95-602�
� �
CIiY � ST. PAIIL � R i G I N A L COUN L F LE N. ���
PBELIHIHA$Y OEDEH gy
File No S 5103�p �
Voting Ward 4 6
Zn the Matter of Sidewalk reconstruction at the following location(s):
at 1345 and 1347 Summit Ave.
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Beeonstrnction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.04 per front foot for a
five (5) foot wide walk and $8.46 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. Hev constrnction
(where no walk existed) - 100% of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $3.15 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; 100% of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.25 per square foot.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul having received the report of the Mayor
upon the above improvement, and having considered said report, hereby
resalves:
1. That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no
alternatives, and that the estimated cost thereof is *SEE ABOVE
for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and
1995 Public Improvement Aid.
2
3.
That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 2nd day
of August, 1995 , at 3:30 o'clock P.M., in the Council Chambers of
the City Hall and Court House Building in the City of Saint Paul.
That notice of said public hearing be given to the persons and in
the manner provided by the Charter, stating the time and place of
hearing, the nature of [he improvement and the total cost thereof
as estimated.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas Nays
�Blakey
rimm
Guerin
�arris
y`legard ���R���uefl
I/ gettman
�Thune J�� m11995
AbseY.-�
�
� In Favor
� Against
! I�bse�.�
Adopted by Council: Date��
�
Certified Passedby Council Secretary
��
' �- • : .i . � ..� ....��.—�_
�����! �/s 9
'�/ '
_..
Public Hearing Date - August 2, 1995 RE 5-26-95 !s`� � y
DEPAFiTMEM/OFFICf�COUNCLL DATEWITIATEO GREEN SHEET No.
Public Works Sidewalks 5-9-95 wmauo�rE rc�rtwwnTe
CONGCTPERSONdPHONE DEPARTMEMDIRECTOR CIttCOUNC0.
ThomasP,Keefe-266-6121 N �B�� p C17YATTORNEY �GTYCIERK
YUST 6E ON COUNCILAGENDA BY (M7� 6-14- 5 ��n� euocer oir�c'roa FW. e MGT. SERVICES DIR.
Must be in Council Researc Office �� µAYOA(ORASSISTANS) � Coun«t Rssearch
no later than noon Frida 6-2-9 �
TOTAL � OF 31CNANPE PAGES 1 _— (CLIP ALL LOCA710NS FOR SIGNATUPE� � ASSOCIAtE D PAR EMAL ACCOUNTAM
ACTION FiEOUESTED �' �p'
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 4(See attached tist}
File No. 595103
aECAMMENDATWNS: nq�ae (N a Rejeu (R) pEpSONAL S COMRACTS MUST ANS WEP THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
_ PLANNING COAIMISSIOM _ �` ���� �� ��� yES � NO� worked under a convact for this deparonent? .
^ C�8 CouMfREE _ 2 Has this vm ever been a ciry employee? .-�
ES NO
A STAFF _ 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not rwrmally possessed by arry current ciry _
— employee?
D�siA�CT WUNC�L — 13 YES NO -
� �� �� L ���7 Explain ell yes answers on separate sheet and attaeh fo green sheet
3 .
Neighborhoods Ward f�
WRtATING PROBLEM, ISSUE. OPPORNNRV (WHO, WFiA7, WHEN, WHEflE, WF1Y):
The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, akernating freeRhaw cycles,
sen��e Gfe limits, chemicai additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be
addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a staze where k would be
rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from talls and possi6le litigations,
�� -��. _ �_ -
__;_ , �:t�.,,
�:ry,. ,�' - � . , _ _. ,. < - �
ApVANTAGES IF APPflOVEO: . , , . .. � . . , ...
The community wiN bensfit from this project because it will provide sate detect free sidewalks for its many cftizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by private crontractors, so k follows that private sector jobs are created as a resuR of this activity,
DSADYANTAGESIFAPPHOVED:
�Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment.
Simply stated, property ow�ers detest assessments, and despite the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it still
remains controversial.
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVEO:
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, wi�l generale more personal injury suits,
uftimately resulting in the expanditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
C��.�rc� �s�-�r� �t4r
� f�RY � � �9��
TOTALAMOUNTOFTRANSACTIONS 2.Q1FS.QO COSTlREVENUEBUDGETED(ffiqZ`C�EbNEj" YES NO
RINDINGSOUpCE 95-M-0664 A. PIA 95 � 575,000 ACINITYNUMBER C95-2T727-078G-270]0
FINANCIAL INFOflMAT10N: (EXPLAII� $� As1' s�} � Fj i 000
C, t!B 95 = SQ,00O