09-88City of St. Paul
FINAL ORDER
�Y a �
� e No. 19071
Voting Wazd 2
Green Sheet No. 3 ��s/u�
E�
(BOUnded
Summit C
Withdrawn Ol/21/2009
r of improving the brick alley
t of Terrance Court by grading
Grand Hill/Summit Court, Summit
.) ,
also,
in Summit Court, being
and paving with brick.
Avenue, Lawton Street
�
and
In the Matter of condemning and taking an easement in the land
necessary for the lopes, cuts and fills, including right of removal of
lateral support fro subject land or land remainder thereof, occasioned
by excavation thereo or construction of slopes in the grading and
paving with brick the ley in Summit Court, being a Rearrangement of
Terrance Court.
under Preliminary Order
approved
The Council of the City of Saint Paul has cb�nducted a public hearing upon the above improvement, due
notice thereof having been given as prescribed by tA� City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the Council has heard all persons, bjections and recommendarions pertaining to said
proposed improvement and has fully considered the same, ow, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Pa�' ,does hereby order that the above-described
improvement be made, and the proper City officers are hereby d°ixx,r�ected and authorized to proceed with the
improvement; and be it 1
FURTHER RESOLVED, that upon the completion of said improb
calculate all expenses incurred therein and shall report the same to the
Chapte�r 14 of the City Charter.
Yeas Nays Absent
Bostrom
Carter
Harris
Helgen
Lantry
Stark
Thune
, the proper City officers shall
Council in accordance with
Adopted by the Council:
Certified Passed by the Council
I:
Mayor
.� �u6�;� �� �/a�/�9
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green S eet
�, gg�
PW _ Publie Works
Contact Person 8 Phone:
Pete Gallaqher
266-6085
Must Be on Co�ncil Agenda by (Date):
Doc. Type: PUBLIC HEARING
(RESOLUTION)
E-DOCUment Required: Y
DoeumentContact: �uanOrtiz
ConWct Phone: 266-8864
--
11-DEG08 ! Green Sheet NO: 3065105
�
Assign
Number
For
Routing
Order
0
1
2
3
4
5
Total # of Sig nature P ages _( A l l L owtions for SignaW re )
Action Requested: �
Approval of project to improve the brick alley in Summit Couct, being a reaixangement of Terrace Court (bounded by Cnrand
HilUSummit Court, Summit Avenue, Lawton Sheet, and Summit Court).
Recommendatlons: Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Civil Service Commission
Personal5ervice Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions:
1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a conVact for this department?
Yes No
2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this persoNfirm possess a skill not normaliy possessed hy any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separste sheet and attach to green sheet.
Initiating Problem, lssues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why)•
The improvement was initiated by a petition signed by 73% of the property owners.
Advantages IfApproved:,
Drainage in the alley will be improved.
DisadvanWges If Approved:
Normal problems associated with construction such as noise, dust, and generai disrupdon will occur.
DisadvanWges If Not Approved:
Total Amount of $�� 51227
Transaction:
Funding5ource: ASS2SSf1lBfltS
Financial information:
(Explain)
Cost/Revenue Budgeted: Y
Activity Number:
December 11, 2008 2:57 PM Page 1
�fi8
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
HERTTAGE PRESERVATION CONII�IISSION RESOLUTION
FII,E NUMBER Summit C� alley
DATE July 10, 2008
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is authorized by Chapter
73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code to review applications for exterior alterations, new
construction or demolition on or within designated Heritage Preservation Sites or Heritage
Preservation Districts; and
WHEREAS, In April 2008, public works staff received a petition from neighbors of the alley bounded
by Lawton, Summit Avenue, Summit Court and Grand Hili to rebuild the brick alley; and
WHEREAS, the clay paver brick alley was laid in 1900 and measures roughly 20 feet by about 260
feet long according to Public Works records. This alley is within the boundary for the local Hill
Historic District and the National Register Hill District. The ailey is in fair condition with a few
patches of asphalt. The brick aileywas installed during the period of significance forthe Hill Historic
District; and
WHEREAS, Prior to scheduling a public hearing before the City Council, the HPC considered
whether or not there are appropriate alternatives to rebuilding the ailey with brick that will still
maintain the integrity of the district but allow for a change in instailation or materials for the alley.
Public Works staff provided the HPC with the following cost estimates of different options:
1. Standard bituminous alley pavement in a previously graveled, oiled or unimproved alley cost
about $35 to $40 per assessable foot.
2. Standard bituminous alley pavement for this brick alley is about $90 per assessable foot.
The higher cost is to remove and salvage the brick and to remove the concrete
underlayment beneath.
3. To reconstruct the brick alley according to the HPC guidelines costs about $155 per
assessable foot.
4. To replace the alley with colored and stamped concrete is about $275 per assessable foot.
5. To replace the alley with a non-colored and non-stamped concrete pavement is about $160
per assessable foot.
6. Other options such as, only repairing the worst ruts and potholes or having brick on the
center with a different border or locating the brick at the ends of the block with a different
center material were not estimated; and
WHEREAS, relevant portions of the Hiil Historic District design review guidelines for
rehabilitation that pertain to alleys include the following:
�9���
Page 2
HPC Resolution S�it Ct alley
10/2/2008
Restoration and Rehabilifation
General Principles:
2. The distinguishing original qualiSes or character of a building, structure, o� site
and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any
historic material or disfinc6ve architectural features should be avoided when
possible.
5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craRsmanship which
characferize a building, structure, or site shall be freated with sensitivity.
6. Deferiorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced,
whenever possi6le. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material
should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, fexture,
and ofher visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features
should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historic,
physical, or pictorial evidence rather than on conjecfural designs or fhe availability
of different architectural elements from other buildings or sfructures.
Public Infrastructure
The tradi6onal pattern of public streets, curbs, 6oulevards, and sidewalks in the area
should be maintained. '�isfinctive features of puklic spaces in fhe area, such as
brick alleys, stone slab sidewalks, granite curbs, and fhe early iwenfieth century
lantern style street lights, should be preserved. The same style should be used
when new street lights are installed. New street furniture such as benches, bus
shelters, telephone boofhs, kiosks, sign standards, trash containers, planters and
fences should be compatibie with the character of the district.
Brick alleys and stone slab sidewalks generally should be maintained and repaired
as necessary with original materials; asphalt and concrete patches should not be
used. When concrete tile pubiic sidewalks need to be replaced, new poured
concrete sidewalks should be the same width as the exiting sidewalks and should be
scored in a 2 foot square or 98 inch square pattern to resemble the old tiles;
expansion joints should match the scoring. Handicap ramps should be installed on
the inside of curbs as part oi the poured concrete sidewalk; where there is granite
curbing, a section should be lowered for the ramp.
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission, based upon the evidence
presented at its July 10 business meeting on said request, made the following findings of fact
conceming the rebuiiding of the alley:
1. Brick alleys are considered a significant and contributing architectural feature
for the Hill Historic District.
2. Replacing the brick with another material, such as asphalt, concrete or
concrete pavers would not comply with the guidelines which state "The
distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site and its
environment shall not be destroyed"and `Brick alleys and stone slab sidewalks
generally should be maintained and repaired as necessary with origina( maferials;
asphalt and concrete patches should not be used."
3. Patching an existing brick aliey with asphait would prohibit reuse and repair of
the brick at a later date. Typically, public works staff has used a Class 5 gravel
for infilling deep ruts on a temporary basis because the in-fill does not damage
the existing brick and is reversibie.
oy-��
Page 3
HPC Resolution Sun�it Ct. alley
10/2/2008
4. According to pubiic works staff the brick alley is considered mostly in fair
condition with about 20 percent of the alley considered in poor condition. Fair
condition is defined as a small percentage of asphait patching, shallow ruts from
cars, shallow potholes, and few cracked or missing bricks, fairiy even slopes.
5. Some of the higher costs can be attributed to the width of the ailey which is 20
feet. Typical alleys are 16 feet wide. There may be a minimal impact to the
overall character of the ailey if 16 feet of the alley is repaired and maintained and
a two foot border on each side was ailowed to be asphait or a lesser material.
This idea was not estimated but is likely somewhere in between the $90/If and
$155/lf.
6. In 2001 the HPC conducted a survey of the existing brick alleys in the Hill
Historic District. Also in 2001, a petition to fill ruts in a brick ailey with asphalt was
submitted to the HPC and a public hearing was held. The HPC endorsed a
resolution by the Ramsey Hiil Association to protect both public and private
historic features (brick alleys) to the district. The HPC denied the request and the
decision was appealed to the City Council. The City Council upheld the HPC
decision. A short time later, a TEA-21 grant request was submitted to repair the
brick alleys and the grant was not awarded.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the above findings, the Heritage
Preservation Commission recommends the guidelines for brick alleys be upheld in this case and
the aliey be repaired with existing brick and if new bricks are needed, salvaged brick will be
used. A border of a different material may help to fray some costs while still maintaining the
historical integrity of the alley; and
FINALLY, BE IT RESOLVED, the HPC urges consideration of repair of the poorest conditions
as a lcnger Y2rm salution as opposed to compiete rebuiiding oi ihe aliey. This may be a more
cost effective measure and one that addresses the worst conditions.
MOVEDBY Manning �����
SECONDED BY Meyer �� �3,Z,,�r� E�fC-,CrL�'�'G( l ��`�
IN FAVOR 11
AGAINST 0
ABSTAIN
�'� ��-r/C... � couLda ���aq<S€�-vc:�`
�LY ?-�YT�" r�a`— F2t6'f i s�r��t. Rs�-r.m�ax�
t? E+Y"�"3Z2�' �L�+G,7� t�� m"�,2LFie �R�..�u
?�-az c�.a_S � �. E. /�se�.s ��. c� S T�F.4�t'
Da R{o a�� t� �o��
`��