97-716��
CITY OF ST. PAIIL
PRELIMINARY ORDER
.
• •
�- � �i.��
� �3lL•n�:2 1 : � -
In the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s):
Both sides B1air Ave from N Chatsworth St to N Oxford 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
walk. Al1 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.
MiJLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.50 per square foot.
/7
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:
�
�
�
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 6th day of August,
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
�Blakey
✓�os trom
�Collins
✓Harris
N1.egard.- 'F�bSe-r�
�/Morton
�/2'hune
pllAli,S{RR Adopted by Council: Date � ���
JUL ��:���7 Certified Passed by Council Secretary
`� In Favor
QAgainst
� �bs �r�
By �av�� a- _ H rc-�...,.-....-�
L�
Mayor
- Public Hearing Date — Au ust 6, 1997 RE 5-30-97
DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET NO.���
Publfc Works Sldeweike 5-2�-9� INITIAUDAT INITIAUDATE
CONiACiPERSONdPHONE �pEppqTMENTDIRECTOR �CITVCAUNCIL
RobertA.Lissick-26&6121 ASSIGN �CITYATTORNEY �CRYCLERK
MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGEN�A BV (DA7E) NUMBER FOR
6-18-97 q��T�� �BUDGETDIpECTOfl FIN.EMGT.SERVICESDIq.
Must be in Council Research Office �p MAYOR(ORASSISiANn 1[� Coundl Research
b noon Frida 6-6-97 ❑
TOTAL N OF SICNANHE PAGES 1 _(CI1P ALL LOCA710N4 FOR SIGNATUPE) ASSOCIA7E EMAL ACCOUNTANT
ACTIONFEQUES7ED Cp ��a��f)-�
� ����•- i d
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See attached list)
`'���' z - 199T q�1
� � � q�
flECOMMENDATIONS:Ppprave(A)orRefe�z(R) PERSONALSERVICECONTRACTSMUSTA FOLLOWINGOUESTIONS:
_PLANNING WMMISSION _CNIL SERVICE COMMISS�ON �• H � ��s PeES Nfi NOer worked under a con[rac[ for is departrnent?
Y
CIe CWAAi1TtEE 2. Has ihia parsonHirm ever bean a ciry emptoyee?
— — VES NO
A STAFF 3. Does tlils perso�rm poeseas a akill not normaly possessed by any current ciry
— — employee7
_DISTRICTCOUNCIL"? _ VES NO
SUPPORTS WFIICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE7 ExP�a�n eil yos anewors on seperata shaat and ettech to grean ahaet
� '
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPOpNNIN (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WfiERE, WHY):
The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freerthaw cycles,
service 1Ne limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a cRywide tevel and must be
addressed and correctad on an annual basis. Left 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.
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVEO:
The community will benefk from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by private contractors, so ii follows that private sector jobs are created as a resuk of this activity.
DISADVANTAGES 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 .,�.��rr;� �'.�,'�":'��'
�s�BS331CL �e:,.,�... .t
JUPI � 2 IJJ/
DISADVANTAGES IP NOT APPROVED: . _ , , ., �
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turnywill generate more personal injury suits,
uftimately resulting in the expenditure of larger do�lar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTAIAMWNTOFTRANSACTIONS � 9 ,772,44 COSTlREVENUEBUDGETED(CIflCLEONE) YES No
FlINDMGSOUpCE 97-M-o667 A, PlA 97 = 557 ��00 pCRVRYNUMBER C97-ZT729 -o784-27012
FINANG�AL INFORMATION: (E%PU11f�ry B� AS T ° 3OO � OOO
C, Ct6 97 = 50,000
\
/
��
CITY OF ST. PAIIL
PRELIMINARY ORDER
.
• •
�- � �i.��
� �3lL•n�:2 1 : � -
In the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s):
Both sides B1air Ave from N Chatsworth St to N Oxford 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
walk. Al1 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.
MiJLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.50 per square foot.
/7
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:
�
�
�
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 6th day of August,
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
�Blakey
✓�os trom
�Collins
✓Harris
N1.egard.- 'F�bSe-r�
�/Morton
�/2'hune
pllAli,S{RR Adopted by Council: Date � ���
JUL ��:���7 Certified Passed by Council Secretary
`� In Favor
QAgainst
� �bs �r�
By �av�� a- _ H rc-�...,.-....-�
L�
Mayor
- Public Hearing Date — Au ust 6, 1997 RE 5-30-97
DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET NO.���
Publfc Works Sldeweike 5-2�-9� INITIAUDAT INITIAUDATE
CONiACiPERSONdPHONE �pEppqTMENTDIRECTOR �CITVCAUNCIL
RobertA.Lissick-26&6121 ASSIGN �CITYATTORNEY �CRYCLERK
MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGEN�A BV (DA7E) NUMBER FOR
6-18-97 q��T�� �BUDGETDIpECTOfl FIN.EMGT.SERVICESDIq.
Must be in Council Research Office �p MAYOR(ORASSISiANn 1[� Coundl Research
b noon Frida 6-6-97 ❑
TOTAL N OF SICNANHE PAGES 1 _(CI1P ALL LOCA710N4 FOR SIGNATUPE) ASSOCIA7E EMAL ACCOUNTANT
ACTIONFEQUES7ED Cp ��a��f)-�
� ����•- i d
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See attached list)
`'���' z - 199T q�1
� � � q�
flECOMMENDATIONS:Ppprave(A)orRefe�z(R) PERSONALSERVICECONTRACTSMUSTA FOLLOWINGOUESTIONS:
_PLANNING WMMISSION _CNIL SERVICE COMMISS�ON �• H � ��s PeES Nfi NOer worked under a con[rac[ for is departrnent?
Y
CIe CWAAi1TtEE 2. Has ihia parsonHirm ever bean a ciry emptoyee?
— — VES NO
A STAFF 3. Does tlils perso�rm poeseas a akill not normaly possessed by any current ciry
— — employee7
_DISTRICTCOUNCIL"? _ VES NO
SUPPORTS WFIICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE7 ExP�a�n eil yos anewors on seperata shaat and ettech to grean ahaet
� '
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPOpNNIN (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WfiERE, WHY):
The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freerthaw cycles,
service 1Ne limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a cRywide tevel and must be
addressed and correctad on an annual basis. Left 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.
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVEO:
The community will benefk from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by private contractors, so ii follows that private sector jobs are created as a resuk of this activity.
DISADVANTAGES 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 .,�.��rr;� �'.�,'�":'��'
�s�BS331CL �e:,.,�... .t
JUPI � 2 IJJ/
DISADVANTAGES IP NOT APPROVED: . _ , , ., �
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turnywill generate more personal injury suits,
uftimately resulting in the expenditure of larger do�lar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTAIAMWNTOFTRANSACTIONS � 9 ,772,44 COSTlREVENUEBUDGETED(CIflCLEONE) YES No
FlINDMGSOUpCE 97-M-o667 A, PlA 97 = 557 ��00 pCRVRYNUMBER C97-ZT729 -o784-27012
FINANG�AL INFORMATION: (E%PU11f�ry B� AS T ° 3OO � OOO
C, Ct6 97 = 50,000
\
/
��
CITY OF ST. PAIIL
PRELIMINARY ORDER
.
• •
�- � �i.��
� �3lL•n�:2 1 : � -
In the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s):
Both sides B1air Ave from N Chatsworth St to N Oxford 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
walk. Al1 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.
MiJLTI-RESIDENTIAL than three family structures), NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 100� of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.50 per square foot.
/7
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:
�
�
�
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 6th day of August,
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
�Blakey
✓�os trom
�Collins
✓Harris
N1.egard.- 'F�bSe-r�
�/Morton
�/2'hune
pllAli,S{RR Adopted by Council: Date � ���
JUL ��:���7 Certified Passed by Council Secretary
`� In Favor
QAgainst
� �bs �r�
By �av�� a- _ H rc-�...,.-....-�
L�
Mayor
- Public Hearing Date — Au ust 6, 1997 RE 5-30-97
DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET NO.���
Publfc Works Sldeweike 5-2�-9� INITIAUDAT INITIAUDATE
CONiACiPERSONdPHONE �pEppqTMENTDIRECTOR �CITVCAUNCIL
RobertA.Lissick-26&6121 ASSIGN �CITYATTORNEY �CRYCLERK
MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGEN�A BV (DA7E) NUMBER FOR
6-18-97 q��T�� �BUDGETDIpECTOfl FIN.EMGT.SERVICESDIq.
Must be in Council Research Office �p MAYOR(ORASSISiANn 1[� Coundl Research
b noon Frida 6-6-97 ❑
TOTAL N OF SICNANHE PAGES 1 _(CI1P ALL LOCA710N4 FOR SIGNATUPE) ASSOCIA7E EMAL ACCOUNTANT
ACTIONFEQUES7ED Cp ��a��f)-�
� ����•- i d
Reconstruct Sidewalk in Ward 1(See attached list)
`'���' z - 199T q�1
� � � q�
flECOMMENDATIONS:Ppprave(A)orRefe�z(R) PERSONALSERVICECONTRACTSMUSTA FOLLOWINGOUESTIONS:
_PLANNING WMMISSION _CNIL SERVICE COMMISS�ON �• H � ��s PeES Nfi NOer worked under a con[rac[ for is departrnent?
Y
CIe CWAAi1TtEE 2. Has ihia parsonHirm ever bean a ciry emptoyee?
— — VES NO
A STAFF 3. Does tlils perso�rm poeseas a akill not normaly possessed by any current ciry
— — employee7
_DISTRICTCOUNCIL"? _ VES NO
SUPPORTS WFIICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE7 ExP�a�n eil yos anewors on seperata shaat and ettech to grean ahaet
� '
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPOpNNIN (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WfiERE, WHY):
The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tree roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating freerthaw cycles,
service 1Ne limits, chemical additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems occur on a cRywide tevel and must be
addressed and correctad on an annual basis. Left 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.
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVEO:
The community will benefk from this project because it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by private contractors, so ii follows that private sector jobs are created as a resuk of this activity.
DISADVANTAGES 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 .,�.��rr;� �'.�,'�":'��'
�s�BS331CL �e:,.,�... .t
JUPI � 2 IJJ/
DISADVANTAGES IP NOT APPROVED: . _ , , ., �
This option would allow the infrastructure of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in turnywill generate more personal injury suits,
uftimately resulting in the expenditure of larger do�lar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTAIAMWNTOFTRANSACTIONS � 9 ,772,44 COSTlREVENUEBUDGETED(CIflCLEONE) YES No
FlINDMGSOUpCE 97-M-o667 A, PlA 97 = 557 ��00 pCRVRYNUMBER C97-ZT729 -o784-27012
FINANG�AL INFORMATION: (E%PU11f�ry B� AS T ° 3OO � OOO
C, Ct6 97 = 50,000
\
/