Loading...
97-486L� �t°� -y �� CITY OF ST. PAIIL COUNC� / FIL / E NO. PRELIMINARY ORDSR By //�1�,T,/.fyn//O�✓'r� 3�/• Fi1�No. 597063 Voting Ward 6 In the Matter o£ Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s): 597063 - North side of E Hawthorne Ave from Walsh St to Weide St *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 $8.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide wa1k. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. Dlew coastruction (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: 1 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 o£ the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays �3 akey ✓ostrom %/�arris :/�egard VPI'orton � jF1"�iune �����`�S �i�� ieuer MAY 9.7 1997 �In Favor � Against Adopted by Council: Date��� � t�`�� � Certified Passed by Council Secretary By � I � Mayor rublic Hearing Date — June 25, 1997 RE 4-18-97 DEPAHTMENT/OfFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET N 3?_239 Public Works Sidewalks 4-�0-97 INITIqVDATE lNIT1ALtDnTE CONTACT PERSON a PHONE � OEPPATMENT OIRECTOR � CT' COUNCIL Robert A. Lissick - 266-6121 �aN ��(ry p((pRNEY �C1TV CLERK NUM9EAFOR MUST 8E ON COUNqL AGENDA BY (�A'f� 5_ 7_(j pOUTiNG Q gVpGET DIflECSOR � FlN. 8 tAGT. SERVICES Di Must be in Council Research Office �R µAYOA(ORASS�STANn t Coundl Research b noon Frida 4-ZS-97 � ❑ TOTAL i OF SIGNATUHE PAGES 1 _(CLIP ALL LOLAl10NS FOR 9GNATUHE) � ASSOCIATE � DEP b1 ACCOU AM AGTIONqEWESTED 1`7 ` Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 6(See attached listJ (l� �, f��(_ �.,� �_� l� � # 9 3 RECOMMENDA710N5: Appran it9 wReject iPo PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEN THE FOLLOWIN6 QUESTIONS: PLANNMG COMMISSION CNIL SEAVICE COMMISSION 1. Has tliisper Sonfirtn ev6r xrorked under a carriracl for tliis depaztrnBnt? — — YES NO _CIB fAMMfTTEE _ 2. Has ihis pES n?r Ne been a city employee? Y A 57AFF 3. Does Mis persoNfirm possess a skdl nat normalty possessed by any current ciry — employae? OIS7A�cTCOUNCIL � YES NO SUPPoRTS WHICH COUNCIL 09JECTNE7 E%P�bI1f All Y!6lO4Y(8f6 00 60fIflIfiLO 6F18B( 81K{lIlBCFI l0 9f80118I18BI WITIATIN R09l.EM, ISSUE.OPPORNNITY (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WNERE, WHY�; The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freeRhaw cycies, service life limfts, chemical add'Rives, extreme tamperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Leit uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subjed to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIRAPPROVED: The community wilf benefit from this project because it wili provide saTe dated iree sidewalks ior its many eRizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it foilows that private sector jobs are created as a resuR of this activity. DISA�VANTAGES IF PPPROVED: Historically, ihe sidewafk reconstructions have created negative feedback in ihe area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners datest assessments, and despite the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it stifl remains controversial. � �(�';i( �'�c�'a°?C:�'� �'^"rli'.�4d� �� � F1� �� :� �.� ��:tJ1 DISADVAN7AGES IF NOT APPROVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, uKimately resulting in the expenditure ot larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts. TOTALAMWMOFTRANSACTpNS 3 6�l�.SZ COS?/REVENUEBUpGEfED(CIHCLEONE) '�ES� No FUNDINGSOUHCE 97-M�o667 A ,. P��{ J] �s 5,�],��0 ACtTVRYNUMeER ��]^2T 2 8�1^2 � FINANCIAL MFORMATION: (E%PLAIN� B � AST = 3OO � OOO C,� Cfs 97 = 50�000 L� �t°� -y �� CITY OF ST. PAIIL COUNC� / FIL / E NO. PRELIMINARY ORDSR By //�1�,T,/.fyn//O�✓'r� 3�/• Fi1�No. 597063 Voting Ward 6 In the Matter o£ Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s): 597063 - North side of E Hawthorne Ave from Walsh St to Weide St *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 $8.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide wa1k. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. Dlew coastruction (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: 1 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 o£ the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays �3 akey ✓ostrom %/�arris :/�egard VPI'orton � jF1"�iune �����`�S �i�� ieuer MAY 9.7 1997 �In Favor � Against Adopted by Council: Date��� � t�`�� � Certified Passed by Council Secretary By � I � Mayor rublic Hearing Date — June 25, 1997 RE 4-18-97 DEPAHTMENT/OfFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET N 3?_239 Public Works Sidewalks 4-�0-97 INITIqVDATE lNIT1ALtDnTE CONTACT PERSON a PHONE � OEPPATMENT OIRECTOR � CT' COUNCIL Robert A. Lissick - 266-6121 �aN ��(ry p((pRNEY �C1TV CLERK NUM9EAFOR MUST 8E ON COUNqL AGENDA BY (�A'f� 5_ 7_(j pOUTiNG Q gVpGET DIflECSOR � FlN. 8 tAGT. SERVICES Di Must be in Council Research Office �R µAYOA(ORASS�STANn t Coundl Research b noon Frida 4-ZS-97 � ❑ TOTAL i OF SIGNATUHE PAGES 1 _(CLIP ALL LOLAl10NS FOR 9GNATUHE) � ASSOCIATE � DEP b1 ACCOU AM AGTIONqEWESTED 1`7 ` Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 6(See attached listJ (l� �, f��(_ �.,� �_� l� � # 9 3 RECOMMENDA710N5: Appran it9 wReject iPo PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEN THE FOLLOWIN6 QUESTIONS: PLANNMG COMMISSION CNIL SEAVICE COMMISSION 1. Has tliisper Sonfirtn ev6r xrorked under a carriracl for tliis depaztrnBnt? — — YES NO _CIB fAMMfTTEE _ 2. Has ihis pES n?r Ne been a city employee? Y A 57AFF 3. Does Mis persoNfirm possess a skdl nat normalty possessed by any current ciry — employae? OIS7A�cTCOUNCIL � YES NO SUPPoRTS WHICH COUNCIL 09JECTNE7 E%P�bI1f All Y!6lO4Y(8f6 00 60fIflIfiLO 6F18B( 81K{lIlBCFI l0 9f80118I18BI WITIATIN R09l.EM, ISSUE.OPPORNNITY (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WNERE, WHY�; The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freeRhaw cycies, service life limfts, chemical add'Rives, extreme tamperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Leit uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subjed to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIRAPPROVED: The community wilf benefit from this project because it wili provide saTe dated iree sidewalks ior its many eRizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it foilows that private sector jobs are created as a resuR of this activity. DISA�VANTAGES IF PPPROVED: Historically, ihe sidewafk reconstructions have created negative feedback in ihe area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners datest assessments, and despite the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it stifl remains controversial. � �(�';i( �'�c�'a°?C:�'� �'^"rli'.�4d� �� � F1� �� :� �.� ��:tJ1 DISADVAN7AGES IF NOT APPROVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, uKimately resulting in the expenditure ot larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts. TOTALAMWMOFTRANSACTpNS 3 6�l�.SZ COS?/REVENUEBUpGEfED(CIHCLEONE) '�ES� No FUNDINGSOUHCE 97-M�o667 A ,. P��{ J] �s 5,�],��0 ACtTVRYNUMeER ��]^2T 2 8�1^2 � FINANCIAL MFORMATION: (E%PLAIN� B � AST = 3OO � OOO C,� Cfs 97 = 50�000 L� �t°� -y �� CITY OF ST. PAIIL COUNC� / FIL / E NO. PRELIMINARY ORDSR By //�1�,T,/.fyn//O�✓'r� 3�/• Fi1�No. 597063 Voting Ward 6 In the Matter o£ Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s): 597063 - North side of E Hawthorne Ave from Walsh St to Weide St *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 $8.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide wa1k. A11 other widths will be prorated accordingly. Dlew coastruction (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: 1 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 o£ the improvement and the total cost thereof as estimated. COUNCILPERSONS Yeas Nays �3 akey ✓ostrom %/�arris :/�egard VPI'orton � jF1"�iune �����`�S �i�� ieuer MAY 9.7 1997 �In Favor � Against Adopted by Council: Date��� � t�`�� � Certified Passed by Council Secretary By � I � Mayor rublic Hearing Date — June 25, 1997 RE 4-18-97 DEPAHTMENT/OfFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET N 3?_239 Public Works Sidewalks 4-�0-97 INITIqVDATE lNIT1ALtDnTE CONTACT PERSON a PHONE � OEPPATMENT OIRECTOR � CT' COUNCIL Robert A. Lissick - 266-6121 �aN ��(ry p((pRNEY �C1TV CLERK NUM9EAFOR MUST 8E ON COUNqL AGENDA BY (�A'f� 5_ 7_(j pOUTiNG Q gVpGET DIflECSOR � FlN. 8 tAGT. SERVICES Di Must be in Council Research Office �R µAYOA(ORASS�STANn t Coundl Research b noon Frida 4-ZS-97 � ❑ TOTAL i OF SIGNATUHE PAGES 1 _(CLIP ALL LOLAl10NS FOR 9GNATUHE) � ASSOCIATE � DEP b1 ACCOU AM AGTIONqEWESTED 1`7 ` Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 6(See attached listJ (l� �, f��(_ �.,� �_� l� � # 9 3 RECOMMENDA710N5: Appran it9 wReject iPo PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEN THE FOLLOWIN6 QUESTIONS: PLANNMG COMMISSION CNIL SEAVICE COMMISSION 1. Has tliisper Sonfirtn ev6r xrorked under a carriracl for tliis depaztrnBnt? — — YES NO _CIB fAMMfTTEE _ 2. Has ihis pES n?r Ne been a city employee? Y A 57AFF 3. Does Mis persoNfirm possess a skdl nat normalty possessed by any current ciry — employae? OIS7A�cTCOUNCIL � YES NO SUPPoRTS WHICH COUNCIL 09JECTNE7 E%P�bI1f All Y!6lO4Y(8f6 00 60fIflIfiLO 6F18B( 81K{lIlBCFI l0 9f80118I18BI WITIATIN R09l.EM, ISSUE.OPPORNNITY (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WNERE, WHY�; The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freeRhaw cycies, service life limfts, chemical add'Rives, extreme tamperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a citywide level and must be addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Leit uncorrected, the sidewalk condition would worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subjed to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations. ADVANTAGESIRAPPROVED: The community wilf benefit from this project because it wili provide saTe dated iree sidewalks ior its many eRizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it foilows that private sector jobs are created as a resuR of this activity. DISA�VANTAGES IF PPPROVED: Historically, ihe sidewafk reconstructions have created negative feedback in ihe area of construction procedure and assessment. Simply stated, property owners datest assessments, and despite the fact up to one-half the assessment is City subsidized, it stifl remains controversial. � �(�';i( �'�c�'a°?C:�'� �'^"rli'.�4d� �� � F1� �� :� �.� ��:tJ1 DISADVAN7AGES IF NOT APPROVED: This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turn, will generate more personal injury suits, uKimately resulting in the expenditure ot larger dollar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts. TOTALAMWMOFTRANSACTpNS 3 6�l�.SZ COS?/REVENUEBUpGEfED(CIHCLEONE) '�ES� No FUNDINGSOUHCE 97-M�o667 A ,. P��{ J] �s 5,�],��0 ACtTVRYNUMeER ��]^2T 2 8�1^2 � FINANCIAL MFORMATION: (E%PLAIN� B � AST = 3OO � OOO C,� Cfs 97 = 50�000