The URL can be used to link to this page

97-221�L ca� ag sa , Pavx, F12t�I��'F�1Ait� ORUER 3�t, <,Ui�dGIL N1LE l�ti-', --��Ld�{ Bf �� Fi e ;v*c. 59?Q3i ?�ta ag Tr,�r'? 5 In th� Matta� a� P:efr constructi�n �f �ide �n East �iue i]ariene St.- frcm E. Hc:yi. Ave. ta E. 2dr�.e Ave; iaTes�t 5ide David SL. fr:ssi E. Hflyt Ave. to s,. I:tzho P.=re. &nc� South side E. Idati�i Five. fr�s� P,arlene St. t�, vasi� ot. *a�° �m DN�m r^msrx� g mm� �ST AENT?A; FR"'ES (4ne, t�ao or three family structures} Reconstructian (reFlacement of old si�eivalk} -$7.4� per £ront faot far � five {5} foot wi�e walk ar.d 58.94 per fro?-it foer fo*_� a �_x i6� fuvt xide walk. A11 other wi�tt�s wi21 �e �,rorated accordir�gly. uaw Borsatructiaa ;ythera r.L vaalk e�is*ed} - i�7^ve ai tnc actua:i casv sst�.r.teteti t� be apprcfim�tely 53.33 per square foat. A;_1 corner residentia2 praper*_ies *a_21 receive a credit up to the firsL 15Q feet of riew or reconstruoted sidewal;� alonc} �nd abuttinc� the '°lang �i�e" of the pzoperty. T1Cf {Y�Y'� LZi&P_ thr�e faxc�iiy 3tY'UCLtir85) a :�O-n.*–RF�^.T ��,''T -�"F, RA�E° Far new ar.d seoon�tructed sidawaZk; 20D� of artuai co�t e�timat�� to be approximetely $4.50 per square fo�t, TP;� Council of the City - vf Saint Paul having roo�ieEd *he re�ort of the Mayor upcn th� ak,ove imi�revement, and having cansidered said report, hareTiy resvires: 1. That tha eaid report ar�d the �ame is her�ry a�ipr�v?� with no aiternativee, an� th�t tze astimatE�3 oost tii�reoi i� *SE� APt?`;�E for estir.�ate� construc4i< rates, f_nanced L+y asseasmetats and 29a? Pu}ali� Zmur�vement Aid. ?_ mh�r a L�12v Y,Ra�-±x�r Y�c= �.i3r3 0?2 ga_i� i r rsn tY, L�k n r� � 3�n�rov??ner__ e r_ day�f ��?-t �, 39�7, a 4:�0 0° �o. �.hY., in thE C�uncil z��,�y-5 of thF City Hai1 anu C:ourt House Buildinq in the City of Saint Pau2. 3. mP�at _�atice �f sa�d p�b � ic �earing �E qiver. tc tae �erson� and in }tre *�;arvct�r nrovicied hy the Charter, etating the ciane ar�ci piaae c+f i�earing, ihe nature of the i:nprY•v��;cnt ar�d th� total c�st tPiereof �s e�ti�:a�s�, CUUNCT�LFERa^Ji�3S Y°�s � *Iaqs 1� �as�ey ��ostr�m ✓�arris ✓ �� rJ Re L Y�tas2 ✓Thzine �91�IIQVCS� Adopted by G'ouncii: �ate V��,1� L 1 �IAR 15 1997 `'ertifsad Ya�sed hy rGUacii Saerer_Qry � 2�i �a�ot• 3 y�� G � . '7�} �Ag�i"ti."�.t �e'!/t---f— Mayor ,ruoiic Hear3ng Date - April Z3, 1997 RE 2-14-97 °�P""TM�'��" °"'�'"`�'"'E° GREEN SHEET No. 6�5b Public Works Sidewalks 7•27-97 rc�m,umA MRwwAh �+T�T ��+a � DEPAii1MEM DIqECiOR cm cour+ca Robert A. Lissick - 2666086 �'N CIT' ATfDRNEY CfiV CLERK M��+��AeY�^T��3-5-97 �� BUIXiETDIRECTOR FIN.dMGT.SEHYICESDIR. Must be in Council Research Oftice WVOR(ORASSIS7MIT) t Counal Research by noon on Frida 2-21-97 TOTAIiOF&61MNNEP4GE8 ]. �_ (�UVALLlACA710NfiWN9GrilTYFiE) ASSOCIA'1E DE F'f]�ENTALACWUM17iANi OGSION REWESTED • � [•� ( Constroct SidewaAc in Ward s See attached list j-✓_T J J t � q�`�.le, _ F1c�,✓o_ s4� o =' � � - - �COU�tYwiqtls: �ppw. W a Hejxx (Po PEASONAL SERVICE CONTflACT9 Nlf9T �WEAT_fiEFOLLOVANG WESTK7NS: PLANNING COMM755pN CNf� SEAYICE COMMISSpN 1. Has Nis�� rtn ev@f worked under a ConVact i07 @Ii6'q�g� eltt? — — EY 5 NO "�"��" ,_Cf8 CONMRfEE 2. Fias this persorVFiR11 eVbr bEen a ary employce? — YES NO 1� STpFF S. Ooes this PerYanlfirtif Pesaess 8 skill not roemally Posaessed bY anY eurten[ City — emDioyee? rnsi»�crcouNCa — Z. YES NO suPaaarsvnt�pi cauncu. os.iECrNE� �Pk{� aN y�s uu+w�rs on s�parrta ahwt and at4eh to gn�n sMa[ NEi ,t W MRIA7ING PROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPOFTUN(IV (WHO, WFiAT, WHEN, WHERE, WN1�: The probiem "defieMive sidewaik" was created bacause of tree roots, deieterious subgrade materiai, aflemating frseRhaw cycles, service 1'rfe fimits, chemical addRives, extreme temperature variatbns, etc. These problems occur on a citywide Ievai and must be addressed and correcied on an annuat basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewaik cond'rtion would worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries trom falls and possible Iftigations. AUYANTAGESIF RPPROYED: The community wiN benefit ftom this project because it wilf provide safe detea free sidewalks for its many cftizens. The sidawalk coMrads are executed by private comractors, so il follows that private sector jobs are aeated as a resuft of this activity. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROYED: Historicatly, the sidewalk reconstroctions fiave created negative feedbadc in tfie area of constroction procedure and assessment. Simpiy stated, property owneTS dstest assessments, and despfte the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it stili remains controversial. ��:� �?`?"`,p�t:� �`'�s� ��i,'�� c� i�C� OISAOYANTAGES IF NOT APPAOVEO: This option wouid allow the irrfrastructure oi sidewalk stock to deteriotata, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, ultimately resufting in the axpendkura of larger doilar amouMS in evemuaf repairs and�or replacemem, as well as c{aim payouts. TOTALANOUNTOFTRANSACTpNf 3� COST/REVENUEBUOGETED(CIflCLEONE) YES NO wNOx�souece 97-M-0667 A, PfA 97 = 557,OQ0 ppRy�{yµ(yMBEH �97-2T729-0784-27oi2 FI1iANC1ALiNGORMpTqN:(EXPLAf� B. AST = 50,000 C. CIB 97 = 50,000 �L ca� ag sa , Pavx, F12t�I��'F�1Ait� ORUER 3�t, <,Ui�dGIL N1LE l�ti-', --��Ld�{ Bf �� Fi e ;v*c. 59?Q3i ?�ta ag Tr,�r'? 5 In th� Matta� a� P:efr constructi�n �f �ide �n East �iue i]ariene St.- frcm E. Hc:yi. Ave. ta E. 2dr�.e Ave; iaTes�t 5ide David SL. fr:ssi E. Hflyt Ave. to s,. I:tzho P.=re. &nc� South side E. Idati�i Five. fr�s� P,arlene St. t�, vasi� ot. *a�° �m DN�m r^msrx� g mm� �ST AENT?A; FR"'ES (4ne, t�ao or three family structures} Reconstructian (reFlacement of old si�eivalk} -$7.4� per £ront faot far � five {5} foot wi�e walk ar.d 58.94 per fro?-it foer fo*_� a �_x i6� fuvt xide walk. A11 other wi�tt�s wi21 �e �,rorated accordir�gly. uaw Borsatructiaa ;ythera r.L vaalk e�is*ed} - i�7^ve ai tnc actua:i casv sst�.r.teteti t� be apprcfim�tely 53.33 per square foat. A;_1 corner residentia2 praper*_ies *a_21 receive a credit up to the firsL 15Q feet of riew or reconstruoted sidewal;� alonc} �nd abuttinc� the '°lang �i�e" of the pzoperty. T1Cf {Y�Y'� LZi&P_ thr�e faxc�iiy 3tY'UCLtir85) a :�O-n.*–RF�^.T ��,''T -�"F, RA�E° Far new ar.d seoon�tructed sidawaZk; 20D� of artuai co�t e�timat�� to be approximetely $4.50 per square fo�t, TP;� Council of the City - vf Saint Paul having roo�ieEd *he re�ort of the Mayor upcn th� ak,ove imi�revement, and having cansidered said report, hareTiy resvires: 1. That tha eaid report ar�d the �ame is her�ry a�ipr�v?� with no aiternativee, an� th�t tze astimatE�3 oost tii�reoi i� *SE� APt?`;�E for estir.�ate� construc4i< rates, f_nanced L+y asseasmetats and 29a? Pu}ali� Zmur�vement Aid. ?_ mh�r a L�12v Y,Ra�-±x�r Y�c= �.i3r3 0?2 ga_i� i r rsn tY, L�k n r� � 3�n�rov??ner__ e r_ day�f ��?-t �, 39�7, a 4:�0 0° �o. �.hY., in thE C�uncil z��,�y-5 of thF City Hai1 anu C:ourt House Buildinq in the City of Saint Pau2. 3. mP�at _�atice �f sa�d p�b � ic �earing �E qiver. tc tae �erson� and in }tre *�;arvct�r nrovicied hy the Charter, etating the ciane ar�ci piaae c+f i�earing, ihe nature of the i:nprY•v��;cnt ar�d th� total c�st tPiereof �s e�ti�:a�s�, CUUNCT�LFERa^Ji�3S Y°�s � *Iaqs 1� �as�ey ��ostr�m ✓�arris ✓ �� rJ Re L Y�tas2 ✓Thzine �91�IIQVCS� Adopted by G'ouncii: �ate V��,1� L 1 �IAR 15 1997 `'ertifsad Ya�sed hy rGUacii Saerer_Qry � 2�i �a�ot• 3 y�� G � . '7�} �Ag�i"ti."�.t �e'!/t---f— Mayor ,ruoiic Hear3ng Date - April Z3, 1997 RE 2-14-97 °�P""TM�'��" °"'�'"`�'"'E° GREEN SHEET No. 6�5b Public Works Sidewalks 7•27-97 rc�m,umA MRwwAh �+T�T ��+a � DEPAii1MEM DIqECiOR cm cour+ca Robert A. Lissick - 2666086 �'N CIT' ATfDRNEY CfiV CLERK M��+��AeY�^T��3-5-97 �� BUIXiETDIRECTOR FIN.dMGT.SEHYICESDIR. Must be in Council Research Oftice WVOR(ORASSIS7MIT) t Counal Research by noon on Frida 2-21-97 TOTAIiOF&61MNNEP4GE8 ]. �_ (�UVALLlACA710NfiWN9GrilTYFiE) ASSOCIA'1E DE F'f]�ENTALACWUM17iANi OGSION REWESTED • � [•� ( Constroct SidewaAc in Ward s See attached list j-✓_T J J t � q�`�.le, _ F1c�,✓o_ s4� o =' � � - - �COU�tYwiqtls: �ppw. W a Hejxx (Po PEASONAL SERVICE CONTflACT9 Nlf9T �WEAT_fiEFOLLOVANG WESTK7NS: PLANNING COMM755pN CNf� SEAYICE COMMISSpN 1. Has Nis�� rtn ev@f worked under a ConVact i07 @Ii6'q�g� eltt? — — EY 5 NO "�"��" ,_Cf8 CONMRfEE 2. Fias this persorVFiR11 eVbr bEen a ary employce? — YES NO 1� STpFF S. Ooes this PerYanlfirtif Pesaess 8 skill not roemally Posaessed bY anY eurten[ City — emDioyee? rnsi»�crcouNCa — Z. YES NO suPaaarsvnt�pi cauncu. os.iECrNE� �Pk{� aN y�s uu+w�rs on s�parrta ahwt and at4eh to gn�n sMa[ NEi ,t W MRIA7ING PROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPOFTUN(IV (WHO, WFiAT, WHEN, WHERE, WN1�: The probiem "defieMive sidewaik" was created bacause of tree roots, deieterious subgrade materiai, aflemating frseRhaw cycles, service 1'rfe fimits, chemical addRives, extreme temperature variatbns, etc. These problems occur on a citywide Ievai and must be addressed and correcied on an annuat basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewaik cond'rtion would worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries trom falls and possible Iftigations. AUYANTAGESIF RPPROYED: The community wiN benefit ftom this project because it wilf provide safe detea free sidewalks for its many cftizens. The sidawalk coMrads are executed by private comractors, so il follows that private sector jobs are aeated as a resuft of this activity. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROYED: Historicatly, the sidewalk reconstroctions fiave created negative feedbadc in tfie area of constroction procedure and assessment. Simpiy stated, property owneTS dstest assessments, and despfte the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it stili remains controversial. ��:� �?`?"`,p�t:� �`'�s� ��i,'�� c� i�C� OISAOYANTAGES IF NOT APPAOVEO: This option wouid allow the irrfrastructure oi sidewalk stock to deteriotata, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, ultimately resufting in the axpendkura of larger doilar amouMS in evemuaf repairs and�or replacemem, as well as c{aim payouts. TOTALANOUNTOFTRANSACTpNf 3� COST/REVENUEBUOGETED(CIflCLEONE) YES NO wNOx�souece 97-M-0667 A, PfA 97 = 557,OQ0 ppRy�{yµ(yMBEH �97-2T729-0784-27oi2 FI1iANC1ALiNGORMpTqN:(EXPLAf� B. AST = 50,000 C. CIB 97 = 50,000 �L ca� ag sa , Pavx, F12t�I��'F�1Ait� ORUER 3�t, <,Ui�dGIL N1LE l�ti-', --��Ld�{ Bf �� Fi e ;v*c. 59?Q3i ?�ta ag Tr,�r'? 5 In th� Matta� a� P:efr constructi�n �f �ide �n East �iue i]ariene St.- frcm E. Hc:yi. Ave. ta E. 2dr�.e Ave; iaTes�t 5ide David SL. fr:ssi E. Hflyt Ave. to s,. I:tzho P.=re. &nc� South side E. Idati�i Five. fr�s� P,arlene St. t�, vasi� ot. *a�° �m DN�m r^msrx� g mm� �ST AENT?A; FR"'ES (4ne, t�ao or three family structures} Reconstructian (reFlacement of old si�eivalk} -$7.4� per £ront faot far � five {5} foot wi�e walk ar.d 58.94 per fro?-it foer fo*_� a �_x i6� fuvt xide walk. A11 other wi�tt�s wi21 �e �,rorated accordir�gly. uaw Borsatructiaa ;ythera r.L vaalk e�is*ed} - i�7^ve ai tnc actua:i casv sst�.r.teteti t� be apprcfim�tely 53.33 per square foat. A;_1 corner residentia2 praper*_ies *a_21 receive a credit up to the firsL 15Q feet of riew or reconstruoted sidewal;� alonc} �nd abuttinc� the '°lang �i�e" of the pzoperty. T1Cf {Y�Y'� LZi&P_ thr�e faxc�iiy 3tY'UCLtir85) a :�O-n.*–RF�^.T ��,''T -�"F, RA�E° Far new ar.d seoon�tructed sidawaZk; 20D� of artuai co�t e�timat�� to be approximetely $4.50 per square fo�t, TP;� Council of the City - vf Saint Paul having roo�ieEd *he re�ort of the Mayor upcn th� ak,ove imi�revement, and having cansidered said report, hareTiy resvires: 1. That tha eaid report ar�d the �ame is her�ry a�ipr�v?� with no aiternativee, an� th�t tze astimatE�3 oost tii�reoi i� *SE� APt?`;�E for estir.�ate� construc4i< rates, f_nanced L+y asseasmetats and 29a? Pu}ali� Zmur�vement Aid. ?_ mh�r a L�12v Y,Ra�-±x�r Y�c= �.i3r3 0?2 ga_i� i r rsn tY, L�k n r� � 3�n�rov??ner__ e r_ day�f ��?-t �, 39�7, a 4:�0 0° �o. �.hY., in thE C�uncil z��,�y-5 of thF City Hai1 anu C:ourt House Buildinq in the City of Saint Pau2. 3. mP�at _�atice �f sa�d p�b � ic �earing �E qiver. tc tae �erson� and in }tre *�;arvct�r nrovicied hy the Charter, etating the ciane ar�ci piaae c+f i�earing, ihe nature of the i:nprY•v��;cnt ar�d th� total c�st tPiereof �s e�ti�:a�s�, CUUNCT�LFERa^Ji�3S Y°�s � *Iaqs 1� �as�ey ��ostr�m ✓�arris ✓ �� rJ Re L Y�tas2 ✓Thzine �91�IIQVCS� Adopted by G'ouncii: �ate V��,1� L 1 �IAR 15 1997 `'ertifsad Ya�sed hy rGUacii Saerer_Qry � 2�i �a�ot• 3 y�� G � . '7�} �Ag�i"ti."�.t �e'!/t---f— Mayor ,ruoiic Hear3ng Date - April Z3, 1997 RE 2-14-97 °�P""TM�'��" °"'�'"`�'"'E° GREEN SHEET No. 6�5b Public Works Sidewalks 7•27-97 rc�m,umA MRwwAh �+T�T ��+a � DEPAii1MEM DIqECiOR cm cour+ca Robert A. Lissick - 2666086 �'N CIT' ATfDRNEY CfiV CLERK M��+��AeY�^T��3-5-97 �� BUIXiETDIRECTOR FIN.dMGT.SEHYICESDIR. Must be in Council Research Oftice WVOR(ORASSIS7MIT) t Counal Research by noon on Frida 2-21-97 TOTAIiOF&61MNNEP4GE8 ]. �_ (�UVALLlACA710NfiWN9GrilTYFiE) ASSOCIA'1E DE F'f]�ENTALACWUM17iANi OGSION REWESTED • � [•� ( Constroct SidewaAc in Ward s See attached list j-✓_T J J t � q�`�.le, _ F1c�,✓o_ s4� o =' � � - - �COU�tYwiqtls: �ppw. W a Hejxx (Po PEASONAL SERVICE CONTflACT9 Nlf9T �WEAT_fiEFOLLOVANG WESTK7NS: PLANNING COMM755pN CNf� SEAYICE COMMISSpN 1. Has Nis�� rtn ev@f worked under a ConVact i07 @Ii6'q�g� eltt? — — EY 5 NO "�"��" ,_Cf8 CONMRfEE 2. Fias this persorVFiR11 eVbr bEen a ary employce? — YES NO 1� STpFF S. Ooes this PerYanlfirtif Pesaess 8 skill not roemally Posaessed bY anY eurten[ City — emDioyee? rnsi»�crcouNCa — Z. YES NO suPaaarsvnt�pi cauncu. os.iECrNE� �Pk{� aN y�s uu+w�rs on s�parrta ahwt and at4eh to gn�n sMa[ NEi ,t W MRIA7ING PROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPOFTUN(IV (WHO, WFiAT, WHEN, WHERE, WN1�: The probiem "defieMive sidewaik" was created bacause of tree roots, deieterious subgrade materiai, aflemating frseRhaw cycles, service 1'rfe fimits, chemical addRives, extreme temperature variatbns, etc. These problems occur on a citywide Ievai and must be addressed and correcied on an annuat basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewaik cond'rtion would worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries trom falls and possible Iftigations. AUYANTAGESIF RPPROYED: The community wiN benefit ftom this project because it wilf provide safe detea free sidewalks for its many cftizens. The sidawalk coMrads are executed by private comractors, so il follows that private sector jobs are aeated as a resuft of this activity. DISADVANTAGES IF APPROYED: Historicatly, the sidewalk reconstroctions fiave created negative feedbadc in tfie area of constroction procedure and assessment. Simpiy stated, property owneTS dstest assessments, and despfte the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it stili remains controversial. ��:� �?`?"`,p�t:� �`'�s� ��i,'�� c� i�C� OISAOYANTAGES IF NOT APPAOVEO: This option wouid allow the irrfrastructure oi sidewalk stock to deteriotata, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, ultimately resufting in the axpendkura of larger doilar amouMS in evemuaf repairs and�or replacemem, as well as c{aim payouts. TOTALANOUNTOFTRANSACTpNf 3� COST/REVENUEBUOGETED(CIflCLEONE) YES NO wNOx�souece 97-M-0667 A, PfA 97 = 557,OQ0 ppRy�{yµ(yMBEH �97-2T729-0784-27oi2 FI1iANC1ALiNGORMpTqN:(EXPLAf� B. AST = 50,000 C. CIB 97 = 50,000