The URL can be used to link to this page

99-542CITY OF ST. PAUL FINAL ORDER O R� G� S1f A L t �ly COUN IL FI :, N0. -�/CJ_Slf [ � By File No. 599050 Voti g Ward 5 In the Matter of sidemalk reconstruction at the following locations: S99050 - Both sides East Geranium Avenue from Abell Street to Jackson Street. Laid over from June 2, 1999 *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$8.65 per front £oot for a£ive (5) foot wide walk and 510.38 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide wa1k. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100°s of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 per square foot. All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL (MOre than three family structures), NON RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.23 per square foot. 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 improvement 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 oP£icers 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 0£ the City Charter. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays ✓ Benanav '� Blakey � Bostrom '� Coleman ✓ Harris '� Lantry ✓ Reiter �In Favor �Against Adopted by Council Certified Passed Date��,-'��gr 1` 1 Secretary Mayor IIBLIC HEARING DATE - JUNE 2, 1999 RE 4-16-99 9"��- ��°z-V�C7��lop OEPARTh/ENT/OFFICFICOUNCIL DATEINITIATED � �— PublicWorksSidewaiks 29-99 GREEN SHEET WfTiAVDATE INfMVDATE MlACT PERSON b PMQYE �DEPARiME�DIRECTOR OGT'COUNCIL erry Tvedt - 266-6087 ^��" cm arroaraev NUMBEfiFOR � ❑CRYCLERK MUSTBEONCQUNCIIAGENDABY(DAT� APTll ZS 1999 �p QBUOGEfDIftECfOR ❑FlN.BMGT.SERVICFSDI0. For public hearing on June 2, 1999 (��roR�oanss�srnnm � Councii Research OTAI f OF SIGNANNE PAGES _(CLIP ALLlOCATONS FOR SIC.NANH� u/SSOGATE P ENTALACCOUMANT ONHEOUESTED Reconstruct Sidewalk in Wards 5& 7(See attached list) i 1�� n 0 2 E fiECAMMENDATIONS Approw (A) or Reject (P.) pEflSONAI SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: PLqNNINGCqMMISSION _CIVILSFAVICECAMMISSION 7, HasN�spersoNfirtneverworketlunderacont2ctforNisdepartment? GBCOrna�rti� YES NO — — 2. Has this perso�rtn ever been a ciry employee? A SipFp _ YES NO DiSTRiCi CoUNCIL 3. Does ihis persoNfirtn possess a skill not nortnally possessetl by eny curtent ciry employee? — — YES NO SUPPORTS WHIGH COVNGL O&IECTIVE7 Ezplain all yes answers un separate sheet and attach to green sheet INRIATING PR08LEM, ISSUE, OPPORTVNITY (NMO. WHAT, YMEN, WHERE, Yrtil�: The probiem "defective sidewaik" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materiais, freezefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuaily. Left uncorrected, the sidewaik condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFAPPPOVED; The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IP APPftOVED: Historically, fhe sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess for wa�k reconstruction remains a controversial issue. OISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPFOVED: This option would aliow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as claim payouts. s�i�S�F�TCI� �iEt1$�P JUN 0 4 1999 TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ �] , 374 .60 COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES No FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-0669 A. PIA 99 = 630 ,0�0 ACINITYNUMBER C99-2T752-0784-00000 FINANCIALINFORMATION:(EXPlA1N) B� qST = 351 I C, ci6 99 = 50,000 � CITY OF ST. PAUL FINAL ORDER O R� G� S1f A L t �ly COUN IL FI :, N0. -�/CJ_Slf [ � By File No. 599050 Voti g Ward 5 In the Matter of sidemalk reconstruction at the following locations: S99050 - Both sides East Geranium Avenue from Abell Street to Jackson Street. Laid over from June 2, 1999 *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$8.65 per front £oot for a£ive (5) foot wide walk and 510.38 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide wa1k. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100°s of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 per square foot. All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL (MOre than three family structures), NON RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.23 per square foot. 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 improvement 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 oP£icers 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 0£ the City Charter. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays ✓ Benanav '� Blakey � Bostrom '� Coleman ✓ Harris '� Lantry ✓ Reiter �In Favor �Against Adopted by Council Certified Passed Date��,-'��gr 1` 1 Secretary Mayor IIBLIC HEARING DATE - JUNE 2, 1999 RE 4-16-99 9"��- ��°z-V�C7��lop OEPARTh/ENT/OFFICFICOUNCIL DATEINITIATED � �— PublicWorksSidewaiks 29-99 GREEN SHEET WfTiAVDATE INfMVDATE MlACT PERSON b PMQYE �DEPARiME�DIRECTOR OGT'COUNCIL erry Tvedt - 266-6087 ^��" cm arroaraev NUMBEfiFOR � ❑CRYCLERK MUSTBEONCQUNCIIAGENDABY(DAT� APTll ZS 1999 �p QBUOGEfDIftECfOR ❑FlN.BMGT.SERVICFSDI0. For public hearing on June 2, 1999 (��roR�oanss�srnnm � Councii Research OTAI f OF SIGNANNE PAGES _(CLIP ALLlOCATONS FOR SIC.NANH� u/SSOGATE P ENTALACCOUMANT ONHEOUESTED Reconstruct Sidewalk in Wards 5& 7(See attached list) i 1�� n 0 2 E fiECAMMENDATIONS Approw (A) or Reject (P.) pEflSONAI SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: PLqNNINGCqMMISSION _CIVILSFAVICECAMMISSION 7, HasN�spersoNfirtneverworketlunderacont2ctforNisdepartment? GBCOrna�rti� YES NO — — 2. Has this perso�rtn ever been a ciry employee? A SipFp _ YES NO DiSTRiCi CoUNCIL 3. Does ihis persoNfirtn possess a skill not nortnally possessetl by eny curtent ciry employee? — — YES NO SUPPORTS WHIGH COVNGL O&IECTIVE7 Ezplain all yes answers un separate sheet and attach to green sheet INRIATING PR08LEM, ISSUE, OPPORTVNITY (NMO. WHAT, YMEN, WHERE, Yrtil�: The probiem "defective sidewaik" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materiais, freezefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuaily. Left uncorrected, the sidewaik condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFAPPPOVED; The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IP APPftOVED: Historically, fhe sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess for wa�k reconstruction remains a controversial issue. OISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPFOVED: This option would aliow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as claim payouts. s�i�S�F�TCI� �iEt1$�P JUN 0 4 1999 TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ �] , 374 .60 COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES No FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-0669 A. PIA 99 = 630 ,0�0 ACINITYNUMBER C99-2T752-0784-00000 FINANCIALINFORMATION:(EXPlA1N) B� qST = 351 I C, ci6 99 = 50,000 � CITY OF ST. PAUL FINAL ORDER O R� G� S1f A L t �ly COUN IL FI :, N0. -�/CJ_Slf [ � By File No. 599050 Voti g Ward 5 In the Matter of sidemalk reconstruction at the following locations: S99050 - Both sides East Geranium Avenue from Abell Street to Jackson Street. Laid over from June 2, 1999 *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$8.65 per front £oot for a£ive (5) foot wide walk and 510.38 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide wa1k. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100°s of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.87 per square foot. All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150 feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of the property. MULTI-RESIDENTIAL (MOre than three family structures), NON RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $5.23 per square foot. 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 improvement 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 oP£icers 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 0£ the City Charter. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays ✓ Benanav '� Blakey � Bostrom '� Coleman ✓ Harris '� Lantry ✓ Reiter �In Favor �Against Adopted by Council Certified Passed Date��,-'��gr 1` 1 Secretary Mayor IIBLIC HEARING DATE - JUNE 2, 1999 RE 4-16-99 9"��- ��°z-V�C7��lop OEPARTh/ENT/OFFICFICOUNCIL DATEINITIATED � �— PublicWorksSidewaiks 29-99 GREEN SHEET WfTiAVDATE INfMVDATE MlACT PERSON b PMQYE �DEPARiME�DIRECTOR OGT'COUNCIL erry Tvedt - 266-6087 ^��" cm arroaraev NUMBEfiFOR � ❑CRYCLERK MUSTBEONCQUNCIIAGENDABY(DAT� APTll ZS 1999 �p QBUOGEfDIftECfOR ❑FlN.BMGT.SERVICFSDI0. For public hearing on June 2, 1999 (��roR�oanss�srnnm � Councii Research OTAI f OF SIGNANNE PAGES _(CLIP ALLlOCATONS FOR SIC.NANH� u/SSOGATE P ENTALACCOUMANT ONHEOUESTED Reconstruct Sidewalk in Wards 5& 7(See attached list) i 1�� n 0 2 E fiECAMMENDATIONS Approw (A) or Reject (P.) pEflSONAI SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: PLqNNINGCqMMISSION _CIVILSFAVICECAMMISSION 7, HasN�spersoNfirtneverworketlunderacont2ctforNisdepartment? GBCOrna�rti� YES NO — — 2. Has this perso�rtn ever been a ciry employee? A SipFp _ YES NO DiSTRiCi CoUNCIL 3. Does ihis persoNfirtn possess a skill not nortnally possessetl by eny curtent ciry employee? — — YES NO SUPPORTS WHIGH COVNGL O&IECTIVE7 Ezplain all yes answers un separate sheet and attach to green sheet INRIATING PR08LEM, ISSUE, OPPORTVNITY (NMO. WHAT, YMEN, WHERE, Yrtil�: The probiem "defective sidewaik" was caused by multiple problems, tree roots, poor subgrade materiais, freezefthaw cycles, service life limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide basis and must be addressed and corrected annuaily. Left uncorrected, the sidewaik condition would worsen to a state where it would be unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIFAPPPOVED; The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe defect free sidewalks for its citizens. The sidewalk contracts are done by private contractors generating private sector jobs as a result. DISADVANTAGES IP APPftOVED: Historically, fhe sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback because of construction procedures and assessments. Property owners question the assessments, despite the fact that up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized. Having to assess for wa�k reconstruction remains a controversial issue. OISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPFOVED: This option would aliow the infrastructure of sidewaik stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in repairs and replacement, as weil as claim payouts. s�i�S�F�TCI� �iEt1$�P JUN 0 4 1999 TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ �] , 374 .60 COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES No FUNDINGSOURCE 99-M-0669 A. PIA 99 = 630 ,0�0 ACINITYNUMBER C99-2T752-0784-00000 FINANCIALINFORMATION:(EXPlA1N) B� qST = 351 I C, ci6 99 = 50,000 �