96-774LL
�RIGIN�L
�9,
CITY OF 3R. PBUL GGUNCIL FILE NO. q y. (��
puvr.iu�nuavv pgbgg BY r!./.r /�+ �
tJ..�LE 3YV. w�VUYV
Yotine Ward 7
Iri the Fdattar af SidEwalk reconstrution at the foiiowing location{s):
�95046 - cn the aeut�s �i�e Ross P>va. fro� Ia. Hc�rrard st. io
Waukon Ave. at 2166 Ross Ave. only.
�ilf5 . i�\. Y �l a. .
RFSTDFjJ'pTAT AT S' (Qylg� tS Oi three family 9"tIUC'tUreS)
Reconatruetion {replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.Z1 per front foot for a
five (5} foot wide walk and $8.64 per front foot for a�ix {6} foot wide
vrali . A21 c;ther widths will �e pr�rated accordingly. 3+7ecv eax:atruetiaa
iwhere na walk exiated7 - 100� of the actual coat estimated to br,
appr�ximateSy $3,23 per square foot.
All corner re�ic�entiel properties wili receive a credit u� to the first 15u
feet nf new �r rQCOP_4trllCtB� sidevr+9lk_ �lonq and �?buttang the "l.c�n� 9i�e" c.f
the property.
t Tb NTT r(MOre than three family structures) NQI7— F 7pi`iNTTA7 nm �
For new and raconstruated �idesvalk; lOQ� of aotual cost estimated to be
approximately $9.35 per scruarE foot.
The Council of the City of Saint Paul hsving received the repart of tne Mayor upon
the above improvement, and havinq aon9idered said report, hereby rssolves:
2. That the said report and the same is hereby approved with no
alternatives, and that the estimated cost thereof i� *SEE ?iBOVE
for estimated construction rates, financed by assessments and
1996 Pubiic Impravement Aid,
2. That a public hearing be had on said i.mgrovement on the 28th day of
August, 1996, at 4:30 o'c2ock P,M., in the Council Chambers of the City
Hall and Caurt House Building in the City of saint Paul.
3. That notice of said publia hearing be given ta the persons and in the
manner providad by the Charter, statinq the time and piace of hearing,
the natvre of the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated.
i:OUNCILPERSCHdS
Yeas Nays
s �xey
��OS'CY'OID
�arin
���ris
✓���Is ard
�Rettman
Thune °— � bSer�'�--
Pt1AI I.@u�n
Adopted by Council: Date �,,,�„ �6 ,����
JU! 2'71996 � ���
rertified Passed by f`Ln1Br7.a. 8ecr_.tary
� In Favor
� Against
1 f'� bS2 r�J �--
By �
y �� May�r
Public Eearing Date - Au ust 28, 1996 RE 6-21-96 ^/�
DEPABTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DAIE IMTIATED G R E EN S H E ET N O. -� V��
Public Works Sidewalks 5-22-96 INIT�AUDATE NJITIAUDATE
CAMACTPEflSON&PHONE �DEPARTMENTDIRECTOR �CINCAUNCIL
Thomas P. Keete - 266-6121 +��N � cirr nrroaNev � Cm' CLERK
MUST BE ON CpUNCIL AGENDA BY (DATE) g NUMBER FOR
J-1 O— 6 p �BUDGETDIRECTOft �FIN. & MGT. SERVICES Olq.
Must be in Council Research 4ffice �� MAYOfl(ORASSISTANn 7(]Council Research
no later than noon Fridav 6-28-96 ❑
TOTAL / OF SIGNATURE PAGES 1 _(CIIP ALL LOCATIOHS FOp SIGNATUFlE) � ASSOCIATE � DEPAR ENTAL ACCOUNTAPI�
ACTION REOUESTED -fj ��V,
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 7(See attached list) f��� -(�� �
�
File No. 596046
FECOMMENDATIONS: Apprwe (A) ot Rejeq (R) pEHSONAL SEiiVICE COMRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING OUESTIONS:
PLANNING CpMA11SSION _CIVIL SEflYICE COMMISSION 7. Ha9 this peEs NO r worked Under a contract for ihls departrnent?
Y
_CIB COMMffTEE _ 2. Has ihis pe Nfir Ne been a ciry employee?
Y
A STAFF 3. Does ihis person/firm possess a skiil noc normaly possessed by arry curren[ ciry
— — employee?
DISTRICTCAUNCIL Z YES NO
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE7 �P�aln all yas answars on separafa shaet and attach to gre6n sh9et
Neighborhoods Ward 7
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (WHO, WHAT. WHEN, WHERE, WHY):
The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roois, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freetthaw cycles,
service I'rfe limits, chemical 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 state where it would be
rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries trom falls and possible litigations.
ADVANTAGESIFAPPftOVED:
The community will benefit from this project because it wiil provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by private contractors, so it tollows that private sector jobs are created as a result of this activity.
DISADVANTACES IF ApPROVED:
Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment.
Simply stated, property owners detest assessments, and despite the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it still
remains controversial.
�! ����t C4�e�i'
JU�! 21 1�;6
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: -
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stxk to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits,
ultimately resulting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or repiacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTALAMWNTOFTRAN3ACTIONj �4.OHS•OO COSTlpEVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES NO
FUNDINGSWpCE 96�M-0665 A� PIA 96 =�3�,00o ACITVRYNUMBER C96-2T728-o784-27ott
FINANCIALINFORMATION:(EXPLAIN) B. AST = 432 �000
C, CIB 96 = 50,000