Loading...
97-481C� � ST. PADS, COUNCIL FILE NO — L 'S � PRSLIMINARY ORDSR By a� Fi1 No_ � 1& 7042 Vo ing a d 1 Ia the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s): 597041 - South side of Englewood Ave from N Lexington Pkwy to N Dunlap St 597042 - Both sides of Van Buren Ave from Virginia St to Como Ave *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.45 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $5.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.33 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. NNLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.50 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 resolves: � 2 3 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 1997 Public Improvement Aid. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 25th day of June, 1997, at 4:30 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 the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays �lakey ✓�o s trom ��arri s i/P egard �orton ;/�hune ��1\:r,S pilA� icueR N{pY 17 1997 Adopted by Council: Date }� '� � i� t� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By c� V Against �°"`� Mayor � Public Hearin Date — June 25 1997 RE 4-18-97 DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATEO GREEN SHEET NO �2234 Public Works Sidewalks 410-97 INITIAUDATE INITIAUOATE CONTACTPERSONbPHONE �DEPARTMENT�IRECTOR �CITYCOUNCIL Robert A. Lissidc - 26fr6121 A��N CfTY ATTOqNEY � CfiY CLERK uusraEONCOUNC�ac�rwasr�oa� 5_�_g7 �n� Must be in Council Research Office �p ��ETDtAECTOR �FiN.dMGT.SERV�CESDIR. b noon Frida 4-25-97 �MAYOR(ORASSISTMf� 10Coundl Research TOTAL R OF 4IGNANRE PAGES 1 _(CUP ALL LOCATONS FOA 9iGW1TUR� � ASSOCIAIE �DEP TIAENTAI ACCOUNLANi ACTpN REpUESTED L} �-� i�""Lj'�J Reconstrud Sidewafk in Ward i(Sae attached list) � q�-�(gl �I-Hz RECAMMENDATIONS: Approw (/1) or RejeG (R) PERSONAL SERVICE WMRACTS MUST ANSWEH THE FOLLOWING OUESTIONS: _PLANNING COMMISSbN _CNIL SERVICE COMMISSION 1. Hes thi9 pBE On/fi NB wotk0d urMBf a tontrac[ for tltis depefbilen[? Y _CIB CoMMITTEE _ 2. Has th�s �ES� NO ar been a ciry employee? A S7AFF 3. Does this persoNfirm possess e skill no[ normalty posaessed by any current ciry J — empioyee? _DISTFiICTCOUNCIL�'�? � YES NO SUPPORis WHICH COUNCIL &1EC7NE7 �P�dn sll yos mswars on s�pera[a aheot aM attaeh to g�p.a{�@p,t��� �\it INITIATIN ROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPORTUNRV (WHO. WHAT, WHEN, WHERE. WH1�: The probiam "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, e �J cles, service I'rfe limits, chemical additivss, eMreme temperature variations, etc. These prob�ems occur on a�t�i6e ����'�r ust be addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where ii would be renderad unusable and subjed to increased pedestrian injuries from tal�s and possible litigations. AOVANTqGES IF APPqOVED: The communfty wiil benetit Srom this project because ii will provide safe detect tree sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it follows that private sector jobs are created as a result of this activity. DI8ADVANiAGE51f APPAOVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detesi assessments, and despite the tacl up to one-fialf tfie assessment is City subsidized, it stifl remains controversiai. � �w4��i�a9 �toa.n�;e�3j �?�l3�� �.:.,, . r�. �� tc 1 � �1J�J7 DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: ,,..-.r.!�-�'�+""�� ' �r, a. .., This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will genersie mbte'personal injury suits, uKimately resulting in the expenditure ot larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts. tOTALAMWNfOFTRANSACTbNS 9.SH9 6�! CO57/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES No FUNDINGSWflCE 97-M�0667 A, PtA 97 = 557,000 ACITVRYNUMBEH C97-2T729-0784-27oi2 FINANCIAIINFORMAiION:(EXP�AII�ry B�, qST � 300�000 C, C16 97 = 50�000 C� � ST. PADS, COUNCIL FILE NO — L 'S � PRSLIMINARY ORDSR By a� Fi1 No_ � 1& 7042 Vo ing a d 1 Ia the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s): 597041 - South side of Englewood Ave from N Lexington Pkwy to N Dunlap St 597042 - Both sides of Van Buren Ave from Virginia St to Como Ave *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.45 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $5.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.33 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. NNLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.50 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 resolves: � 2 3 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 1997 Public Improvement Aid. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 25th day of June, 1997, at 4:30 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 the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays �lakey ✓�o s trom ��arri s i/P egard �orton ;/�hune ��1\:r,S pilA� icueR N{pY 17 1997 Adopted by Council: Date }� '� � i� t� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By c� V Against �°"`� Mayor � Public Hearin Date — June 25 1997 RE 4-18-97 DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATEO GREEN SHEET NO �2234 Public Works Sidewalks 410-97 INITIAUDATE INITIAUOATE CONTACTPERSONbPHONE �DEPARTMENT�IRECTOR �CITYCOUNCIL Robert A. Lissidc - 26fr6121 A��N CfTY ATTOqNEY � CfiY CLERK uusraEONCOUNC�ac�rwasr�oa� 5_�_g7 �n� Must be in Council Research Office �p ��ETDtAECTOR �FiN.dMGT.SERV�CESDIR. b noon Frida 4-25-97 �MAYOR(ORASSISTMf� 10Coundl Research TOTAL R OF 4IGNANRE PAGES 1 _(CUP ALL LOCATONS FOA 9iGW1TUR� � ASSOCIAIE �DEP TIAENTAI ACCOUNLANi ACTpN REpUESTED L} �-� i�""Lj'�J Reconstrud Sidewafk in Ward i(Sae attached list) � q�-�(gl �I-Hz RECAMMENDATIONS: Approw (/1) or RejeG (R) PERSONAL SERVICE WMRACTS MUST ANSWEH THE FOLLOWING OUESTIONS: _PLANNING COMMISSbN _CNIL SERVICE COMMISSION 1. Hes thi9 pBE On/fi NB wotk0d urMBf a tontrac[ for tltis depefbilen[? Y _CIB CoMMITTEE _ 2. Has th�s �ES� NO ar been a ciry employee? A S7AFF 3. Does this persoNfirm possess e skill no[ normalty posaessed by any current ciry J — empioyee? _DISTFiICTCOUNCIL�'�? � YES NO SUPPORis WHICH COUNCIL &1EC7NE7 �P�dn sll yos mswars on s�pera[a aheot aM attaeh to g�p.a{�@p,t��� �\it INITIATIN ROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPORTUNRV (WHO. WHAT, WHEN, WHERE. WH1�: The probiam "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, e �J cles, service I'rfe limits, chemical additivss, eMreme temperature variations, etc. These prob�ems occur on a�t�i6e ����'�r ust be addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where ii would be renderad unusable and subjed to increased pedestrian injuries from tal�s and possible litigations. AOVANTqGES IF APPqOVED: The communfty wiil benetit Srom this project because ii will provide safe detect tree sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it follows that private sector jobs are created as a result of this activity. DI8ADVANiAGE51f APPAOVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detesi assessments, and despite the tacl up to one-fialf tfie assessment is City subsidized, it stifl remains controversiai. � �w4��i�a9 �toa.n�;e�3j �?�l3�� �.:.,, . r�. �� tc 1 � �1J�J7 DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: ,,..-.r.!�-�'�+""�� ' �r, a. .., This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will genersie mbte'personal injury suits, uKimately resulting in the expenditure ot larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts. tOTALAMWNfOFTRANSACTbNS 9.SH9 6�! CO57/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES No FUNDINGSWflCE 97-M�0667 A, PtA 97 = 557,000 ACITVRYNUMBEH C97-2T729-0784-27oi2 FINANCIAIINFORMAiION:(EXP�AII�ry B�, qST � 300�000 C, C16 97 = 50�000 C� � ST. PADS, COUNCIL FILE NO — L 'S � PRSLIMINARY ORDSR By a� Fi1 No_ � 1& 7042 Vo ing a d 1 Ia the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s): 597041 - South side of Englewood Ave from N Lexington Pkwy to N Dunlap St 597042 - Both sides of Van Buren Ave from Virginia St to Como Ave *ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures) Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.45 per front foot for a five (5) foot wide walk and $5.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide walk. All other widths will be prorated accordingly. New construction (where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be approximately $3.33 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. NNLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be approximately $4.50 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 resolves: � 2 3 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 1997 Public Improvement Aid. That a public hearing be had on said improvement on the 25th day of June, 1997, at 4:30 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 the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays �lakey ✓�o s trom ��arri s i/P egard �orton ;/�hune ��1\:r,S pilA� icueR N{pY 17 1997 Adopted by Council: Date }� '� � i� t� Certified Passed by Council Secretary � In Favor By c� V Against �°"`� Mayor � Public Hearin Date — June 25 1997 RE 4-18-97 DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATEO GREEN SHEET NO �2234 Public Works Sidewalks 410-97 INITIAUDATE INITIAUOATE CONTACTPERSONbPHONE �DEPARTMENT�IRECTOR �CITYCOUNCIL Robert A. Lissidc - 26fr6121 A��N CfTY ATTOqNEY � CfiY CLERK uusraEONCOUNC�ac�rwasr�oa� 5_�_g7 �n� Must be in Council Research Office �p ��ETDtAECTOR �FiN.dMGT.SERV�CESDIR. b noon Frida 4-25-97 �MAYOR(ORASSISTMf� 10Coundl Research TOTAL R OF 4IGNANRE PAGES 1 _(CUP ALL LOCATONS FOA 9iGW1TUR� � ASSOCIAIE �DEP TIAENTAI ACCOUNLANi ACTpN REpUESTED L} �-� i�""Lj'�J Reconstrud Sidewafk in Ward i(Sae attached list) � q�-�(gl �I-Hz RECAMMENDATIONS: Approw (/1) or RejeG (R) PERSONAL SERVICE WMRACTS MUST ANSWEH THE FOLLOWING OUESTIONS: _PLANNING COMMISSbN _CNIL SERVICE COMMISSION 1. Hes thi9 pBE On/fi NB wotk0d urMBf a tontrac[ for tltis depefbilen[? Y _CIB CoMMITTEE _ 2. Has th�s �ES� NO ar been a ciry employee? A S7AFF 3. Does this persoNfirm possess e skill no[ normalty posaessed by any current ciry J — empioyee? _DISTFiICTCOUNCIL�'�? � YES NO SUPPORis WHICH COUNCIL &1EC7NE7 �P�dn sll yos mswars on s�pera[a aheot aM attaeh to g�p.a{�@p,t��� �\it INITIATIN ROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPORTUNRV (WHO. WHAT, WHEN, WHERE. WH1�: The probiam "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, e �J cles, service I'rfe limits, chemical additivss, eMreme temperature variations, etc. These prob�ems occur on a�t�i6e ����'�r ust be addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where ii would be renderad unusable and subjed to increased pedestrian injuries from tal�s and possible litigations. AOVANTqGES IF APPqOVED: The communfty wiil benetit Srom this project because ii will provide safe detect tree sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it follows that private sector jobs are created as a result of this activity. DI8ADVANiAGE51f APPAOVED: Historically, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative feedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners detesi assessments, and despite the tacl up to one-fialf tfie assessment is City subsidized, it stifl remains controversiai. � �w4��i�a9 �toa.n�;e�3j �?�l3�� �.:.,, . r�. �� tc 1 � �1J�J7 DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED: ,,..-.r.!�-�'�+""�� ' �r, a. .., This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will genersie mbte'personal injury suits, uKimately resulting in the expenditure ot larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts. tOTALAMWNfOFTRANSACTbNS 9.SH9 6�! CO57/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES No FUNDINGSWflCE 97-M�0667 A, PtA 97 = 557,000 ACITVRYNUMBEH C97-2T729-0784-27oi2 FINANCIAIINFORMAiION:(EXP�AII�ry B�, qST � 300�000 C, C16 97 = 50�000