Loading...
97-72L � CITY OF ST. PAUL �L��BRY O1iDSR �a�� "�9 � � R � t—� � ' ..-, ' S, t � � 1 .d' 6 n . "�. � tl -., . ., . i 9R -�� � F le ha. ��911�51 ': u:g W� d_2 �, 9, 7 In tha Mat�Eer a£ Censtruction ss?3IUr recone�ruction of siciewalk at the fU22owincx io.�ations: 9un Ju:�� ?iva; 2135 Bay�r� AYa; 21I7 Hig�ilan� Par�y; ci?3 �cheffer �ve; 2186 Knapn St; 2315 & 239� vglentine Ave; 2082 � 20$4 E. Fovrth St * H.STTMBTF;I7 G��T �N F77z^-�F�, RF3SD�wmrpT tzn�Ng {�ne, twa or three family structure9) Reooxastructiaa t��plecement of old sidewa2k} -$?.21 par front f•_c° for a five {�} foot wide waik snci $8.69 per frc,nt feot for a six 16) ioot zaide wn�k. All e*her widths will k,e prcrated accordingly. tlew canstructian {where no walk existed} - 1p{}, af the actuel aost estimated ta bE apprasi;nate;.y $3.23 per sqvare fo�t. Ati COYRRZ' rasidential properties wilS receivs � oredit up to tt,� first 3:,0 fe�t of xsew or rec:otzatructE�3 �13ewalk alc�ng aizd abuttir,g t�e ^iotic� >ide" �f chE �rroperty. Mi75'"T (Nj�rEa �y���y t�,ree tamily struatures?, NbN- �: 'r �: T7� RAT •c Fc:r new and recansiruate3 aidewaik; 20�Jo of ac:tual c:ost est:.m�ted �� b� approximate?y $4.35 per sq�.aare fao+, The Counci2 of ths City af Saint Paul having received th� re�ort �f the May�r up� � *_h� above impravem�nt, and h�ving consi�3ered said report, hereby resolvese 1. That the seid report and the same is flereby approved �rith na a1t�r�atives, �rid *ti�t tP,e es�imateci r_or� ±here_nf is *;.`EE 1�gt�` for estimated constructien rates, finance�+ �y assessments and i99b Public Imgrovement Aid. a2 (o �. T'sxat a put��ic hearing be taaci on said improvement an the � cz�.y ❑f �iarch, Z��7, at 4c�G o"cl�ck P.N., ira t.*:e Council Ch�m�ers cf t?:e �ity Y�22 ard C�urt Hou�e Building i:; the City of Saint Faul, 3. That notiae af said public h�aring be �iven r� L>ie perec,ns and in the m�nner pravide� by trie Charter, stating the tzm� �ad plaae aP nearins�, the nature of the i.mprovement and rhe teta2 cost thereof as estimated. �'rrU??t,'SLFEgGONS Y983 N3.+,j8 ��,ak�y ✓�o.trom i/a�ri� � �s ✓Tnune �IIR114tJe� Adepterl �y counci2: Date;\���� t l FEE �� 2g97 ��«�.¢��u n��s�•4 r� ��s.���_ ���Et�� �In Favor By_� c�.. � �,,�_ ��— � —�. �'A�»;n4t Y+�i(!i<I�� J �Iayar rubl3c HearinQ Date — 3-26�97 Public Works Sidewalks RE 1-17-97 iIATED � GREEN SHEET No. 36345 INITIAUDATE INITIAUDATE_ GONTACT YEFSON 8 PHONE �OEPAFiTMENT pIRECTOR Robert A. Lissick - 266-6086 A� � CITY ATTOFNEY NUMBEft FOp MUSTBEONCAUNCILAGENDABV(DATE) 2 MllSt be p �� �BUDGETDIRECTOH in Council Research Office by noon MAYOR(OPASSISTANn Erida 1-24-97 � TOTAL! OF SIGNATUHE PAGES _ 1 __ (CLIP ALL LOCAiIONS FOR SIGNANHE) � ASSOCIATE qTV CLERK FIN. E MGT. SERVICES Dlfl. DEPARTMENTALACCWNTANT i JN flEOUESTED y � N i.7 n Reconstruct Sidewalk in VI/ard 2 CSee attached list) U�] _�/ � 1 � E F�t� .vp. _59605! �MMENDATIONS: �WUrove (A) or ReJea (R) PER30NAL SERYICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UESTION3: PLANNING COMMISSION _CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION �• Haz ��g �ES� r NOef Wofked Undef a conlfaCt fOf ihis depafirtterlt? CIB CoMMI7tEE 2. Has this person/firm ever been a ciry employee? — VES NO S7AFF 3. Doas U��s personmrm possess a skill not normally possessed by any cunent ciry — employee? DISTRICTCOUNCII' I�9� �2-j/S YES NO 'OflTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE9 �P�eln BII yes answefs on 86pafat8 shee[ and attaeh to gfeen sheet INITIATING PROBIEM, ISSUE. The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tres roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating free/thaw cycles, service life limits, chemica! additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oc�ur on a citywide level and must 6e addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition wouid worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from talls and possible IRigations. The community will benetit irom this project bscause it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it tol�ows that private sector Jobs are created as a result of thls activlty. 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 �.y f'+I� n•q�+�.rtPf'� � remains controversial. � q� ,,. � , .. �+�1�� � C3t1t8f °. _ J11P: 2 3 1997 `� Z E.`�c�� �sast! u DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVED: � " � This option would allow the infrastructura of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in furn will generate more personal injury suits, uftimatefy resufting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eveMual repairs andlor replacement, as we{I as cfaim payouts. TOTAL AMOUM OFTRANSACTION; 1 }( S. S6 COST/PEVENUE BUDGETED (CIfiCLE ONE) � NO FUNDINGSWRCE 96—M-066S A� PIA 96 = S�S:ooO ACI7VRYNUMBEP C96-2T728—o784-2�oti FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (E%PLAIf� B� AST = 432 , 000 C. CiB 96 = 50,000 L � CITY OF ST. PAUL �L��BRY O1iDSR �a�� "�9 � � R � t—� � ' ..-, ' S, t � � 1 .d' 6 n . "�. � tl -., . ., . i 9R -�� � F le ha. ��911�51 ': u:g W� d_2 �, 9, 7 In tha Mat�Eer a£ Censtruction ss?3IUr recone�ruction of siciewalk at the fU22owincx io.�ations: 9un Ju:�� ?iva; 2135 Bay�r� AYa; 21I7 Hig�ilan� Par�y; ci?3 �cheffer �ve; 2186 Knapn St; 2315 & 239� vglentine Ave; 2082 � 20$4 E. Fovrth St * H.STTMBTF;I7 G��T �N F77z^-�F�, RF3SD�wmrpT tzn�Ng {�ne, twa or three family structure9) Reooxastructiaa t��plecement of old sidewa2k} -$?.21 par front f•_c° for a five {�} foot wide waik snci $8.69 per frc,nt feot for a six 16) ioot zaide wn�k. All e*her widths will k,e prcrated accordingly. tlew canstructian {where no walk existed} - 1p{}, af the actuel aost estimated ta bE apprasi;nate;.y $3.23 per sqvare fo�t. Ati COYRRZ' rasidential properties wilS receivs � oredit up to tt,� first 3:,0 fe�t of xsew or rec:otzatructE�3 �13ewalk alc�ng aizd abuttir,g t�e ^iotic� >ide" �f chE �rroperty. Mi75'"T (Nj�rEa �y���y t�,ree tamily struatures?, NbN- �: 'r �: T7� RAT •c Fc:r new and recansiruate3 aidewaik; 20�Jo of ac:tual c:ost est:.m�ted �� b� approximate?y $4.35 per sq�.aare fao+, The Counci2 of ths City af Saint Paul having received th� re�ort �f the May�r up� � *_h� above impravem�nt, and h�ving consi�3ered said report, hereby resolvese 1. That the seid report and the same is flereby approved �rith na a1t�r�atives, �rid *ti�t tP,e es�imateci r_or� ±here_nf is *;.`EE 1�gt�` for estimated constructien rates, finance�+ �y assessments and i99b Public Imgrovement Aid. a2 (o �. T'sxat a put��ic hearing be taaci on said improvement an the � cz�.y ❑f �iarch, Z��7, at 4c�G o"cl�ck P.N., ira t.*:e Council Ch�m�ers cf t?:e �ity Y�22 ard C�urt Hou�e Building i:; the City of Saint Faul, 3. That notiae af said public h�aring be �iven r� L>ie perec,ns and in the m�nner pravide� by trie Charter, stating the tzm� �ad plaae aP nearins�, the nature of the i.mprovement and rhe teta2 cost thereof as estimated. �'rrU??t,'SLFEgGONS Y983 N3.+,j8 ��,ak�y ✓�o.trom i/a�ri� � �s ✓Tnune �IIR114tJe� Adepterl �y counci2: Date;\���� t l FEE �� 2g97 ��«�.¢��u n��s�•4 r� ��s.���_ ���Et�� �In Favor By_� c�.. � �,,�_ ��— � —�. �'A�»;n4t Y+�i(!i<I�� J �Iayar rubl3c HearinQ Date — 3-26�97 Public Works Sidewalks RE 1-17-97 iIATED � GREEN SHEET No. 36345 INITIAUDATE INITIAUDATE_ GONTACT YEFSON 8 PHONE �OEPAFiTMENT pIRECTOR Robert A. Lissick - 266-6086 A� � CITY ATTOFNEY NUMBEft FOp MUSTBEONCAUNCILAGENDABV(DATE) 2 MllSt be p �� �BUDGETDIRECTOH in Council Research Office by noon MAYOR(OPASSISTANn Erida 1-24-97 � TOTAL! OF SIGNATUHE PAGES _ 1 __ (CLIP ALL LOCAiIONS FOR SIGNANHE) � ASSOCIATE qTV CLERK FIN. E MGT. SERVICES Dlfl. DEPARTMENTALACCWNTANT i JN flEOUESTED y � N i.7 n Reconstruct Sidewalk in VI/ard 2 CSee attached list) U�] _�/ � 1 � E F�t� .vp. _59605! �MMENDATIONS: �WUrove (A) or ReJea (R) PER30NAL SERYICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UESTION3: PLANNING COMMISSION _CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION �• Haz ��g �ES� r NOef Wofked Undef a conlfaCt fOf ihis depafirtterlt? CIB CoMMI7tEE 2. Has this person/firm ever been a ciry employee? — VES NO S7AFF 3. Doas U��s personmrm possess a skill not normally possessed by any cunent ciry — employee? DISTRICTCOUNCII' I�9� �2-j/S YES NO 'OflTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE9 �P�eln BII yes answefs on 86pafat8 shee[ and attaeh to gfeen sheet INITIATING PROBIEM, ISSUE. The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tres roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating free/thaw cycles, service life limits, chemica! additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oc�ur on a citywide level and must 6e addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition wouid worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from talls and possible IRigations. The community will benetit irom this project bscause it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it tol�ows that private sector Jobs are created as a result of thls activlty. 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 �.y f'+I� n•q�+�.rtPf'� � remains controversial. � q� ,,. � , .. �+�1�� � C3t1t8f °. _ J11P: 2 3 1997 `� Z E.`�c�� �sast! u DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVED: � " � This option would allow the infrastructura of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in furn will generate more personal injury suits, uftimatefy resufting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eveMual repairs andlor replacement, as we{I as cfaim payouts. TOTAL AMOUM OFTRANSACTION; 1 }( S. S6 COST/PEVENUE BUDGETED (CIfiCLE ONE) � NO FUNDINGSWRCE 96—M-066S A� PIA 96 = S�S:ooO ACI7VRYNUMBEP C96-2T728—o784-2�oti FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (E%PLAIf� B� AST = 432 , 000 C. CiB 96 = 50,000 L � CITY OF ST. PAUL �L��BRY O1iDSR �a�� "�9 � � R � t—� � ' ..-, ' S, t � � 1 .d' 6 n . "�. � tl -., . ., . i 9R -�� � F le ha. ��911�51 ': u:g W� d_2 �, 9, 7 In tha Mat�Eer a£ Censtruction ss?3IUr recone�ruction of siciewalk at the fU22owincx io.�ations: 9un Ju:�� ?iva; 2135 Bay�r� AYa; 21I7 Hig�ilan� Par�y; ci?3 �cheffer �ve; 2186 Knapn St; 2315 & 239� vglentine Ave; 2082 � 20$4 E. Fovrth St * H.STTMBTF;I7 G��T �N F77z^-�F�, RF3SD�wmrpT tzn�Ng {�ne, twa or three family structure9) Reooxastructiaa t��plecement of old sidewa2k} -$?.21 par front f•_c° for a five {�} foot wide waik snci $8.69 per frc,nt feot for a six 16) ioot zaide wn�k. All e*her widths will k,e prcrated accordingly. tlew canstructian {where no walk existed} - 1p{}, af the actuel aost estimated ta bE apprasi;nate;.y $3.23 per sqvare fo�t. Ati COYRRZ' rasidential properties wilS receivs � oredit up to tt,� first 3:,0 fe�t of xsew or rec:otzatructE�3 �13ewalk alc�ng aizd abuttir,g t�e ^iotic� >ide" �f chE �rroperty. Mi75'"T (Nj�rEa �y���y t�,ree tamily struatures?, NbN- �: 'r �: T7� RAT •c Fc:r new and recansiruate3 aidewaik; 20�Jo of ac:tual c:ost est:.m�ted �� b� approximate?y $4.35 per sq�.aare fao+, The Counci2 of ths City af Saint Paul having received th� re�ort �f the May�r up� � *_h� above impravem�nt, and h�ving consi�3ered said report, hereby resolvese 1. That the seid report and the same is flereby approved �rith na a1t�r�atives, �rid *ti�t tP,e es�imateci r_or� ±here_nf is *;.`EE 1�gt�` for estimated constructien rates, finance�+ �y assessments and i99b Public Imgrovement Aid. a2 (o �. T'sxat a put��ic hearing be taaci on said improvement an the � cz�.y ❑f �iarch, Z��7, at 4c�G o"cl�ck P.N., ira t.*:e Council Ch�m�ers cf t?:e �ity Y�22 ard C�urt Hou�e Building i:; the City of Saint Faul, 3. That notiae af said public h�aring be �iven r� L>ie perec,ns and in the m�nner pravide� by trie Charter, stating the tzm� �ad plaae aP nearins�, the nature of the i.mprovement and rhe teta2 cost thereof as estimated. �'rrU??t,'SLFEgGONS Y983 N3.+,j8 ��,ak�y ✓�o.trom i/a�ri� � �s ✓Tnune �IIR114tJe� Adepterl �y counci2: Date;\���� t l FEE �� 2g97 ��«�.¢��u n��s�•4 r� ��s.���_ ���Et�� �In Favor By_� c�.. � �,,�_ ��— � —�. �'A�»;n4t Y+�i(!i<I�� J �Iayar rubl3c HearinQ Date — 3-26�97 Public Works Sidewalks RE 1-17-97 iIATED � GREEN SHEET No. 36345 INITIAUDATE INITIAUDATE_ GONTACT YEFSON 8 PHONE �OEPAFiTMENT pIRECTOR Robert A. Lissick - 266-6086 A� � CITY ATTOFNEY NUMBEft FOp MUSTBEONCAUNCILAGENDABV(DATE) 2 MllSt be p �� �BUDGETDIRECTOH in Council Research Office by noon MAYOR(OPASSISTANn Erida 1-24-97 � TOTAL! OF SIGNATUHE PAGES _ 1 __ (CLIP ALL LOCAiIONS FOR SIGNANHE) � ASSOCIATE qTV CLERK FIN. E MGT. SERVICES Dlfl. DEPARTMENTALACCWNTANT i JN flEOUESTED y � N i.7 n Reconstruct Sidewalk in VI/ard 2 CSee attached list) U�] _�/ � 1 � E F�t� .vp. _59605! �MMENDATIONS: �WUrove (A) or ReJea (R) PER30NAL SERYICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UESTION3: PLANNING COMMISSION _CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION �• Haz ��g �ES� r NOef Wofked Undef a conlfaCt fOf ihis depafirtterlt? CIB CoMMI7tEE 2. Has this person/firm ever been a ciry employee? — VES NO S7AFF 3. Doas U��s personmrm possess a skill not normally possessed by any cunent ciry — employee? DISTRICTCOUNCII' I�9� �2-j/S YES NO 'OflTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTNE9 �P�eln BII yes answefs on 86pafat8 shee[ and attaeh to gfeen sheet INITIATING PROBIEM, ISSUE. The problem "defective sidewalk" was created because of tres roots, deleterious subgrade material, alternating free/thaw cycles, service life limits, chemica! additives, extreme temperature variations, etc. These problems oc�ur on a citywide level and must 6e addressed and corrected on an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewalk condition wouid worsen to a state where it would be rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from talls and possible IRigations. The community will benetit irom this project bscause it will provide safe detect free sidewalks for its many citizens. The sidewalk contracts are executed by private contractors, so it tol�ows that private sector Jobs are created as a result of thls activlty. 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 �.y f'+I� n•q�+�.rtPf'� � remains controversial. � q� ,,. � , .. �+�1�� � C3t1t8f °. _ J11P: 2 3 1997 `� Z E.`�c�� �sast! u DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVED: � " � This option would allow the infrastructura of sidewalk stock to deteriorate, which in furn will generate more personal injury suits, uftimatefy resufting in the expenditure of larger dollar amounts in eveMual repairs andlor replacement, as we{I as cfaim payouts. TOTAL AMOUM OFTRANSACTION; 1 }( S. S6 COST/PEVENUE BUDGETED (CIfiCLE ONE) � NO FUNDINGSWRCE 96—M-066S A� PIA 96 = S�S:ooO ACI7VRYNUMBEP C96-2T728—o784-2�oti FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (E%PLAIf� B� AST = 432 , 000 C. CiB 96 = 50,000