oo
° o
11
I
I
i
I
i
I
i
I
i
I
I
i
i
i
i
l
I
I
I
i
i
r
�
D
r
o
a
y
o
o
r
y
�
b
�
0
0
a
cw
a
1
+o2'� *c o
o.3 �'�• I �� i0 8
5,
I
lam_ O•L /o 9
i
�o o �tr•6
.i.8=
OH�L Ib /8.
O
rN
0) - 00 I 20.0
N
a -z 1�•y a-`
ago �o,� �• —s - � �
o � ono
loi it— It
•W .
C - i
z3�o
OD �
`C I tW
� I I
/6
l
C
Co
v oa j o
o i Who
o
�o
C''Go oN�
� o o `a
t
/c�ENNA/PD S T.
� I
LVIq
n
a
r
r
—
y
o
n
y
�
d
-
n
�
a
�o
LVIq
n
a
r